PDA

View Full Version : Gravity



onthewall2983
09-04-2013, 11:00 PM
http://www.joblo.com/newsimages1/Gravity-article-5-9.jpg


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufsrgE0BYf0


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QQGVvt_iW8


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4pcg7bXgmU#at=33


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZV-UEca2W9U

Alfonso Cuaron's first film since Children Of Men, which was in my opinion the best movie of the 00's. Variety article (http://variety.com/2013/film/news/alfonso-cuaron-returns-to-the-bigscreen-after-seven-years-with-gravity-1200596518) about the long journey it took to this point, to which James Cameron calls it "the best space film ever done".

Iran_Ed
09-04-2013, 11:33 PM
I thought there was a thread already for this. Oh well, this looks interesting, when I first saw a trailer for it months back I automatically had a few problems with it.
1. I don't like Sandra Bullock. I'm sure she's a nice person, but I not a fan of her work.
2. How long would it be? I have the patience to sit through long films, but just drifting in space could get old quick. That Variety article says it's 91 minutes, that sounds perfect to me.
3. Fair or unfair 2001, Solaris and Alien are my favorite space films. When I saw Moon for the first time I found myself comparing it to those films. While I enjoyed moon, I find it hard to go into space films without one of those films on my mind.

Maybe this one will change that mentality. With that said, Children of Men is one of the few films that will make me weep uncontrollably every time I see it. I have high hopes for this.

neorev
09-05-2013, 12:11 AM
New trailer:
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=108548

Waiting for a higher quality HD version
The special effects look amazing in this film

AgentofChaos
09-09-2013, 04:37 PM
Saw this yesterday. It's pretty intense. Probably was as close to recreating the experience of being in space as possible. Gorgeous and breathtaking. Sadly not much of a story. But I don't think that was the point so I was fine with that. It's definitely no Children of Men though.

Hazekiah
09-13-2013, 12:13 PM
Hitting this up in IMAX and reserving two hits of acid for it.

>:)

ambergris
09-13-2013, 12:20 PM
I also thought that Children of Men was the best movie of the past decade. The reviews for Gravity so far, are glowing. I am really excited for this one.

EPICRAGE
09-14-2013, 06:13 AM
The infamous author/tweeter Bret Easton Ellis, almost daring his fans to unfollow him, dropped huge spoilers in his tweeted negative review for the movie. I haven't seen the movie yet but I was really looking forward to it so having it spoiled is a great disappointment. To those who have seen the film, I'm just wondering how spoiler-rific was his tweet (one from Sept. 5th and bigger one on Sept. 6th) really, and if knowing these details takes away from the movie at all.

I would put the tweet in spoiler tags but I don't want anyone to accidentally glide over it and read it. Those who have seen the movie and want to answer can PM me if necessary. Thanks!

onthewall2983
09-14-2013, 06:41 AM
What a dick.

thevoid99
09-14-2013, 03:18 PM
What a dick.

Well, he did write that Paul Schrader movie with Lindsay Lohan that no one really saw nor cared about. So let's just thank him for being irrelevant.

ninedead
09-14-2013, 04:52 PM
only thing i cant get out of my head from the main trailer on tv is a scene of sandra bullock and her head looks giant and and fake in the helmet and if thats the way the whole movie is i dont think i could get past that haha

richardp
09-17-2013, 10:16 PM
I just saw this, and:

This is the best film of the last 10, maybe even 15 years.

It's the Sci-Fi Life of Pi. It's Terrence Malick in Space.

It's incredible. Sandra Bullock 100% deserves an Oscar for her performance. Unbelievable cinematography. But also incredibly terrifying and nerve-wracking. Inbetween the intensity, however, Cuaron injects these amazingly serene moments of peace. It's just unreal how amazing this film is. Also, despite it being a post-conversion, Gravity holds the best use of 3D that I have seen to date.

Cat Mom
09-18-2013, 08:48 PM
I must see this movie because James Cameron says it's a fucking awesome space movie and because the trailer so perfectly captures everything that has always TERRIFIED me about space.

skullboy0
09-19-2013, 12:50 PM
I must see this movie because James Cameron says it's a fucking awesome space movie and because the trailer so perfectly captures everything that has always TERRIFIED me about space.

That's pretty much why I DON'T want to see it, the trailer scares the shit outta me.

richardp
09-25-2013, 11:33 PM
That's pretty much why I DON'T want to see it, the trailer scares the shit outta me.

