Jump to content

Neo

Gravity | Re-released on 2D and 3D January 17 | IMAX 3D on January 31! | 100M+ WW IMAX

By Neo, in Box Office Discussion

Recommended Posts

Dannb Cult Classic

Dannb

Posted
Posted

About 2001, I watched the first hour (commercials included) of it with my friends and it was so bad that we had to put Transformers on to cleanse our minds. In a sentence, how does the rest of the movie go? We were basically too drunk on laughter from the apes beginning to really get the rest of what we saw.

It's interesting but I can see why people would hate it or think it's a long self indulgent mess. Definitely not for everyone, sometimes I felt it did drag on for too long, especially at the end. But overall it was pretty nice experience, particularly around the halfway mark. The first part you have to bear with but the build up with the music always gives me the chills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Dannb Cult Classic

Dannb

Posted
Posted

Yeah as far as we know, it's all taking place within the realm of reality. Unless there is a kubrick 2001 twist it all sounds more like a tragedy/disaster event. To be honest it sounds chilling, that'd be a terrible terrible way to go not dying until your oxygen supply runs out or you get fried by a solar flare event or get peppered by thousands of tiny space rocks traveling at super high speeds, all very real possibilities that astronauts/future colonizers face.

 

Space can be a frightening place and I wonder if that's what Cuaron is going for here or if it's more Clooney and Bullock reflecting on their lives and loved ones. Emmanuel Lubezki is working on this so that's a plus, I loved his work on Tree of Life and New World. My biggest concern is that it could be pretty boring. What can be done from there(astronauts perspective) in 2+ hours? Them floating would surely take them a long, long time(past their lives, I assume they only have hours til the oxygen runs out) until they'd reach any significant destination. I may be nitpicking but I wonder what velocity they're moving at.

I forgot death from space decompression

Link to comment
Share on other sites




Jandrew Global Phenomenon

Jandrew

Posted
Posted

Im anticipating this because 1. I love love LOVE astronomy and 2. I want to see how in the world they're gonna make a 2 hour movie out of this, especially if they're just dangling most of the time. 3. Sandra Bullock, nuff said.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Dannb Cult Classic

Dannb

Posted
Posted

Im anticipating this because 1. I love love LOVE astronomy and 2. I want to see how in the world they're gonna make a 2 hour movie out of this, especially if they're just dangling most of the time. 3. Sandra Bullock, nuff said.

Basically what I said above. 2 hours of drifting in space and dialog or is Cuaron gonna give science the double bird and opt for throwing everything space has to kill people at the astronauts for the sake of entertainment, after all this is supposed to be a very visual based movie. Because of that I wonder what will be stealing the scenes as there aren't many things to stare at from there perspective(besides the Earth and Sun and distant stars but you know what I mean like nebulas and multiple spacecrafts in Kubrick's 2001) I am cautiously excited but if that crash event is the most exciting scene in the film, surely it will take an emotional/fearful turn to keep viewers from boredom? 

 

Good characters would have to fill that time as well but that poses a huge problem for me personally because I am not a huge fan of  Bullock, especially in a leading role(I don't think she is bad, just forgettable for me) Admittedly Jolie would have been worse IMO, that nearly put me off completely. When Bullock was confirmed for the role, I had a similar reaction that Bateman's character in Arrested Development had whenever someone mentioned Angie, "who?" and "her?" but Clooney and Cuaron/Lubezki can make up for it. And who knows, she may put a memorable performance. I just think Cuaron could have got a better leading actress instead of chasing Bullock and Angelina, the very last names I'd have in mind for this particular role. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dashrendar44 Global Phenomenon

dashrendar44

Posted
Posted

Basically what I said above. 2 hours of drifting in space and dialog or is Cuaron gonna give science the double bird and opt for throwing everything space has to kill people at the astronauts for the sake of entertainment, after all this is supposed to be a very visual based movie. Because of that I wonder what will be stealing the scenes as there aren't many things to stare at from there perspective(besides the Earth and Sun and distant stars but you know what I mean like nebulas and multiple spacecrafts in Kubrick's 2001) I am cautiously excited but if that crash event is the most exciting scene in the film, surely it will take an emotional/fearful turn to keep viewers from boredom? 

 

That and mental hallucinations due to insanity. Naked Sandra Bullock for one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Ozymandias Global Phenomenon

Ozymandias

Posted
Posted (edited)

Yeah as far as we know, it's all taking place within the realm of reality. Unless there is a kubrick 2001 twist it all sounds more like a tragedy/disaster event. To be honest it sounds chilling, that'd be a terrible terrible way to go not dying until your oxygen supply runs out or you get fried by a solar flare event or get peppered by thousands of tiny space rocks traveling at super high speeds, all very real possibilities that astronauts/future colonizers face.

