Gravity (2013)

[mattmav45]

There's simply no reason to have that tacked-on emotional angle dealing with the kid. The situation is already harrowing enough, adding that in actually took away a great deal of the intensity for me.My basic reaction to the whole dead kid plot device was "Whatever."

[Jake Gittes]

Then they should've found a more believable way to address that than a vision of her co-worker that she seemed to have very little personal relationship with coming back to tell her to move on. Heck, I think I would've preferred her actual daughter appearing in said vision, which may have been more treacly but also would've made more sense.

Anyone other than Clooney appearing in the hallucination wouldn't have been believable because he clearly communicated the most with her during the two weeks of the mission, and was the only person she had both seen and spoken to after the disaster.

[CoolioD1]

Yeah, I actually liked the hallucination scene. Though her speech to her daughter after it was  . Sandra sold it well but c'mon.

Edited November 9, 2013 by CoolioD1

[Plain Old Tele]

Her speech to her daughter was great. Corny, but great.

[Jack Nevada]

The only part I had a problem with was the shot of Bullock floating in a fetal position. That was a little too obvious.

[Jessie]

Watched this yesterday. First off, the visuals were great, certainly the best I've seen since Avatar and Alfonso Cauron is the master of elongated shots, I swear that opening scene was about 15 minutes long. However, I though this was still pretty far fetched and stupid. First off, the Sandra Bullock talking to herself scene were too cringe worthy for me, it didn't need to be that corny. Secondly, she's seemed to have a lot of bad luck. The debris from the Russian Space Station kept passing by every 1 and a half hours but conveniently they didn't destroy all satellites in one go. It's like it conveniently waited for Sandra Bullock to get to the satellite before it got destroyed lol. Then she enters earth after her pod nearly being destroyed by rubble and nearly drowns lol. When she was in the sea I was half expecting her to start getting circled by sharks.Brilliant visuals but a shitty script in my opinion and it was too far fetched for what it was trying to achieve. Also you can't start the film by saying there's no sound in space, then actually make the destructive scenes noisy lol, that's just stupid. Also I found there to be a lot of scenes that purposely dragged just so they could call this a feature length film. Overall I think I felt more nauseous and intense in buried than this and it didn't need pretty visuals to do so.I'll give this a B simply for its visuals and I give Caruso an A+ for directing

Edited November 10, 2013 by Jessie

[Films]

A+

 

Best film of the year and a longer review later

[Heretic]

Just saw in IMAX. Visually mesmerizing. I thought it'd be all about the visuals, but Sandra gave a brilliant performance, and the film actually had emotional depth. Fucking loved it.

[Omario]

Brilliant movie. Far fetched but nicely executed. Some scenes were beautifully directed. I have developed immense respect for Alfonso Cauron.

[AniNate]

Anyone other than Clooney appearing in the hallucination wouldn't have been believable because he clearly communicated the most with her during the two weeks of the mission, and was the only person she had both seen and spoken to after the disaster.

 

To each his own, I guess. I just can't buy it.

[Hatebox]

This is literally the only film I've ever watched that made me think "I'm glad I saw this in 3D". Which is about as high a praise as I can give it.

 

(Ok, the solo dialogue from Bullock felt frequently off-key, but there's little else I can fault the film for.)

[Hatebox]

PS: at the risk of reigniting the debate, a major trope of sci-fi for me is that the story contains a speculative piece of technology - which would rule this movie out of that genre (unless the inaccuracies of Clooney's jet pack count). I'm fine with calling it one of the best thrillers ever.

Edited November 13, 2013 by Hatebox

[Jose Gabriel Alvarez]

There is a sensational and overwhelming power that Alfonso Cuarón's space thriller Gravity possesses and manages to sustain in its 90 minute run time. I think I left my jaw on the theater floor. There are four things in particular to credit for this occurrence. The first of which being co-writer and director Cuarón, who has constructed one of his finest outings. Gravity breathes in a way I haven't seen before and is probably one of the best technical marvels that cinema has offered in the past twenty years. Cuarón handles the film with absolute certainty, restraining himself from committing any science fiction bourgeois, and reinventing the genre in a miraculous execution. 