Trust me. It's even more terrifying than the trailer lets on.

Deadpool
09-25-2013, 11:41 PM
Oh man, I'm crazy excited for this.

I can't imagine a better movie to be shown in IMAX and 3D. The inclusion of those 2 things sweetens the deal so much. Can't wait. Opening day, here I come.

DF118
10-05-2013, 01:43 AM
I'd have laughed my ass off if she got run over by a bus at the end.

october_midnight
10-05-2013, 06:59 AM
Saw this last night in IMAX and it needs to be seen on as big a screen as you can get to....what a terrific film. And DF118 By the time she landed, she had such shit luck that I whispered to my wife when she was underwater 'Here comes the shark.' lol

RhettButler
10-05-2013, 09:20 AM
I've heard good things about this movie. Nice to see Bullock star in a movie that isn't total shit.

GoodSoldier333
10-05-2013, 11:32 AM
How is this for kids? Say under 10?

r_z
10-05-2013, 01:37 PM
Not suited for, I'd say. There are a few bodies (with pieces of their faces missing) floating around.

So yeah, I saw this yesterday and was blown away by the visuals. However, the narrative was a tad too hollywood-y for my taste. As my girl pointed out: Of course they wouldn't let both of their stars die.

Also, I got distracted the whole time thinking "Did she get a nose-job, too? Wasn't that botox enough already? And what's with those fake-looking lips?"

The Great Destroyer
10-05-2013, 03:21 PM
Wow. This movie was definitely a must-see for the visuals alone, on par with 2001 for how groundbreaking and beautiful they are. Really intense experience, but the dialogue and mteaphorical aspect of the story were a little clunky or heavy-handed at times. Still, this probably the best movie I've seen so far this year.

onthewall2983
10-05-2013, 04:13 PM
Just came back from watching it (RealD 3D format, btw). I didn't find it as deeply profound and unique as Children Of Men altogether, but visually it tops anything I've seen in quite awhile. Bullock does surprisingly well carrying the film herself, and of course Clooney was born to play an astronaut so no surprise there

Space Suicide
10-05-2013, 05:29 PM
Anything with space interests me (username yeah?) but I can't stomach enough to even bother because of Sandra Bullock. I find her acting appalling as I do the credit she's given.

botley
10-05-2013, 05:30 PM
Loved this. Really good/subtle use of 3D effects, mind-bending camera composition and especially good sound mixing. A true technical wonder, on par with (though possibly not as mind-blowing as) Children of Men.

The dialogue was a little wonky in parts, but — and this is my own fault for reading a review before seeing the movie — only one thing really bugged me: the Hubble Space Telescope and the ISS are in completely different orbits. There is no way anyone could fly from one to the other even with a "prototype jetpack" capable of crazy-heavy thrust.

onthewall2983
10-05-2013, 05:44 PM
Anything with space interests me (username yeah?) but I can't stomach enough to even bother because of Sandra Bullock. I find her acting appalling as I do the credit she's given.

This movie is worth putting that aside for 90 minutes.

r_z
10-05-2013, 07:06 PM
Wow. This movie was definitely a must-see for the visuals alone, on par with 2001 for how groundbreaking and beautiful they are. Really intense experience, but the dialogue and mteaphorical aspect of the story were a little clunky or heavy-handed at times. Still, this probably the best movie I've seen so far this year.

There is a metaphorical aspect in this movie aside from calling the protagonist "Stone" and having her float in space like an embryo for a half a minute?

As I said before, I loved the visuals. It's the script what prevents this film from being even remotely close to classics of the genre, imho.

The Great Destroyer
10-05-2013, 07:25 PM
There is a metaphorical aspect in this movie aside from calling the protagonist "Stone" and having her float in space like an embryo for a half a minute?

As I said before, I loved the visuals. It's the script what prevents this film from being even remotely close to classics of the genre, imho.

In the opening credits we are reminded that space is void where life is impossible. Space is a metaphor for Stone's depression where life feels incredibly empty and she finds herself drifting away from other people. Thus the spacesuit, a thin buffer between the astronaut and instant death represents the outward facade of content she puts on to keep her grief from swallowing her up like space. The story is literally about grabbing on to things and letting them go, mirroring her character's struggle to come to terms with the past and move on and look to the future.

r_z
10-05-2013, 08:00 PM
That's an interesting theory. But what is it founded on? As I recall, the movie doesn't spend much time with the character. It's only explained once how she lost her girl and that's about it. No mention about family, friends and all that.

