The Ultimate Debate of the Theories of Interstellar’s Ending (Contains Spoilers)

Yesterday I came across a theory that the end of Interstellar is a dream sequence.  When talking about space, time, and black holes the possibilities are endless and we don’t know exactly what Christopher Nolan was trying achieve unless he mentions it in the future interviews.  Feel free to read the article to make up your own opinion but I noticed this counter argument to the Dream Theory in the comments that was written by a user named Simon.  Simon says feel free to repost his comment verbatim and I have done so.  Please comment on what your opinion is but please be civil, this is for fun not to be rude.


“This dream theory makes no sense. It’s just a cop out that is fairly commonly used by people that don’t understand a movie so they say “oh it’s just a dream”, thinking they’ve discovered the true meaning. No.

This is gonna be a long ranty post that people need to see because this sort of thing happens too often. A complicated movie comes out, people don’t get it, they lazily write the ending off as a dream, and then tell everyone their fan fiction as if it’s the same movie that everyone else saw. This is laziness and it annoys me as a movie fan. Anyway before I type this out, I should point out that the burden of proof is not on me, but on the article writer, and he needs to do better than this nonsense.

Anyway, first of all, the bookshelf morse code thing definitely does happen, because we see it at the start of the film. This confirms that Cooper does survive the ejection and found his way to the tesseract. He was the one pushing the books off the shelf at the start of the film, because we see him doing it later. Oh look it’s happening the exact same way as we saw at the start of the movie. It is not valid to say that because you don’t like the scene, you just pretend it’s a dream sequence. Do you see how utterly flawed that logic is? You might as well spit in Nolan’s face. I could end my post here because this simple confirmation discredits the article completely. But I’ll continue.

Second of all, simply recalling images like the baseball field means nothing. It’s a simple cinema technique and I don’t have any idea how you link that with it being a dream. One conversation between Mann and Cooper does not a dream sequence confirm. Anyway I think he meant you’d think of your kids like you remembered them, not you’d think of your kids as they were over 100 and had to imagine what they’d look like as you’re dying. Seems like you were really set on wanting it to be a dream and you’re just looking for small reasons to confirm your belief, rather than the other way around.

Thirdly, you clearly did not understand at least some aspects of the film when you say Anne Hathaway’s character would be dead by the end. No she wouldn’t, because Cooper is saved by the humans and taken through the wormhole to Cooper Station which is in Earth’s dimension. So say 80 years have passed here since Murph saved the world. That does not mean 80 years have passed in Anne Hathaways dimension.

Remember time goes by much slower where Anne Hathaway is because she’s in a different dimension. when Cooper wakes up at Cooper Station, Anne Hathaway’s character has pretty much just landed on that third planet, due to the time discrepancy between dimensions. Remember, Cooper Station is back on the other side of the wormhole.

Let me just say that even using another method of evaluation, and that is simply cinema language and how the last scene plays out in terms of tone and all that. The ending sequence does NOT play out like a dream sequence. It plays out with a twinge of hope attached to it, with Cooper stealing the jet going to meet up with Hathaway, then cutting to Anne Hathaway about to start a new civilization on that planet, and then cuts to credits. It certainly does not play out like a “death dream”. What I’m saying is you’re basically ignoring EVERYTHING and selecting only VERY MINUTE DETAILS which coincidentally support your theory, even without Nolan even intending to do so! You ignore EVERYTHING that goes against your theory and even basically state outright “oh I don’t believe what is happening on screen is actually happening”. There’s no puzzle to be solved.

I mean even the most outrageous David Lynch movies are not as complicated as some people make out these Nolan movies are. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. When you look too hard for subtext, you are in danger of inventing your own.

In fact the entire movie is pretty sound and it’s been confirmed by numerous scientists. There were consultants on the movie. It’s funny that the article author has written an article about his little fan theory and not the actual paradox in Interstellar. The paradox is how does the human race survive to the point of being able to use 5 dimensions, if there was no wormhole. See the only way humanity survives is with that wormhole that future humans put there…but how do the future humans get to that stage if there was no one to give them the wormhole in the first place? It’s a paradox.

Hope I cleared that up. But haven’t you guys noticed that this happens all the time? A mildly challenging movie comes out and some people don’t quite get it, and they say the ending was a dream because they just don’t understand. They feel the need to explain every single detail so even if they’re making crap up, it makes them feel better because they THINK they understand. But they don’t.

I did not understand 2001 A Space Odyssey when I first saw it, but I never would have said that ending was a dream. I never jump to that awful conclusion because outside of TV movies and low budget schlock, dream endings are never used whatsoever. There are more fan-conjured dream endings than there are actual dream endings. I think it is extremely disrespectful to the film maker to simply write it off as a stupid dream sequence. Dream sequence endings are cliche and basically an enormous joke. I would much rather admit not understanding a challenging ending than trying to conjure up some ridiculous theory and telling myself thats what happened. You’re basically writing your own ending to the movie and not following what’s ACTUALLY in the ending to the movie.

I just think it’s incredibly disrespectful and LAZY to write the ending off as a dream. What do you think Nolan is? Don’t even bring up Inception because that’s entirely different. The entire movie was about dreams and even then, Nolan was candid about the possibility of the ending or even more being a dream. It was shown as a possibility IN THE MOVIE. Interstellar is about dimensions and forms of time travel etc. But the difference is, people basically create these dream endings when there’s really nothing at all in the movie that implies it. I feel sorry for you because Interstellar had a fantastic ending and if you thought it was a dream it would’ve been completely sullied for you.

Feel free to write another article called “Explaining Interstellar” and just copy paste my entire post. Do you get paid to write fan theories or what? Also I love the article headline and, kind of got that superior attitude going and then you post one of the worst fan theories I’ve ever read. It’s like “here let me tell you what the ending really means” and then followed by just a bunch of absolute garbage lmfao.”


One response to “The Ultimate Debate of the Theories of Interstellar’s Ending (Contains Spoilers)

  1. Great article, but I have one question. Wouldn’t Brand, indeed, be older when Cooper arrives on Edmunds planet to reconvene? Although you’re correct to assert that time on the other side of the wormhole moves more slowly than Earth’s dimension, it’s also true that time moves more slowly the further into a black hole one goes. Since Cooper lost 51 years in the black hole during the tesseract sequence, and Brand did not because she never entered it, would not their time have moved differently, much as Romilly’s time progressed 23 years while only taking 3 hrs for Brand and Cooper while on Miller’s planet. The three of them were on the same side of the wormhole when this happened, but Coop and Brand were closer than Romilly to Gargantua.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s