"Gravity" by Alfonso Cuarón

Nex 0

I'm really surprised there isn't a thread for this considering it releases tonight, and will probably be the best film of the year. Cuarón is known for his masterpieces "Children of Men," "A Little Princess," and, of course, "Y Tu Mama Tambien" and this should not be any different.

It also helps that with 121 reviews in it is sitting at 98% with an average rating of 9/10 on Rotten Tomatoes. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/gravity_2013/ The fiance and I are going to see it tonight. We're expecting big things.

Gizmo

Not really interested in watching an entire movie of Sandra Bullock drifting in space hoping to make it home. It just seems like a very simple plot.

I heard the movie is a spectacle to behold (like it's well worth watching in IMAX) and I like Bullock/Clooney, but this just doesn't seem like my kind of movie.

Takaho

Heard a lot about it and would really like to go see it.

I am not the biggest fan of Bullock…but I'm sure I can look past it for this film.

Neaeran

The premise reminds me of 127 hours. How many people thought a movie that shows a guy being stuck between rocks for 90 minutes would be boring? In the end that movie was great.

After i saw the trailer for Gravity it didn't really interest me, but all the praise is intriguing me. Probably going to see it tomorrow.

MetaMario

@Gizmo:

Not really interested in watching an entire movie of Sandra Bullock drifting in space hoping to make it home. It just seems like a very simple plot

See, this is my exact hang-up with the movie. But…..then again:

@Neaeran:

The premise reminds me of 127 hours. How many people thought a movie that shows a guy being stuck between rocks for 90 minutes would be boring? In the end that movie was great.

So maybe it'll wow me. But I feel the trailers might've shown all the action right away, with Bullock panicking and drifting across space while the station gets wrecked. But who knows.

either way, I'll give it a shot.

TLC

I really like the idea and that effect of drifting in space was freakin' terrifying. Only…Sandra Bullock's "acting" really took me out of that scary experience. She's in the msot terrifying position a human being could be and all she can muster is a few weak oohs and ahhs and oh nos! This is one of those situations where you would scream your fucking lungs out, act as panicked as you can, crying, snivelling, hyperventilating. Not like you're on a very boring roller coaster ride.

Gizmo

@Thousand:

I really like the idea and that effect of drifting in space was freakin' terrifying. Only…Sandra Bullock's "acting" really took me out of that scary experience. She's in the msot terrifying position a human being could be and all she can muster is a few weak oohs and ahhs and oh nos! This is one of those situations where you would scream your fucking lungs out, act as panicked as you can, crying, snivelling, hyperventilating. Not like you're on a very boring roller coaster ride.

Feel like it'd be the exact opposite for me. If someone trained to go into space got into a major accident and is freaking out, wasting precious oxygen panicking, that would just annoy the hell out of me.

And admittedly I've never seen 127 hours either. And from the reviews this is definitely on the upper end of these types of movies than say, Open Waters. But seriously, I've heard IMAX is the way to go. This is apparently a spectacle to behold (and might be why I might check it out, that and because it's about space and after looking through online articles I've heard some liberties were taken in the science, a fair amount is actually accurate which actually does have me more intrigued. But I was told Avatar was a must see as well for the visuals and well…I don't think visuals alone is enough to go out of the way for me to see this).

Cyclone_Baroness

I've seen the trailer in theaters a few times now and each time never realized it was Sandra Bullock….I was so focused on the "Oh god why!?!" feeling.

Nex 0

This film is a masterpiece. A friend of mine said it will go down in the pantheon of all time greats and I have to agree. This is easily one of the best films I have ever seen in my life.

If at all possible go see it in theaters. This is a film that has to be seen in theaters. It will still be phenomenal on DVD, but, even in simple 2D, it adds another layer.

Full review will be coming later.

TLC

@Gizmo:

Feel like it'd be the exact opposite for me. If someone trained to go into space got into a major accident and is freaking out, wasting precious oxygen panicking, that would just annoy the hell out of me.

And admittedly I've never seen 127 hours either. And from the reviews this is definitely on the upper end of these types of movies than say, Open Waters. But seriously, I've heard IMAX is the way to go. This is apparently a spectacle to behold (and might be why I might check it out, that and because it's about space and after looking through online articles I've heard some liberties were taken in the science, a fair amount is actually accurate which actually does have me more intrigued. But I was told Avatar was a must see as well for the visuals and well…I don't think visuals alone is enough to go out of the way for me to see this).

