"Gravity" (currently 98% positive ratings on RT)

[rockyct]

Well damn. If they left out the fuck I'd probably take him.

Well, with the amount of shit that happened to Bullock, it was a pretty justified "fuck." Clooney replied with "copy that."

So I just got back from seeing this movie in IMAX 3D, partly in thanks to this comment and other related comments.

While possibly the sound portion was scientifically accurate, the majority of the movie was beyond realism. Huge let down. I spent $31.50 on tickets and would have preferred this movie as a redbox film unfortunately.

7/10 is my rating.

I'll admit it was at least better than the trailer lead me to believe, but that was it. It was unbelievable bull after unbelievable bull. A little here and there I can take, but it was RAMPANT in this film.

I don't mind if a film has unrealistic features, but the movie should NOT be based in realism, which they try to allude to with the facts that they show before the film starts.

Had they kept more realism in the film, it likely would have been excellent.

I didn't really take the opening to imply that the movie was going to be ultra-realistic, but to set the stage with the idea that even though space travel is "normal" to us, it's an extremely hostile environment. The facts are supporting the statement; "Life in space is impossible."

The money wasn't spent to make things realistic, it was to immerse you in the story. Movies always toss away realism if it gets in the way of their story. Just because the ISS lies in a completely different orbit than the HST, doesn't mean the movie sucks. The realism with the lack of sound is used to keep you disoriented in this foreign environment, similar to what the characters are feeling. However, I've never see a movie that's made me feel more like I've been to space than Gravity. Heck, Buzz Aldrin liked the movie. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/gravity-review-by-astronaut-buzz-639883

Anyway, looks like it's having a very strong opening weekend thanks to Imax: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/box-office-gravity-soaring-friday-643469

 

[Tweak155]

I didn't really take the opening to imply that the movie was going to be ultra-realistic, but to set the stage with the idea that even though space travel is "normal" to us, it's an extremely hostile environment. The facts are supporting the statement; "Life in space is impossible."

The money wasn't spent to make things realistic, it was to immerse you in the story. Movies always toss away realism if it gets in the way of their story. Just because the ISS lies in a completely different orbit than the HST, doesn't mean the movie sucks. The realism with the lack of sound is used to keep you disoriented in this foreign environment, similar to what the characters are feeling. However, I've never see a movie that's made me feel more like I've been to space than Gravity. Heck, Buzz Aldrin liked the movie. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/gravity-review-by-astronaut-buzz-639883

Anyway, looks like it's having a very strong opening weekend thanks to Imax: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/box-office-gravity-soaring-friday-643469

It wasn't just the opening statements. They would have taken away the earth's atmosphere if it helped them in any way, shape or form.

 

[Scarpozzi]

I saw it last night. It was very good...not too long either.

I was picking apart details as many folks on here have....when you back up and realize how good the camera work was...it makes me respect the making of this film. It was well produced and the CGI wasn't painfully obvious. (still a little obvious)

 

[TheVrolok]

I had completely written this off? My gut still says it's garbage, but I suppose I'll have to reconsider.

 

[bearxor]

when you back up and realize how good the camera work was...it makes me respect the making of this film.

This is really the only reason I want to see it. Couldn't care less about which actors are in it or the overall plot. I'm simply expecting it to be a beautifully shot movie. And that's probably the problem with some people thinking it's boring. It's probably a filmmakers movie and not a movie for the general public.

 

[SlitheryDee]

I saw this last night. Excellent movie. I love how it was shot. The 3d was spectacular. The action parts were so intense that at times I found myself leaning forward in my seat and trying to will the characters to grab handholds before they flew off into space forever. For practically the whole time I felt certain that this was what it would be like to be in space, and that went a long way toward adding to the tension of the movie. I have no personal experience to draw from, but I can't help but think that this movie had to have nailed the overall look and feel of zero-g movement.

I do have a few gripes though. The movie was so immersive that anything that took me out of it felt especially jarring. The parts that took me out of the movie turned out to be nearly all of the quieter scenes when Sandra Bullock found herself temporarily out of danger. For all the technical mastery of the movie, they approached the concept of having us identify with the character in a sort of ham fisted way. The monologues that Bullock kept having with herself did nothing but make me think "hmmm, the director want me to feel sad now", or "hmmm, the director wants me to feel triumphant now". Instead of just identifying with the character and feeling something for her, I was all too aware that the movie was trying to push me in a certain direction, and it kept messing with my ability to suspend disbelief. There were a lot of times in those scenes where I was just hoping the debris field was coming back soon.

