|Postcard from - Interstellar|
I can accept that, with a man like Kip Thorn as science advisor, the visuals showing wormhole travel are likely to be as accurate as we're currently able to get. My beef is with the rest of the movie.
It's difficult to know where to start.
How about an unknown, or at least unrecognised NASA installation inside Chyenne Mountain building a huge rocket. Then just launching it from inside what looked to be a combination of lab and enginieering workshop. The Chyenne Mountain complex is burried under millions of tons of granite for a good reason - it was built to survive a nuclear war. It's unlikely that that a workable launch site could be created using that as a starting point.
Then a shuttle which is able to go from orbit to a safe landing on the destination planet(s) and get back into orbit again. Single stage, no refuelling. So, remind me, why the large rocket in the mountain? Surely, just use the shuttle.
Than a planet orbiting a black hole so closely that a few hours on the surface are equivalent to years on the spacecraft patiently waiting for them to return. Presumably it's a black hole with no radiation given off from the accretion disk.
I like science fiction, but surely with someone of Kip Thorn's stature to advise on wormholes, there has to be some left over common sense/budget for the rest of the story.