Kodiak33
10-05-2013, 08:41 PM
I loved this movie, I thought there was an interesting metaphor at the end too.

orestes
10-06-2013, 04:03 PM
This movie OMG, see it in IMAX 3D if you can. The opening scene that pans out over Earth brought tears to me eyes. Such a riveting and intense movie to watch!


Saw this last night in IMAX and it needs to be seen on as big a screen as you can get to....what a terrific film. And @DF118 (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=53)By the time she landed, she had such shit luck that I whispered to my wife when she was underwater 'Here comes the shark.' lol

Last I checked, sharks don't live in fresh water. ;)

thevoid99
10-06-2013, 06:46 PM
I just saw this (w/ Enough Said) and man... I never want to go to outer space if shit like this happens. Film of the year so far..., and here is my full review. (http://thevoid99.blogspot.com/2013/10/gravity-2013-film.html)

dpeters
10-06-2013, 11:16 PM
That's an interesting theory. But what is it founded on? As I recall, the movie doesn't spend much time with the character. It's only explained once how she lost her girl and that's about it. No mention about family, friends and all that.

It's reinforced when she hallucinates and Clooney says, "it's tough to lose a kid." Clooney is her mind trying to find a way forward both plot-wise and in her character arc. She is letting going and choosing to live (and cope) with the loss of her daughter (and potential to die alone).

botley
10-06-2013, 11:45 PM
Did anyone else catch that Ed Harris provided the voice of NASA's mission control commander? Nice little tip of the hat to Apollo 13.

orestes
10-07-2013, 12:12 AM
Holy crap, you're right.

thevoid99
10-07-2013, 12:12 AM
Did anyone else catch that Ed Harris provided the voice of NASA's mission control commander? Nice little tip of the hat to Apollo 13.

I certainly did as I was wondering whose voice it was as it took me some minutes to realize who it really is.

mfte
10-07-2013, 07:20 AM
This was pretty good. Definitely the best modern movie in terms of floating around in space that I have seen.

Sandra Bullock needs to lay of the Botox or whatever she did.


Did anyone else find the music a little over bearing?

I feel that certain scenes could have been alot more impactful if the score wasn't blaring. Imagine if Cast Away had a score?

baudolino
10-07-2013, 09:48 AM
This was pretty good. Definitely the best modern movie in terms of floating around in space that I have seen.

Sandra Bullock needs to lay of the Botox or whatever she did.


Did anyone else find the music a little over bearing?

I feel that certain scenes could have been alot more impactful if the score wasn't blaring. Imagine if Cast Away had a score?

jep, the music was the thing which bothered me most about this movie. and that stupid scene in which Matt "had to" let loose, totally unnecessary

Deadpool
10-07-2013, 10:21 AM
I was mildly disappointed by this movie. Still very enjoyable, intense, and absolutely worth seeing in the theater, but I think I let myself be a victim of my own hype and critics'. I already have a feeling I'll enjoy this more a second time since my expectations will be more in-check. I also saw Rush the same night I saw this, and that honestly set the bar decently high even if that wasn't a perfect movie either.

ambergris
10-08-2013, 05:15 AM
Obviously a very well-crafted film. The best use of 3D I can imagine and maybe even the best cinematography. Each picture was so rich. But I can't give the highest grades for this movie because I was a bit bothered by the philosophical undertones. I love space and I'd rather want space exploration now than later, but the movie basically says that the place for mankind is on earth and going beyond is overstepping our boundaries. There was a similar message in Children of Men. The infertility was suspected to be caused by genetic engineering or maybe pharmazeutics, so it was another instance of mankind going too far. It didn't bother me back then, but here, I'd really love more space exploration. (Obviously, the terror of space itself is a foundation for the success of this movie, so what did I expect?)

Another parallel to Children of Men: Sandra Bullock at the end making her way from the sea to the land like the very first amphibians. And in Children of Men, the pregnant woman was of course a black woman, because mankind probably originated in Africa. Cuarón likes scientific creation theories in his movies....