There were a few shots during these times that the director clearly just wanted in the movie, like the one where

Spoiler

she has just entered the ISS and is floating in the doorway in a semi-fetal position, with her legs and arms positioned "just so" and the shot is held for entirely too long

. The director clearly was in love with that scene and wanted it in there. The problem is that while I was looking at the shot, I was being taken out of the movie.

Overall though, awesome movie. I wouldn't give it 98%, but I would give it a solid 8.5/10. It says something when the only complaints I have are related to the fact that parts of the movie are so utterly convincing that I demand perfection everywhere else as well. Go see it in 3-d if you haven't yet. It's definitely a better movie than the trailer makes it appear to be.

 

[CZroe]

I just don't get the appeal of this movie.

The trailer implied no story other than "2 abnormally pretty astronauts in full makeup float around space for 2 hours". I can't imagine that being very good. Maybe 30 minutes of build up before shit hits the fan and 30 minutes of resolution afterwards, but even an hour of them floating sounds bad.

And them, at least both, surviving (as is the way of Hollywood) really turns me off. I don't care how beautiful the imagery is, it can't possibly have a good story.

Astronauts are probably the most fit and healthy group of people on the planet due to intense training and being extremely selective of candidates. It is not "abnormal" for them to look better than the majority of us. And everything else in your post is pure LOL. If this is a troll and you know better: GENIUS!

 

[CZroe]

My only real complaint is that this was the perfect opportunity to make an awesome movie in real time and they missed the opportunity. Instead, 90 story minutes pass more than once in 90 viewing minutes.

 

[MikeyLSU]

saw it last night in 3D, loved the effects and the shots from space were amazing. I enjoyed the imagery more than anything and I loved how many shots they did without cuts back and forth. Really gave more of a presence in space to see a 360 view from the persons viewpoint.

One of my only real gripes

Spoiler

when clooney detached himself because he was "pulling" her away and it wouldn't hold. Once the initial impact was done, wouldn't both of them be suspended since there is no gravity? Basically once the first pull was done and they didn't detach from the ISS, she should be able to pull them both back to the station and his "weight" wouldn't really be pulling at all.

 

[child of wonder]

Saw the movie in IMAX 3D yesterday and sat close to the screen so it enveloped our field of view. Went in with very high expectations after reading others' experiences and I have to say they were exceeded.

Caught my wife crying during the movie and I felt emotionally spent at the end where I'd take a deep breath and shudder as I exhaled like coming off an adrenaline high.

 

[child of wonder]

saw it last night in 3D, loved the effects and the shots from space were amazing. I enjoyed the imagery more than anything and I loved how many shots they did without cuts back and forth. Really gave more of a presence in space to see a 360 view from the persons viewpoint.

One of my only real gripes

Spoiler

when clooney detached himself because he was "pulling" her away and it wouldn't hold. Once the initial impact was done, wouldn't both of them be suspended since there is no gravity? Basically once the first pull was done and they didn't detach from the ISS, she should be able to pull them both back to the station and his "weight" wouldn't really be pulling at all.

Spoiler

Isaac Newton says otherwise. Pulling Clooney closer would put more tension on the ropes holding Bullock in place.

 

[badb0y]

The only way I can describe it is as a roller coaster ride.

Why were so many people in this thread doubting the movie? It's directed by Alfonso Cuarón, same guy that did Children of Men and that was damn good too.

 

[MikeyLSU]

Spoiler

Isaac Newton says otherwise. Pulling Clooney closer would put more tension on the ropes holding Bullock in place.

Spoiler

I'm not talking about pulling him back, obviousl that would somewhat push her out with force also.

I'm saying he can pull herself and clooney back to the station on the cable connected to her leg. The movie made it out to be him being there was causing extra stress to the cable holding them there.

 

[SlitheryDee]

Spoiler

Isaac Newton says otherwise. Pulling Clooney closer would put more tension on the ropes holding Bullock in place.

Spoiler

That scene made it appear that clooney was somehow being pulled away from her by some constant force though. There were a few moments before he disconnected himself where they were both motionless in space, yet he seemed to be pulling away from her, keeping the tether taut. Once they stopped moving relative to the ISS, shouldn't they have remained motionless? Hell, she should have been able to let go of the tether and have him remain floating in more or less the same place where she could later come back and get him, right? Furthermore, It should have taken nothing but a tiny tug to get him started back toward the station, yet he seemed to be caught in the flow of some kind of "space current" that was pulling him away from her. I can't figure out how that was anything but a contrivance to get him out of the movie.