 

Space can be a frightening place and I wonder if that's what Cuaron is going for here or if it's more Clooney and Bullock reflecting on their lives and loved ones. Emmanuel Lubezki is working on this so that's a plus, I loved his work on Tree of Life and New World. My biggest concern is that it could be pretty boring. What can be done from there(astronauts perspective) in 2+ hours? Them floating would surely take them a long, long time(past their lives, I assume they only have hours til the oxygen runs out) until they'd reach any significant destination. I may be nitpicking but I wonder what velocity they're moving at.

 

Lol, thats why this take major balls.  The mere thought of your shit malfunctioning and floating off into space away from the shuttle is a terrifying thought.

 

Posted Image

 

About 2001, I watched the first hour (commercials included) of it with my friends and it was so bad that we had to put Transformers on to cleanse our minds. In a sentence, how does the rest of the movie go? We were basically too drunk on laughter from the apes beginning to really get the rest of what we saw.

 

Only 1 hour and commercials?  So you probably didn't even get to see HAL 9000, the third act of the movie(Jupiter Mission) is definitely the best part of the movie(imo).  Can't really tell you how it ends since you asked, the 4th act is just stacked with ambiguity and kind of a mind trip, but there are tons of great and interesting write ups on the movie with people's different takes on it.  But 2001 definitely isn't for everyone lol, it requires patience and an open mind.  Its definitely one of the best scifi films of all time IMO.

 

You'll probably enjoy this though.

 

Edited by Shpongle
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Dannb Cult Classic

Dannb

Posted
Posted (edited)

Lol, thats why this take major balls.  The mere thought of your shit malfunctioning and floating off into space away from the shuttle is a terrifying thought.

         Yeah, that really takes the cake on worst ways to go(or a collection of ways to go actually) Maybe deep sea diving would beat it since I have a huge problem with the ocean. It would probably be a bit similar, you even face the decompression issue and might even think tiny particles underwater look like stars. In fact, if I was floating in space and lost my mind I would probably think I was sinking to the dark depths of the ocean just waiting for some massive sea critter to swallow me whole. 

 

        I also can't imagine how any future colonizers, if any, of other planets would cope. I have seen documentaries of all these wild and fantastical plans to take humans here and there and keep them resupplied with shipments and this isn't different from Columbus's expeditions supposedly but gosh the distances involved and the absolute loneliness and boredom astronauts face in International Space Station face already would be 10x worse and more like cabin hell not cabin fever.

 

        They'd probably live in small vehicles slowly putting structures together at a snails pace and watching out for solar flare events that would fry the surface of Mars every now and then. I don't care how many dvds and albums they send them, people have a hard time being satisfied with the newest technology here and now, you won't have that stimulation. Obviously not just anyone would be sent though but regardless it would still be a frightening and depressing trip.

 

edit

off topic mostly sorry, I will make it up 

Clooney in SPAAAAAACE!

 

edit

I meant submersible diving ala Cameron's sub

Edited by Dannb
Link to comment
Share on other sites




Cochofles Global Phenomenon

Cochofles

Posted
Posted (edited)

Bullock and Clooney are, to me, the sort of actors who always seem to be hopelessly out of place whenever they are not playing in their wheelhouse. They are both incredibly charming stars, but I just can't get past their faces...they are so...iconic and recognizable...and they are not convincing (again, to me) playing anything other than their stock characters. I love Bullock and Clooney, but this doesn't look appealing at all.

Edited by cochofles
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Dannb Cult Classic

Dannb

Posted
Posted

Bullock and Clooney are, to me, the sort of actors who always seem to be hopelessly out of place whenever they are not playing in their wheelhouse. They are both incredibly charming stars, but I just can't get past their faces...they are so...iconic and recognizable...and they are not convincing (again, to me) playing anything other than their stock characters. I love Bullock and Clooney, but this doesn't look appealing at all.

Same with me and aging A list actors where I just think "Clooney lost in SPAAAACE!" or "Brad lost in a cgi mass of ZOOOMBIES!" I was hoping for new faces to be cast for Gravity but that doesn't mean I don't like Clooney's inclusion, he is still a great actor plus he has that gruffy older astronaut vibe going for him already, which makes him more believable. To me it's Cuaron's choice of Bullock for the leading role that put me off a bit. She too has that "too recognizable" issue but I just don't enjoy her performances so for me it's kinda lose-lose. Clooney and Bullock combo just cooks up images of RomComs not SciFi, if it was Clooney and another actress not named Jolie or Bullock I wouldn't have that slightly underwhelming vibe I am getting from this, though I am still excited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites










Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.

  I accept