Rabbit
10-10-2013, 06:47 AM
I was mildly disappointed by this movie. Still very enjoyable, intense, and absolutely worth seeing in the theater, but I think I let myself be a victim of my own hype and critics'. I already have a feeling I'll enjoy this more a second time since my expectations will be more in-check. I also saw Rush the same night I saw this, and that honestly set the bar decently high even if that wasn't a perfect movie either.
Shocking, cuz i went in a big fan of his previous movies, a huge fan of anything to do with space/scifi/etc, and all the critical acclaim hype so my bar was sickly high. I thought for sure i was going to leave disappointed.

i was utterly blown away. it's a near flawless ride of pure terror, beautiful, sublime, terror. the score was fantastic, the directing fantastic, acting fantastic, visuals probably the best i've seen ever to this point, i mean... it's just a one of a kind. truly special.

i've seen some nitpicking here and there about the science which some of it might not be accurate (who cares?) it does a good enough job presenting the physics of zero gravity. i've also seen some people gripe about the metaphors, again, who cares? ya like it, ya don't, it's still a ride. I didn't mind the metaphors, and i read into it through my own perspective.

This movie has ascended into my all time list.

NOTE: must see in 3d. if you can, IMAX/Dolby Atmos





Another parallel to Children of Men: Sandra Bullock at the end making her way from the sea to the land like the very first amphibians. And in Children of Men, the pregnant woman was of course a black woman, because mankind probably originated in Africa. Cuarón likes scientific creation theories in his movies....

Huh? your post is a contradiction. Scientific creation theories? You mean creationism? How does Children of Men show that? And how does this movie show that? He's a firm believer in evolution. He has stated this multiple times.

From what I remember he backed away from the original Children of Men source material. It had a lot more religious tones than his movie, though he did leave some in. And he does also leave some hints of spirituality in this one as well, hardly creationism or even religious.

Bluegirl
10-10-2013, 01:33 PM
but the movie basically says that the place for mankind is on earth and going beyond is overstepping our boundaries. There was a similar message in Children of Men.
I did not get that theme at all from this movie. There was nothing about it that implied that exploration was over stepping our boundaries. If anything it seemed to be about not giving up no matter what and not being afraid of what could happen. The main character was afraid and this lead her to panic and not be able to react. She could not unbuckle herself, she couldn't react when she needed to and she had to be talked in to trying to save herself by George Clooneys character from the very beginning. By the time she decided to try to live she no longer hesitated to act. She did what she needed to do. On Earth if you give up you can still go on living on autopilot. That is what she was doing. She would do nothing but work and drive. In space where living requires such effort giving up is so much easier but it also means dying. Effort and action is living.

ambergris
10-10-2013, 01:58 PM
@ Rabbit: Yeah, that was a bad word-choice on my part. First, I wanted to write "creation myth", but then I realized that I couldn't do this because the human origin from Africa and the origination of all higher life from sea are scientific theories. I guess I should have replaced "creation" with "origination".

@ Bluegirl: Well, the movie began with the description of how hostile space is to life, which is true, of course. And then, in the course of the movie, ALL satellites and stations were getting destroyed. And then the religious images, the orthodox picture in the russian station and the buddha figure on the chinese station. Then the frog in the water where the Bullock character lands on Earth..In space you see plastic objects or dead bodies floating around. The frog then is the symbol of life. And earth is the place to be. BUT, this is probably all a metaphor and as a metaphor it works well. And the movie is very effective in what it does. It's just my personal attitude, I like space.

The_Prowler
10-13-2013, 03:22 PM
For those of you who didn't stick around for the credits, one of the Russian voices was provided by a man named, no joke, Basher Savage. That name is so ridiculously manly, just reading it made my beard immediately grow six inches while sitting there in the theater.

koz-ivan
10-14-2013, 08:55 PM
the movie was pretty enough, everything other than visual effects seemed a bit of a waste at best, and complete failure at worst. i suppose it has to do if you buy the initial premise and just run with it, or if you remember that you're watching a Hollywood film.

despite all evidence to the contrary, it just never seemed like sandra bullock was actually in any jeopardy, it was more like what kind of divine intervention are they going to use to keep advancing her forward. the "return" of clooney probably struck me the wrong way than was intended, my reaction was more "oh fuck, they are gonna wave the magic wand and save him too..."

i wonder if a lesser name actress might have allowed for the possibility that she might just die after all.

probably a nitpick, but after awhile you've got to think, "maybe just keep the fucking helmet on?" you know maybe after having the first, the 2nd, or even the 3rd spaceship shot out from under you.

clooney just stuck me as too coldly calculated, what the audience is seeing is spectacular, yet he sounds like he's narrating a grocery list for he entire film.

while i appreciate the lean approach to keep the runtime short, maybe a scene that shows why there is a storm of steel death raining down on them for the entire film may have helped.

liked that they cast ed harris as ground control, but he's pretty cold, we never get that "failure is not an option" vibe from him. his dialogue seemed oddly paced as well, at time it sounds like he is not only talking to the astronauts, but also to others @ nasa, however the lack of pauses made him seem too omniscient.