But she was panicking. Just her panic acting was very poor.

And I agree with you on the visual thing. This movie has been getting a lot of stellar reviews but I just don't see what this movie has to offer other than a bunch of really pretty effects. The setting doesn't really lend itself to an exploration of interesting themes or allow for a complex story. So it's going to be heavily based on the two main characters, one of whom I've already made my thoughts on clear. Guess I'll know when I see it.

Nex 0

@Thousand:

The setting doesn't really lend itself to an exploration of interesting themes or allow for a complex story.

Without spoiling anything, I can point out on a base level how wrong this is. Two people stranded in space? There's only one real plot you can do, but it's incredibly complex and allows for a multitude of variations. Think about what being stranded in space means. Imagine you're helpless, floating along in space, with nothing but the knowledge that eventually, very soon, you will die. It will be slow. And i will be painful. Think about what that would do to you on a psychological level. Space is perhaps the only setting in which you could have such a pure existential crisis.

And that's just on a base level of plot. There is much more tot his film than you are expecting. I honestly think you'll come out rather impressed.

stephen

@Nex:

I honestly think you'll come out rather impressed.

Knowing the poster you're talking with, you might be wrong. This is the same guy who felt Breaking Bad made a terrible mistake by "trying to make Walter a bad guy"

Gizmo

@Thousand:

But she was panicking. Just her panic acting was very poor.

I meant panicking is a natural reaction, especially in a situation like that and given the description of Bullock I'd probably be more annoyed if she was completely stoic throughout the situation. But the way you described the way she should be panicking sounds like someone that hasn't been mentally trained to go into space and would just ultimately die that much sooner because she's wasting her oxygen supply screaming her lungs out and unable to truly access the best situation to get out and hopefully try to survive.

@Nex I realize this is just noise since I haven't/might not see the movie, but I don't think the movie gets necessarily more complex, and that kind of existential crisis can probably occur in any of these "type" of movie" but that's neither here or there, but it's just that the execution of the plot makes the movie work. Iono, after reading/listening to reviews I know I'd probably enjoy the movie, especially since I started with low expectations. But still hesitant, and I know if I don't see it, I won't regret not seeing it, even if it's a better experience to see on the big screen (like almost every review I've heard/read said this too).

Kitsune Inferno

This reminds me a little of Final Fantasy VIII when Squall and Rinoa are drifting through space. It's one of those rare moments where you have absolutely no clue how they're going to survive. No one will come to save them. They're essentially stuck in a vast vacuum, hundreds of thousands of miles from the nearest lifeform. It's the loneliest most terrifying place to be.

It's the premise that's drawing me to go see this tonight. I hope it won't disappoint me.

Neaeran

I saw it today … and i'll try not to spoil anything.
After i saw the trailer for the first time, if you would have told me that this will be the best movie of the year, i just would have laughed. But even with fun and entertaining movies like Iron Man 3, Pacific Rim or The World's End ... it was the best and most entertaining movie experience i had this year, without a doubt. Well my girlfriend doesn't agree with me on that point, although she thought it was much better than she expected.
I liked that the trailer told you almost nothing. If there are trailers that show more of the movie, i haven't seen them and i would advise everyone to stay away from them if you're planning on seeing the movie.

And yes, the visuals and the soundtrack are amazing. But you really have to see it and to feel it because the intensity can't be described. It's one of those movies where i can only recommend to go see it for yourself ... i couldn't imagine anyone (especially on this forum) to not at least "like" it.

Kitsune Inferno

I knew nothing going into this movie save for "lost in space" and I'm really glad I didn't know anything else. It's such a simple, minimalistic plot, but it's so tense and gripping. I love it. :)

Satsuki

Give the "impact" of what this movie's story seems to be, I'm going to ask everyone to PLEASE be mindful and use spoiler tags.

TheCrystalShip

@Nex:

This film is a masterpiece. A friend of mine said it will go down in the pantheon of all time greats and I have to agree. This is easily one of the best films I have ever seen in my life.

LOL what the fuck?

Pochipochi

This movie was pretty okay. I wish it had more moments of absolute silence with nothing but scoring going on, because the babbling to herself with stilted "dialogue" had quite a few clunkers that were … unconvincing? The script wasn't too great and I would've preferred something more meditative than what we got.