 

[Ns1]

I saw it last night. It was very good...not too long either.

I was picking apart details as many folks on here have....when you back up and realize how good the camera work was...it makes me respect the making of this film. It was well produced and the CGI wasn't painfully obvious. (still a little obvious)

This. If you noticed Sandra bullocks skin but didn't notice the 13 minute single shot scene, you're in it for the wrong reasons.

 

[MikeyLSU]

oh and to add, I thought Bullock was amazing in her role. Clooney could have been better, he added the normal confident Clooney role(think Oceans 11), but Sandra did outstanding IMO.

This. If you noticed Sandra bullocks skin but didn't notice the 13 minute single shot scene, you're in it for the wrong reasons.

Yeah, the single shot scenes were great. I never would notice how long they went on(13 minutes is a long time), but I did notice quite a few of them and it really helped immerse you in space.

 

[Ns1]

Spoiler

that first scene alone where she was spinning out of control was like pure technical mastery

Possibly my favorite sequence in the movie.

 

[badb0y]

Pretty much how I felt. Way too much hype and undeserved praise. It is nearly two hours of bullock being tossed around in space. At one point they try to make her have sex appeal when she takes off her suit and floats around but it did nothing for me.

Sex appeal? You fucking retarded bro?

Spoiler

The scene your talking about is when she takes all her astronaut shit off and goes into a fetal position, there was nothing sexual about it. It's supposed to represent rebirth as she narrowly escaped death. The next step was entering earth as a new person which she was by the end of the movie.

 

[Ns1]

Sex appeal? You fucking retarded bro?

Spoiler

The scene your talking about is when she takes all her astronaut shit off and goes into a fetal position, there was nothing sexual about it. It's supposed to represent rebirth as she narrowly escaped death. The next step was entering earth as a new person which she was by the end of the movie.

When I saw that scene all I could say was...how the fuck did they shoot that?

 

[Ichinisan]

My only real complaint is that this was the perfect opportunity to make an awesome movie in real time and they missed the opportunity. Instead, 90 story minutes pass more than once in 90 viewing minutes.

Spoiler

The descent

would have been 23 minutes of the 91 minute movie.

 

[Ichinisan]

One of my only real gripes

Spoiler

when clooney detached himself because he was "pulling" her away and it wouldn't hold. Once the initial impact was done, wouldn't both of them be suspended since there is no gravity? Basically once the first pull was done and they didn't detach from the ISS, she should be able to pull them both back to the station and his "weight" wouldn't really be pulling at all.

That bothered me enough that I had to say something to my brother in the theater. He said they were being pulled toward Earth, but that doesn't make sense because

Spoiler

Clooney didn't fall straight to Earth when he detached

.

 

[5150Joker]

Sex appeal? You fucking retarded bro?

Spoiler

The scene your talking about is when she takes all her astronaut shit off and goes into a fetal position, there was nothing sexual about it. It's supposed to represent rebirth as she narrowly escaped death. The next step was entering earth as a new person which she was by the end of the movie.

Rebirth lol, yeah sure.

 

[bearxor]

oh and to add, I thought Bullock was amazing in her role. Clooney could have been better, he added the normal confident Clooney role(think Oceans 11), but Sandra did outstanding IMO.


Yeah, the single shot scenes were great. I never would notice how long they went on(13 minutes is a long time), but I did notice quite a few of them and it really helped immerse you in space.

Children of Men had an 8 minute shot, so it's not entirely out of the realm of possibility.

Seeing it this afternoon and can't wait!

 

[Ns1]

Rebirth lol, yeah sure.

Michael bay is ------> that way

 

[slugg]

That bothered me enough that I had to say something to my brother in the theater. He said they were being pulled toward Earth, but that doesn't make sense because

Spoiler

Clooney didn't fall straight to Earth when he detached

.

Yea, someone needs to explain the physics in this scene. Is it movie physics, or is it real physics that I'm just not understanding?

The only possible explanation that I can come up with is

Spoiler

that the entire ISS is spinning ever so slightly. When they're holding on for dear life, the tether and cords are fully taught and they are at a large distance away from the ISS. If it's in fact barely spinning, then the large distance from the axis of rotation increases centripetal force. If this is true, this is why Sandra Bullock is able to pull herself in (i.e. she is closer to the axis of rotation, less force) whereas George Clooney cannot (i.e. too far away).

My understanding of these physics may be wrong. If I could just watch that scene again, I'll pay more attention next time for any clues that may support or disprove my theory.