Rabbit
10-16-2013, 10:39 PM
the movie was pretty enough, everything other than visual effects seemed a bit of a waste at best, and complete failure at worst. i suppose it has to do if you buy the initial premise and just run with it, or if you remember that you're watching a Hollywood film.

despite all evidence to the contrary, it just never seemed like sandra bullock was actually in any jeopardy, it was more like what kind of divine intervention are they going to use to keep advancing her forward. the "return" of clooney probably struck me the wrong way than was intended, my reaction was more "oh fuck, they are gonna wave the magic wand and save him too..."

i wonder if a lesser name actress might have allowed for the possibility that she might just die after all.

probably a nitpick, but after awhile you've got to think, "maybe just keep the fucking helmet on?" you know maybe after having the first, the 2nd, or even the 3rd spaceship shot out from under you.

clooney just stuck me as too coldly calculated, what the audience is seeing is spectacular, yet he sounds like he's narrating a grocery list for he entire film.

while i appreciate the lean approach to keep the runtime short, maybe a scene that shows why there is a storm of steel death raining down on them for the entire film may have helped.

liked that they cast ed harris as ground control, but he's pretty cold, we never get that "failure is not an option" vibe from him. his dialogue seemed oddly paced as well, at time it sounds like he is not only talking to the astronauts, but also to others @ nasa, however the lack of pauses made him seem too omniscient.

Have you ever met an astronaut? A veteran? A lot of them are insanely cold and calculated. Nothing jolts these guys, i know it's crazy but it's true. That's why they're picked for what they do.

Your other complaints are just nitpicks.

botley
10-17-2013, 12:04 AM
while i appreciate the lean approach to keep the runtime short, maybe a scene that shows why there is a storm of steel death raining down on them for the entire film may have helped.
I think that was made pretty clear, at least for the purposes of the story. Perhaps the actual full explanation of WHY any nation would be foolhardy enough to shoot a nuclear missile at any satellite in orbit over Earth is enough for a whole other movie entirely.

thelastdisciple
10-17-2013, 12:18 AM
I came to the conclusion after seeing Sandra Bullock in space with short hair that she would make a damn sexy Vulcan.

Rabbit
10-17-2013, 03:02 AM
I think that was made pretty clear, at least for the purposes of the story. Perhaps the actual full explanation of WHY any nation would be foolhardy enough to shoot a nuclear missile at any satellite in orbit over Earth is enough for a whole other movie entirely.

huh? this happens more often than you think.

botley
10-17-2013, 11:35 AM
That doesn't make it any less insane.

Corvus T. Cosmonaut
10-17-2013, 04:50 PM
But I can't give the highest grades for this movie because I was a bit bothered by the philosophical undertones. I love space and I'd rather want space exploration now than later, but the movie basically says that the place for mankind is on earth and going beyond is overstepping our boundaries.
It is explicitly not saying that.

Note that we go from "LIFE IN SPACE IS IMPOSSIBLE" immediately (give or take a lenthy shuttle approach) to shots of people living in space. Observe that at the end Stone lands in the lake, which we're shown is also not conducive to human life. And following both of these—a movie's length in a pioneering inhospitable zone of space, a sudden splash-down in a more terrestrial inhospitable zone of being under water—we get this evolution-metaphor imagery of Stone first crawling, then taking her very first wobbly, uncertain but determined steps on the Earth, then walking into the great unknown.

But we also see that frog while Stone is submerged, and that frog serves (at least) three purposes. It:

1. provides a wandering shot away from Bullock that allows a cut as she's removing her space suit. We follow the frog as she's unfastening her jacket, return as she's discarding her pants.
2. demonstrates that though Stone's life is in immediate peril, there are other creatures that may call it home. See again the evolution imagery: the process has long been one of creatures adapting to hostile environments.
3. recalls our own evolutionary history, the frog's being associated with a much earlier stage of evolution, when we were still taking our first tentative steps into the hostile environment of dry land and open air.