But all it did, hilariously, was make me want to go up into space it was so good visually and in atmosphere.

Nex 0

@TheCrystalShip:

LOL what the fuck?

What ?

TheCrystalShip

@Nex:

What ?

I'm just trying to wrap my head around this.

How many films are in your pantheon or on your list of best films?
And what was the last film that you considered a masterpiece?

Nex 0

@TheCrystalShip:

I'm just trying to wrap my head around this.

How many films are in your pantheon or on your list of best films?
And what was the last film that you considered a masterpiece?

First, have you seen this yet? If not, all of this is pointless.

Second, the last film I considered to be a masterpiece was Cabin in the Woods, for reasons completely different than this. Before that? Pan's Labyrinth. Before that? The entire Lord of the Rings trilogy, which I am convinced will be the greatest cinematic masterpiece of our time. It just succeeds on every level. (The Hobbit doesn't.) Also, LotR is the sole reason I'm in the business right now, so that is a bias I need to mention.

This movie will go down as an all time great, because it is groundbreaking. As Holy said, the script, ain't that great. It's the weakest part of the film. However, this movie has used a visual atmosphere in a way that I would say is unprecedented on screen. It will (hopefully) revolutionize the filmmaking process.

Also, anything groundbreaking is in my personal pantheon. Any film throughout history that was offered a new approach to cinematic storytelling, that has presented new ideas, that revolutionized the process, even if it was only through a technical nature. So there are quite a lot of films in what I would consider the pantheon of all time greats.

As for my personal best films, well now that's just objective. I wouldn't put Citizen Kane on my list, even though, (and I'm already sick of using this term) it would be in said pantheon.

And, honestly, I'm hardly alone in this sentiment. Go read through some of the multitude of overwhelmingly positive critic and fan reviews on RT and you'll see my thoughts repeated endlessly.

But, once again, this all matter very little if you haven't seen the film yet. Even if I were to sit down and tell you the entire plot of the movie in as much detail as possible, it would not even come close to experiencing the film on the screen.

DarthAsthma

I'm on the verge of watching this the only thing right now stopping me is that this movie is probably one of my few fears.
I really really really get weird just thinking about being stranded in space floating around endlessly.
I probably should watch this on a day where I feel good.

TheCrystalShip

@Nex:

-snip-

Ehhh, I think you just appreciate technicality much more than I do, LOL. Kind of the movie/film split.

I personally believe that the practical effects in The Thing were some of the greatest visual effects of all time. And y'know, that is actually a pretty good example of an amazing movie that is really not that great of a film, LOL. So maybe I can see where you're coming from.

kouch_lee

@Holy:

This movie was pretty okay. I wish it had more moments of absolute silence with nothing but scoring going on, because the babbling to herself with stilted "dialogue" had quite a few clunkers that were … unconvincing? The script wasn't too great and I would've preferred something more meditative than what we got.

But all it did, hilariously, was make me want to go up into space it was so good visually and in atmosphere.

Mostly agree. Bullock's monologues were a bit irritating and too Hollywoodesque for my tastes. I expected better from Cuarón.

On the other hand, though, as an audioisual experience this is nothing less than a 10/10.

I also expected something more meditative than what we got (in the end, the whole narrative felt a bit "by the book" action/survival movie, to be honest), but some parts were tense as FUCK, and I love the way they used the sound/lack of it.

Oh, and I think it has the undisputed best first 15 minutes ever.

Pochipochi

i cann only give this movie a C- beucause we saw sandra bullock's ass a lot and it was fairly obvious she wasnt wearing space diaper

Foolio

I saw this movie tonight, and I thought it was quite good but not really for any of the reasons people are giving. Let's be honest, toked out pseudo-intellectual hipsters, this is not some deep existential movie that ponders the human condition via solitude in space. It just isn't. Every attempt to make the movie "deep" comes out corny as all fuck. I don't think what I'm about to say will really spoil anyone, but fair warning I guess.

First of all, let's define what the movie is – a gripping suspense film about a space mission gone wrong. And here's what it isn't -- a movie about someone helplessly floating in space waiting to die for 90 minutes. The latter is what the trailer would have you believe, and which has people scratching their heads wondering how you can make a full movie out of that. Calling Gravity a movie about floating in space is like calling The Poseidon Adventure a movie about sitting in a capsized boat. It is about characters in a predicament trying to get themselves out of that predicament, and it involves plot and action and activity. For the whole movie. It just happens to take place in space.

