You are projecting your beliefs. The popular science crowd thought it was incredibly realistic [1-3]. As you say, the movie is ingratiating to the people who ha

You are projecting your beliefs. The popular science crowd thought it was incredibly realistic [1-3]. As you say, the movie is ingratiating to the people who have heard something about time dilation. But even the movie itself gets it horribly wrong. I remember there is a scene of a crew in the orbit of the planet growing old while those on the surface don't because "it is near a black hole" which is true, but the distance between the surface of the planet and the orbit to cause such massive time dilation would imply the humans should liquefy in their suits. Overall, I found Interstellar to go out of the way to use science to explain events in the movie and then asked the viewers to ignore applying the same principles to other parts. I have no problem with science fiction, but if you try to explain the fiction, you have to keep the universe consistent. [1] - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/interstellar-science-explained-by-neil-degrasse-tyson/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/interstellar-science-explained-... [2] - https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/why-interstellar-belongs-pantheon-best-realistic-science-fiction-films-180953261/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/why-i... [3] - https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/parsing-the-science-of-interstellar-with-physicist-kip-thorne/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/parsing-th...