Cuarón develops the movie around a few simple messages, and one of which is that when we fall, we must get back up again. We are all subject to gravity, literally, and to gravity of all figurative sorts (ie. the emotional turmoil of losing a child), but it's only in overcoming these that we're able to move forward, to become great. Life in space is impossible, and humans have been ingenious enough to find ways to tip-toe out into it.


"I am fascinated by space exploration. I have a big huge respect for the people who have made it happen. For my money, the most amazing piece of technology that humanity has ever done is the Hubble Telescope. Since I was a kid, I followed space exploration because I am from the generation who saw the man stepping on the moon for the first time."

EDIT:


...only one thing really bugged me: the Hubble Space Telescope and the ISS are in completely different orbits. There is no way anyone could fly from one to the other even with a "prototype jetpack" capable of crazy-heavy thrust.


...the spacecrafts' locations [needed to be simplified in "Gravity"].

"The orbital position, they are in different orbital planes … and we had to put them in a similar orbital plane because otherwise we would not be able to tell the story," explained Cuarón.

In reality, it is not possible to easily transfer between the Hubble Space Telescope and International Space Station, or the station and China's spacelab Tiangong 1, because they are in different orbits. The space shuttle, when it was flying, and Russia's Soyuz spacecraft, cannot fly between the outposts and orbiting observatory, at least not without being redesigned and carrying considerably more fuel.

Cuarón didn't just adopt the changes to orbital inclinations and procedures without first trying to make them work.

"We did a draft where we tried to respect everything," he revealed, adding that the end result was a towering script. "Everything was just about explaining to the audiences all of that stuff, so we had to try to create a balance."
This won't necessarily prevent your being bothered by the depiction of the objects in the film being in a similar orbit, but the filmmakers were at least keenly aware of this technical detail.

That (and the previous Cuarón quote) are from the Space.com interview: http://www.space.com/23062-gravity-movie-science-fiction-fact.html


jep, the music was the thing which bothered me most about this movie. and that stupid scene in which Matt "had to" let loose, totally unnecessary
It's not really clear in the film, but the ISS was slightly spinning, enough so that the centrifugal force would keep pushing Kowalski outwards. Of course, unless the parachute cables were bungee cords (I know nothing about the elasticity of Soyuz chute cables), Stone should've had a similar problem even after letting Kowalski go.

aggroculture
10-19-2013, 05:34 PM
http://talkbacker.com/movies/gravity-is-the-mother-of-all-sci-fi-duds-a-feminists-perspective/id=11576

Corvus T. Cosmonaut
10-19-2013, 08:40 PM
That article provides neither feminism nor perspective; Armond White wrote a better ridiculous review.

dpeters
10-28-2013, 09:05 PM
http://talkbacker.com/movies/gravity-is-the-mother-of-all-sci-fi-duds-a-feminists-perspective/id=11576
I laughed at some of the clever allusions the author used. An entertaining read but that's where I start to diverge.

There's very little counter-point, mainly a one-way response to the film without thinking ahead toward rebuttals.

No mention of how moisture and enclosed spaces are so-called feminine imagery (and integral where used in the film); nor the scientific consideration to how phalluses are fairly aerodynamic and "hey-astronauts-have-muscle-atrophy-on-re-entry" being a driving motivator for certain scenes. She's larger than life in a number of sequences before the finale, sometimes devoid of any phallic imagery.

It reads as strawman by selecting one particular lens then refusing to examine possible explanations or how the film successfully used said lens. The assumption that audience feedback on feminism versus actual intent of the directors needs due consideration too. There are three groups at play: the selected audience, the reviewer, and the crew who made the film. The first and last are usually lumped together throughout the piece without much distinction. If the directors are chauvinistic for using phallic imagery and few, if any, vaginal imagery is mentioned without tossing aside, I'm at a loss for what the reviewer is trying to say about film.

However, if the purpose for this may be to generate ad revenue, this is whole-heartedly successful: controversial, anti-establishment position with hyperbolic language drives money like none other. It's well-written by that criteria and will prove profitable for the site, regardless of warranted arguments or semiotic finesse.

On an admittedly Killing-the-Messenger fallacy note, the Bullock is "Uncle Tom" comparison and references to "Our Struggle" felt a bit too much like white, mid-to-upper class, "I'll speak for everyone" privilege to me.