To get back to what I said at the beginning, it's not some artsy film about introspection and humanity. Really. It sort of half-assedly tries to be this, at times, but like I said it just comes out as really corny and dumb. This includes Sanda Bullock's "backstory" which basically had no place in the movie, and other assorted things like the laughable comments about religion. And like what the fuck was that dumbass scene with Bullock floating in the fetal position? UGGGGH.

But when you ignore that, it's just a really tense, well-executed film. The cinematography IS quite awesome, and the soundtrack really works. Although again here's a pretty significant complaint: the very first lines of the movie are some poetic crap about how there is no sound in space because there is nothing to carry the sound -- AND THEN THEY PROCEED TO PROVIDE SOUND EFFECTS FOR EVERY SINGLE THING THAT HAPPENS IN SPACE DURING THE MOVIE. Morons.

Anyway I do recommend the film.

@DarthAsthma:

I'm on the verge of watching this the only thing right now stopping me is that this movie is probably one of my few fears.
I really really really get weird just thinking about being stranded in space floating around endlessly.
I probably should watch this on a day where I feel good.

XD well you should probably take comfort in the fact that you're probably not going to accidentally find yourself stranded in space any time soon (unless you plan to be an astronaut… ).

DarthAsthma

@Foolio:

XD well you should probably take comfort in the fact that you're probably not going to accidentally find yourself stranded in space any time soon (unless you plan to be an astronaut… ).

I will :P, it still creeps me out… floating in space is to me like the epitome of disempowerment, any form of struggle you can muster just falls through into the endless void... shiver

Mmh reading your assessment has made the movie quite a bit less enticing not that I wanted an artsy kind of film. It's just the trailer painted a more interesting picture than what has been said about the film. I'll probably watch it anyway when me and my friends can find time to hit the cinema.

Foolio

Eh there's always the inherent implication of everything related to being stuck in space. It's a good movie though. Even if I definitely don't think in any way that it's groundbreaking cinema (sorry Nex).

TheCrystalShip

@Foolio:

the very first lines of the movie are some poetic crap about how there is no sound in space because there is nothing to carry the sound – AND THEN THEY PROCEED TO PROVIDE SOUND EFFECTS FOR EVERY SINGLE THING THAT HAPPENS IN SPACE DURING THE MOVIE.

Yeah not watching this.

The only movie that did this right was 2001 (I think? maybe I'm forgetting something).

Nex 0

@Foolio:

the very first lines of the movie are some poetic crap about how there is no sound in space because there is nothing to carry the sound – AND THEN THEY PROCEED TO PROVIDE SOUND EFFECTS FOR EVERY SINGLE THING THAT HAPPENS IN SPACE DURING THE MOVIE. Morons.

The issue here is that there would have been no sound in the entire movie had they gone this route outside of dialogue and score, and that would have been unsettling, but not in a good way. Sound design and editing is one of the most crucial yet underrated parts of filmmaking. Every sound, no matter how small, is how you make your audience comfortable, and how you manipulate that sound is how you make them relax. Horror movies will uses certain sounds to clue the audience into what's about to happen. Good horror movies will use a normal sound, but make it ever so slightly off. That dissonance will make the audience uncomfortable.
I'm sure you can think off many examples of subtle sound manipulation.

But now, try to think of a movie that had absolutely no sound effects. You can't. Because there isn't. If absolutely nothing is making the sound the audience expects it to make, then they're going to become exponentially more uncomfortable as the film goes on, and, eventually they'll either walk out or hate the thing. It'll work for short scenes, like Frefly used it, but for a full 90 minutes? Nope.

So, while it would have made scientific sense, it would have been a terrible filmmaking decision to remove all the sound.

TheCrystalShip

@Nex:

The issue here is that there would have been no sound in the entire movie had they gone this route outside of dialogue and score, and that would have been unsettling, but not in a good way. Sound design and editing is one of the most crucial yet underrated parts of filmmaking. Every sound, no matter how small, is how you make your audience comfortable, and how you manipulate that sound is how you make them relax. Horror movies will uses certain sounds to clue the audience into what's about to happen. Good horror movies will use a normal sound, but make it ever so slightly off. That dissonance will make the audience uncomfortable.
I'm sure you can think off many examples of subtle sound manipulation.

