(It's also not surprising if it did because it's modern scientific dogma that the world is deterministic. Even if you take into account quantum uncertainty, as Hawking points out, it is determined probabilities. ).
Well in the end of the movie it turns out that the future humans built the tesseract (I believe it's called) and the wormhole, leading the humans to survive and in the future built the tesseract and the wormhole, leading the humans to survive and in the future built the tesseract and the wormhole... you get the idea.
It's a time travel movie, and the whole thing becomes a paradox - if the humans didn't survive they wouldn't have developed to be able to make wormholes and time travel magic, but they did survive because of time travel magic.
So which came first? It's a paradox. One explanation is that there was nothing that actually came first but everything just happened as it should and there was no other way it could've happened, thus, predetermination.
But yeah, time travel paradoxes, fun stuff.
The other thing to keep in mind is he does not actually have any way to know who (or what) built the tesseract.
Just like how Brand earlier states the spacetime curvature hand she shakes hands with is "the first handshake" (implying first contact with an extraterrestrial), but it actually just turns out to be Cooper. The characters are confident of things they think are right, without actually being totally reliable narrators.
Whether Cooper is right may be an open question, but the film heavily implies it. That 'first contact' turning out to be Cooper may be evidence of wrongness, but we don't necessarily need that since we know the characters are not omniscient, and in the context of the film it implies that there aren't any aliens. There are also no signs of any other life, despite several habitable planets. Frankly, the film doesn't even make sense if "aliens did it"; any message of hopefulness about human spirit would fall apart.
Stable time loops imply predetermination.
> Even if you take into account quantum uncertainty, as Hawking points out, it is determined probabilities. That the probabilities are governed (determined?) by precise equations doesn't mean that quantum mechanics isn't stochastic; it gives us only probabilities. The indeterminacy principle is a better better name than the uncertainty principle. But perhaps I'm misunderstanding you.
I like to think of the universe as a deterministic computer that is calculating its own outcome - there is no shortcut to jump to the end.
I've mostly heard this dubbed "computational irreducibility" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_irreducibility
I hope there's no bugs in it then!
They didn't teach you in your physics PhD that stochastic != Undetermined. We may not know how to predict stochastic processes but that doesn't mean they don't follow cause-and-effect.