Alexandros
11-09-2013, 02:38 AM
An absolutely amazing film in visual terms, so intense and jaw-dropping! Hats off to everyone on the technical side and of course to Cuaron because he made it all work. Yeah, a few Hollywood-isms here and there but nothing too distracting. I left the theatre feeling very...sated!

scorpiusdiamond
11-09-2013, 07:33 AM
I loved this movie so much, it had me racked in terror so many times.
Cuaron is a sucker for big Hollywood clichés, it's apparent in his other films, he's not an out there director, he's just extremely innovative.
I like how he creates so many one takes just because he could with that much cgi.

wizfan
11-17-2013, 05:29 PM
Simply phenomenal. One of the best experiences I ever had in a movie theater. Currently listening to the soundtrack. If only there was a surround version of it. It would be amazing if the movie's Blu-ray comes with an isolated score - or maybe a "more realistic version" with no music at all.

piggies_pinion
11-18-2013, 04:39 AM
My mate CGI'd that frog.
It had a long and arduous development.
He was so happy to get is name in the credits.

r_z
11-18-2013, 11:18 AM
tell him the frog was fantastic!

Highly Psychological
11-18-2013, 11:33 AM
Impressive visually but i didnt feel there was much else here, there was not much of a plot to work with. The visual experience was great, utterly mindblowing in parts but i didnt care about Sandra Bullocks character or back story very much. I found it too hard to concentrate on her backstory when she was talking about her daughter, becuase she was erm... floating a few miles above the earth when she was speaking, how am i supposed to get immersed in her back story in that environment?
Children of Men was innovative and groundbreaking on a few levels had a fantastic story and brilliant characters to work with. Here is only really noticed the visual elements.
The scene where the fragments from the Russian Missile obliterated the space station was one of the best things i have ever seen on screen, jaw dropping, the 3D was impressive, however i dont know if the 3D effect is wearing off on me, the whole thing did not feel quite as new of trippy as i expected it too, maybe it was where i was sitting, the screen, or my glasses but i found i was more immersed in the world on screen with Prometheus and Avatar, however certain scenes did feel new.
Cant help comparing this to Children of Men, very different film, its just that was one of my favourite films ever and in the top 3 of last decade for me! He is a brilliant director either way and i look very forward to seeing more from him.

richardp
11-20-2013, 01:11 PM
Here's (http://badassdigest.com/2013/11/20/watch-the-short-film-that-ties-into-gravity?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+badassdigest+%28Badass+Digest +ALL%29&utm_content=FaceBook) the short film that accompanies Gravity and shows the other end of Dr. Stone's transmission with Annigaaq. This movie just keeps getting better and better.

botley
03-03-2014, 12:43 AM
Congratulations to the filmmakers for winning all those Oscars (http://www.theverge.com/2014/3/2/5464334/gravity-2014-oscar-wins), that's pretty cool. For being a big-ticket movie with two well-known lead actors and stunning production value, it still somehow felt like an underdog.

sheepdean
03-03-2014, 02:14 AM
Really annoying me how the British media is now selling this as a British film after the wins when it's actually a huge coup for the Mexican film industry

streetcleaner89
03-04-2014, 09:49 PM
I felt like it was a pretty good flick, very entertaining, but got to a point of "gee, what more can they do to the woman?"

Vertigo
03-05-2014, 04:15 AM
Really annoying me how the British media is now selling this as a British film after the wins when it's actually a huge coup for the Mexican film industry

Main producer, FX team, composer, editor, production designer, art director... all British. Filmed here, too.

It's an international collaboration, which makes it a bit of a push to call it a British film, but calling it a Mexican film just for the nationality of the director, co-writer and cinematographer - that's like calling The Dark Knight a huge achievement for the British film industry.

sheepdean
03-05-2014, 11:19 AM
Main producer, FX team, composer, editor, production designer, art director... all British. Filmed here, too.