The entire point of sound in film is to manipulate the audience, but those sounds don't have to be diegetic. In fact, most of the sounds that manipulate audiences are non-diegetic, at least in my experience, or at least in horror films. Of course, there could have been diegetic sounds during other parts of the movie, like inside the space station.

Foolio

@Nex:

The issue here is that there would have been no sound in the entire movie had they gone this route outside of dialogue and score, and that would have been unsettling, but not in a good way. Sound design and editing is one of the most crucial yet underrated parts of filmmaking. Every sound, no matter how small, is how you make your audience comfortable, and how you manipulate that sound is how you make them relax. Horror movies will uses certain sounds to clue the audience into what's about to happen. Good horror movies will use a normal sound, but make it ever so slightly off. That dissonance will make the audience uncomfortable.
I'm sure you can think off many examples of subtle sound manipulation.

But now, try to think of a movie that had absolutely no sound effects. You can't. Because there isn't. If absolutely nothing is making the sound the audience expects it to make, then they're going to become exponentially more uncomfortable as the film goes on, and, eventually they'll either walk out or hate the thing. It'll work for short scenes, like Frefly used it, but for a full 90 minutes? Nope.

So, while it would have made scientific sense, it would have been a terrible filmmaking decision to remove all the sound.

Nope, the issue here is that the line at the beginning of the movie had no place being there. If you're not going to show us why the silence of space is terrifying or important in some way, then don't spout that half-assed bullshit at your audience. It's simply insulting.

But aside from that, you're still wrong. A pretty damn good chunk of the movie takes place in oxygenated areas (or nothing else is going on besides dialogue and music anyway), and in fact I think the stark difference between the (lack of) sound in space and those portions would be incredibly cool and "groundbreaking."

legumes

@Foolio:

Nope, the issue here is that the line at the beginning of the movie had no place being there. If you're not going to show us why the silence of space is terrifying or important in some way, then don't spout that half-assed bullshit at your audience. It's simply insulting.

But aside from that, you're still wrong. A pretty damn good chunk of the movie takes place in oxygenated areas (or nothing else is going on besides dialogue and music anyway), and in fact I think the stark difference between the (lack of) sound in space and those portions would be incredibly cool and "groundbreaking."

To be fair I did like the score, although it felt really manipulative at times (like the tone when the debris field was coming closer and closer) since it more or less captured the mood of the moment. Overall speaking it was pretty decent. I especially liked the parts where stuff were just flying around in the ship, especially the fire stuff.

Sarfallet

@Nex:

But now, try to think of a movie that had absolutely no sound effects. You can't. Because there isn't.

Sure I can… :P There's lots of... Lets call them "silent movies".

Foolio

@legumes:

To be fair I did like the score, although it felt really manipulative at times (like the tone when the debris field was coming closer and closer) since it more or less captured the mood of the moment. Overall speaking it was pretty decent. I especially liked the parts where stuff were just flying around in the ship, especially the fire stuff.

I like the score too. To be clear though, score refers to music, which nobody seems to be disputing.

DarthAsthma

Some spoilerish stuff here

Just saw the movie and man… it should be called "Russia yo fucked up..." like how many satelites and space stations got wrecked just because they shot a satelite down, and then there are at least 4(american) lifes lost. They should make a movie about the political aftermath...

As many have already said the movie is visually stunning and as someone who doesn't care for 3d very much I'm also joining the "see this in 3d" bandwagon.
The movie actually made me feel uncomfortable at certain scenes due reasons already mentioned, it didn't last very long though cause this movie quickly transitioned into other things beside the whole lost in space stuff.
And I'd agree that the score is really beautiful.

Now lets bitch a bit about this movie cause I actually didn't like it that much(which is all pretty subjective my friend loved the movie and we're still friends, so don't lynch me :P).
I really didn't like Sandra Bullock's character, she seemed insanely incompetent although I was really trying to play the "emergency situation card" really hard and give leeway.