I've never looked at the world of Cinematography with so much respect and adoration until I saw the works of Roger Deakins and now, firmly sitting next to him at the table as the most innovative and brilliant DP working today, Emmanuel Lubezki. We've all seen what he's accomplished in his Oscar-nominated works in Children of Men, in which he was teamed up with Cuarón, and Terrence Malick's The Tree of Life, both of which resulted in unimaginable losses. A 13-minute opening shot shows his abilities to capture the essence of the now, the feelings that life offers. Real life doesn't cut, Cuarón and Lubezki understand this. The liberties where he chooses to take us, even when we step inside from the cold, lonely edge of space, manages to turn this very simple tale into a full-fledged meditation session with the sooth sounds of composer Steven Price. Visual effects have never been put to better use than what you will witness in Gravity. One of the few films I urge everyone to see on the biggest screen possible. The post-conversion in 3D, although cool at times, was a bit unneeded. It doesn't add to the depth and scope of Cuarón's dramatic endeavor, it actually undersells it as a cheap, blockbuster space movie. An IMAX screen, the largest you can find, with a sound system able to make your eardrums bleed, those are the basic requirements. I haven't been in this much awe of a film's quality and optics this since I saw Terminator 2: Judgment Day when I was six years old. Avatar and Life of Pi are great spectacles, but this will be revisited in years to come as the bench mark for modern day science fiction. It's this generation's 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Finally, I've had a childhood crush on Sandra Bullock since I feasted my eyes on those pretty browns driving a bus in Speed during the early 90's. This manifested into looking at her abilities as an actor with a skewed vision. She's hinted at this greatness I've felt she could achieve in films like A Time to Kill, Crash, and her Oscar-winning role in The Blind Side. Sandra Bullock has finally realized her potential as a leading lady and taps into the very essence of the human spirit as Dr. Ryan Stone; a work that stands as her greatest endeavor and her gift to the silver screen. Natural, poised, and fully engulfed, Bullock is absolutely magnificent and in many ways, my favorite performance of the year so far. She rallies an emotional connection from the audience and demands things of herself that she hasn't done before. An Oscar-worthy work that should land her as a Best Actress nominee...and perhaps a winner.

George Clooney as Matt Kowalsky is exactly what you'd come to expect from the Oscar-winning producer and actor. He utilizes his wit and charm to be a lighter force of our dark tale, and is a perfect balance to Bullock's frantic demeanor. As aforementioned, Steven Price's musical work is tenderly utilized and precisely executed, building up lots of affectionate tones that may leave some audience members in tears. The script by Alfonso Cuarón and son Jonas Cuarón inhabit a rich texture of dialogue that aren't thrown in for the sake of breaking the silence. They aren't afraid to let the scenery speak for itself or to let the actors portray their emotions in mannerisms, but when they step away from that, everything connects beautifully.

Gravity is a rare breed. Simplistic but so refreshingly new. Visually, it will be studied for years to come, and thematically, will be revisited by the genre's most ardent enthusiasts. One of the best films of the year. I'll say, if you haven't watched the trailers and clips, continue to do so. Too much information

 

 

B

Edited November 15, 2013 by JGAR

[Goffe]

I wanted to see this a third time, but it wasn't in the cinemas anymore       

[Jake Gittes]

It's just come back to the only local IMAX for one showing per day (I suppose it will leave for good once CF opens). Thinking about whether I should see it for the fourth time. The only movie I've ever seen four times in theaters is TDK.

[A Marvel Fanboy]

[A Marvel Fanboy]

The only part I had a problem with was the shot of Bullock floating in a fetal position. That was a little too obvious.

too obvious is bad ?

 

Like this not obvious ?

[Hatebox]

I've met quite a few people who really couldn't stand this. Mostly it was the dialogue and liberal use of fictional physics that put them off, but I'm surprised anyone would approach the movie with expectations beyond a thrill ride given the marketing.

Edited November 22, 2013 by Hatebox

[AniNate]

It tries to be more than that, though, which is the problem.

[Hatebox]

It tries to be more than that, though, which is the problem.

 

Bullock's solo dialogue is legitimately awful in the second half, but beyond a few (rather obvious) symbolic images I thought it stuck to its guns as far as its mission statement went.