It's an international collaboration, which makes it a bit of a push to call it a British film, but calling it a Mexican film just for the nationality of the director, co-writer and cinematographer - that's like calling The Dark Knight a huge achievement for the British film industry.
Except that Britain isn't exactly short of blockbuster, high budget, oscar winning films. It's not a 100% Mexican film of course, but calling it a British one is really stealing the limelight from a crew who have really broken expectations.

elevenism
03-14-2014, 02:11 AM
man... I never want to go to outer space if shit like this happens.
LOLZ

I watched this the other night with the surround sound turned up REALLY loud.
Visually, i thought that this film was fucking STUNNING and groundbreaking. We are living in AMAZING fucking times for cinematic technology.
The sound was fucking awesome too...i found myself wishing trent and atticus had done it though.
The plot left a little to be desired, in my opinion, but for me, they could have been talking about football through the whole thing and it still would have been bad ass.

For me, this film was one of those spectacle type films, along the lines of Cell and Avatar.
Definitely not to be missed. Catch it on a big screen with the volume turned up real loud.

BTW, Children of Men? I am going to have to watch it again. I have seen SO MANY movies that i thought were SO MUCH better.

Hazekiah
09-08-2014, 10:01 AM
Finally got to watch this FANTASTIC movie again and realized I never really got back to this thread.

Really glad to see so much discussion in here of the metaphorical underpinnings. The film is beautiful and amazing in all aspects but there's a lot to chew on beneath the surface, too.

Most of that's already been covered but I don't think I've seen mention of the grieving mother's first disrobing leaving her floating in the fetal position with a conveniently-placed cable in the background clearly resembling an umbilical cord stemming from her abdomen. Kinda blatant but worth mentioning, too.

And I got a good chuckle when I realized just how many of Clooney's lines as a party-hardy womanizing astronaut pertained to his "thrust." Considering it was his final spacewalk before retirement which he was trying to survive, his dialogue about "This old can still has a couple good thrusts in it" seemed to have a bit of a double-meaning, lol. Plus, I mean...it IS George Clooney.

On a more serious note, this is actually my first Alfonso Cuarón-directed movie experience. Been well-aware of him for 15 years or so but just never really got around to his stuff. Really, REALLY looking forward to catching up now! GodDAMN this movie was excellent.

However, I have seen a bunch of Guillermo del Toro films and right before watching Gravity I happened to watch Pacific Rim with his director's commentary track on. Obviously, he's collaborated with Cuarón a lot and makes several references to developing Pacific Rim with occasional input from him. So given their friendly spirit of cooperation AND the fact that both films were in production at the same time (both with conversion-input from James Cameron, too) I couldn't help but wonder about the red shoes.

In his commentary, del Toro goes on and on at length about the "color coding" of the film, in particular the association of the color red with the "heart" and "life" of the characters, specifically Mako...linking it in particular with her red shoe from the day she met Pentecost after losing her family.

An, lo and behold, two hours later I'm watching del Toro's buddy Cuarón's movie from the same year and noticing that Stone asks Kowalski to tell her dead daughter that she found her favorite RED shoe under the bed after she'd died and not to worry.

Not that red shoes are that uncommon on little girls or anything, but given the overwhelmingly similar applications in near-simultaneous productions by long-time collaborators and friends who thank each other in the credits of these two films...well, I'm just sayin'!

Wondered if anyone else caught that or if it's maybe been mentioned by either of them anywhere.

:)


while i appreciate the lean approach to keep the runtime short, maybe a scene that shows why there is a storm of steel death raining down on them for the entire film may have helped.

liked that they cast ed harris as ground control, but he's pretty cold, we never get that "failure is not an option" vibe from him. his dialogue seemed oddly paced as well, at time it sounds like he is not only talking to the astronauts, but also to others @ nasa, however the lack of pauses made him seem too omniscient.

Thankfully, there WAS such a scene. As already noted, NORAD warned NASA that Russia took out one of their own satellites with a missile-strike, which resulted in a chain reaction of turning other satellites into debris spreading all over the place in orbit.


I think that was made pretty clear, at least for the purposes of the story. Perhaps the actual full explanation of WHY any nation would be foolhardy enough to shoot a nuclear missile at any satellite in orbit over Earth is enough for a whole other movie entirely.

Well, fwiw, Kowalski speculates that it was a spy satellite being disposed of for security purposes.


Here's (http://badassdigest.com/2013/11/20/watch-the-short-film-that-ties-into-gravity?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+badassdigest+%28Badass+Digest +ALL%29&utm_content=FaceBook) the short film that accompanies Gravity and shows the other end of Dr. Stone's transmission with Annigaaq. This movie just keeps getting better and better.

I can't watch it just yet but OMFG, thanks for that! Sounds amazing.