But it I just couldn't especially after she failed so hard at the basic task of preserving O2 even after Clooney's character tried to calm her down.
Like... it just might have been the dub but the way she breathed didn't sound like someone trying to calm down and at least attempt being careful with their O2, it sounded like someone who's literally just trying to breath in a retarded way, isn't she like supposed to be trained for stuff like that?
Maybe I'm too harsh but since I actually have asthma and was taught ways to breath properly and have experience with fighting for breath(although of course there are differences) it really irked me the way she couldn't calm down her breathing and like I said it didn't even sounded like she tried(like trying to hold your breath for 1 second intervals to try to regain rhythm or something).

Then there were hiccups like when she was trying to put out the fire or when she almost lost that space drill thing cause she didn't put it around her arm. Like I really want to give her a break cause of the circumstances but no, it's just too fucking dumb for me, that stuff shouldn't happen to someone that has the qualifications to go to space in my opinion.

Then I didn't liked the way the movie tried to built suspense(well there wasn't really much of a built up most of the time).
It's just "shit hits the fan", "shit hits the fan again". It was almost Final Destination like the way all those unlucky incidents happened one after another, to the point I was already expecting for the shuttle window to break when they showed a shot of how ice was setting into little cracks and making them bigger(although it didn't happen).

And then there was the squandered dynamic between clooney and bullock's characters. The relationship buildup was too short for me to care.
Heck the pacing up to that scene felt pretty awkward especially the whole 6% O2 left and sinking. His absence also kind of left a hole for me.
A movie that could have been about the relationship between these two persons that have to deal with the shitty situation that could have illustrated some contrast of how they deal with it differently and show how maybe need each other, turned into this film about this one person that in my opinion couldn't carry the movie alone(be it because of the script or her acting I do not know).

So a ranty like first impression... it's probably missing a few complaints and a few positive points but that's it for now.
Maybe I'm a bit unreasonable on certain things but I don't know... I still think it's worth seeing but I think I may have wanted to watch a different movie building on the concept the trailer showed us.

Foolio

@DarthAsthma:

Some spoilerish stuff here

Just saw the movie and man… it should be called "Russia yo fucked up..." like how many satelites and space stations got wrecked just because they shot a satelite down, and then there are at least 4(american) lifes lost. They should make a movie about the political aftermath...

I actually was more curious about whether that type of "chain reaction" is even possible, because my instinct is no. The orbit of the debris would be incredibly unstable, because orbit is only maintained using a fixed angular velocity. As soon as you change the angular velocity by blowing it up, it's going to disperse. Pieces will either spiral toward earth or away from earth depending on the new velocity of each piece of debris. So it wouldn't be like this storm of junk taking out everything at that orbital altitude.

Also the ISS is in extremely low orbit (hence it being in proximity to "spy satellites" which Russia was destroying, which must be close to Earth to get good images) and so it wouldn't make sense that all communications went down. Communications satellites (as well as most TV/media broadcast satellites) are in geosynchronous orbit, which is over 20,000 miles away from the ISS orbit. Communications would be fine and certainly Facebook wouldn't be down, (where the hell did that comment come from?) lol.

As for Bullock's character, I think they were trying to make her seem like an expert on some technology on board and was trained just for this mission. I think she said she prepared for 6 months? I don't know whether or not she would really come out as someone who would really handle emergencies well, as opposed to people who train for years and/or have military backgrounds etc.

CosmicDebris

I thought the movie was good and definitely worth seeing in theaters. I was forced to see it in 3D (I usually try to avoid 3D), and while I doubt it really adds much, it did make me jump back a couple of times, so mission successful I guess.

I don't think there's anything particularly deep about the film; the message is pretty simple, however, it succeeded in making me really believe I was watching people in space (even without the diaper). It was intense, emotional, and visually stunning.

DarthAsthma

@Foolio:

I actually was more curious about whether that type of "chain reaction" is even possible, because my instinct is no. The orbit of the debris would be incredibly unstable, because orbit is only maintained using a fixed angular velocity. As soon as you change the angular velocity by blowing it up, it's going to disperse. Pieces will either spiral toward earth or away from earth depending on the new velocity of each piece of debris. So it wouldn't be like this storm of junk taking out everything at that orbital altitude.

Also the ISS is in extremely low orbit (hence it being in proximity to "spy satellites" which Russia was destroying, which must be close to Earth to get good images) and so it wouldn't make sense that all communications went down. Communications satellites (as well as most TV/media broadcast satellites) are in geosynchronous orbit, which is over 20,000 miles away from the ISS orbit. Communications would be fine and certainly Facebook wouldn't be down, (where the hell did that comment come from?) lol.

As for Bullock's character, I think they were trying to make her seem like an expert on some technology on board and was trained just for this mission. I think she said she prepared for 6 months? I don't know whether or not she would really come out as someone who would really handle emergencies well, as opposed to people who train for years and/or have military backgrounds etc.

Yeah, I actually thought it was pretty unlikely as well but I kind of wrote it off.
As for her being a rookie I really considered that but I don't feel like things like not using the safety on your tools can be written of as rookie mistakes. That seems rather negligent. I also feel like with less experience, shouldn't it be even more important to remember the training and proceed per protocol?
But ok I guess it can be written of because we don't know much of what the 6 month training actually entailed.

I guess it also might have been my mood that I wasn't really engaged by the movie. I just was constantly disagreeing with ryan's(bullocks' character) actions.
Or some scene where I thought "come on…." like when she got into safety and there was this embryo like picture where some parts of the station floated at make it look like an umbilical cord. That felt a tad bit.... mmh I don't want to say pretentious ... but yeah it felt that way to me.

Aioria

My two cents;
Visually speaking I believe the movie raised the bar; it's very dynamic, it has the best use of 3D I've seen, simply put it's magnificent.
As for the script, just like everyone else, I think it's a little bit simplistic, dealing with struggle and survival, but it feels it could have been more profound.
The score was ok, although it failed to deliver what my mind had been expecting since the first turn of events in the movie: David Bowie's "Space Oddity"… it just seemed so appropriate for one or two scenes to have it play there... but it never happened!!

Having watched and read Planetes, it all seemed very familiar, and I couldn't help but remember it had a so much better script. I just goes to show what a masterpiece Planetes is.

tatermoog

Still haven't seen it, but the plot's making me have flashbacks to when I watched Marooned.

Foolio

@DarthAsthma:

Or some scene where I thought "come on…." like when she got into safety and there was this embryo like picture where some parts of the station floated at make it look like an umbilical cord. That felt a tad bit.... mmh I don't want to say pretentious ... but yeah it felt that way to me.

XD I complained about this in my first post.

TLC

I'll finally be able to see this in a few more weeks. I'm hyped up for it but the comments on how it delved into arthouse pretentiousness at times make me cringle a little. Hopefully it won't be so prevalent in the movie that I would dislike it.

xan

Saw this movie during the weekend in IMAX 3D and the visuals were AMAZING! Story & dialogues weren't great but the graphics made up for it.

Looking at Sandra Bullock made me feel so old…

FrankyFan

Damn, here I thought this thread would be praising the movie but I guess not. I'm with Nex on this one. "Gravity" is this year's "Avatar" or "Lord of the Rings" in the sense that the bar has been raised. Like wow, everything looked incredible. I was flipping my shit when the 2nd shot (20 minutes in I might add!) went from a long shot to a close-up to Sandra's point-of-view inside the helmet! Just wow.

Flame728

Watched it yesterday. 3D is what makes this movie better.

But really, it was great. Simple yet great concept and almost perfect execution.

TLC

Sorry for resurrecting this thread but I finally saw the flick

It was good. Pretty overrated though. Nowhere near deserving the over 90% on RT. Visually it's dazzling, story-wise…not so much. And the plot conveniences and scientific errors (and I'm not talking about nitpicky shit like Bullock's hair wasn't floating, I mean huge taking off your helmet in space, defying the common law of physics sort of errors) were very distracting. Also the movie got pretty pretentious (and stupid) at times which admittedly was unintentionally hilarious (I laughed my ass off at the Sandra Bullock fetal scene) but also detracted from the experience. It's like the movie didn't know if it wanted to be an action film or one of those deeply philosophical 127 hours sort of films so it tried to be both and it didn't really work.

It was a good movie just not the best movie of the decade...or of this year for that matter, it was just good.

RobZilla

Saw it last night. Total pornography for the eyeballs, the visuals were so good.

Really kind of hammered home the terrifying thought of being lost in space, thought it captured that feeling really well.

What a stressful movie though. Sandra if you could just grab something halfway up the ship/station/whatever instead of grabbing the very last thing you possibly can then that'd be great. Cheers.

TheCrystalShip

@FrankyFan:

I'm with Nex on this one. "Gravity" is this year's "Avatar"

Wow, you agree with Nex? Because it sounds like you agree with me.