Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Sat Apr 19, 2014 11:55 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 104 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
GRAVITY 
Author Message
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:57 pm
Posts: 376
Post Re: GRAVITY
So I saw Gravity and I gotta say it's a technical marvel with amazing direction. There are some parts that will take your breath away.

Sandra Bullock actually bothers to act for once(Her so-called performance in The Blind Side doesn't count) though it's mostly just crying and fear, but probably the best performance Bullock is capable of ever doing though I wouldn't call it Oscar-nomination worthy. George Clooney outacts her, then again he can outact anybody at anytime with his charm, wit and flat-out being better than everyone else which makes him my favorite non-Gene Hackman actor.

But, let's face facts here. This is a mere thrill ride, a very well-made thrill ride but it is not the future of anything. In a couple months when the 3-D wears off and when it's revealed that it was all smoke and mirrors, and it will, the backlash is going to be swift and severe like Avatar was. But one big difference between Gravity and Avatar was that Avatar knew it was silly. Gravity has horrible delusions of grandeur.

And for the record, I saw this in 2D. I doubt I'm missing anything and I think that "See it in 3D or you're missing out" is a load of shit.


Sat Oct 05, 2013 1:44 pm
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 2:41 pm
Posts: 602
Location: The Desert
Post Re: GRAVITY
patrick wrote:
I doubt I'm missing anything and I think that "See it in 3D or you're missing out" is a load of shit.


I saw it in 3D and I'm struggling to understand where everyone is coming from when they say it's essential to the experience. I took the glasses off at several points to check to see if there was any kind of difference, and I struggled to notice any. Then again, the theater "forgot" to charge me the normal extra amount, so maybe there was something wrong with their projection.

_________________
"The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool."
Letterboxd Profile


Sat Oct 05, 2013 2:22 pm
Profile WWW
Site Admin

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:55 pm
Posts: 3059
Location: Mount Laurel, NJ, USA
Post Re: GRAVITY
Thom20 wrote:
Mr. Berardinelli,
How would you compare this film to BEFORE MIDNIGHT, or any of your other recenf four-star films? Does GRAVITY have a shot at the Top 100?


You'll have to wait until December to find out... :twisted:

Yes, I can be a nasty bastard at times.


Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:41 pm
Profile WWW
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:37 am
Posts: 852
Location: Laurel, MD
Post Re: GRAVITY
James Berardinelli wrote:
Thom20 wrote:
Mr. Berardinelli,
How would you compare this film to BEFORE MIDNIGHT, or any of your other recent four-star films? Does GRAVITY have a shot at the Top 100?


You'll have to wait until December to find out... :twisted:

Yes, I can be a nasty bastard at times.


Thank you! The "So You Think You Know James" contest is a lot more fun when there's suspense.

_________________
https://www.facebook.com/ken.rossman.5


Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:18 pm
Profile
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1361
Post Re: GRAVITY
Quote:
And for the record, I saw this in 2D. I doubt I'm missing anything and I think that "See it in 3D or you're missing out" is a load of shit.


For me, a movie is a movie, whether seen on an IMAX screen or a laptop. I've watched Lawrence of Arabia both ways; the story and pacing don't change.


Sat Oct 05, 2013 5:43 pm
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 661
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: GRAVITY
I just saw "Gravity 3D" again but this time in Gold Class :D. I wish I had IMAX in Hobart thou

I think that this movie will have viewers watching it more than once in the Cinema as Avatar ;-)

Sandra Bullock was not the first choice for the role of Dr Ryan Stone but now it is hard to imagine the film without her.

I just read that Mexican director Alfonso Cuarón took 5 five years in making it which surprise me as Latino Americans normally are not known for our patience lol

Also it was a father-son project as Jonas Cuarón (Son of Alfonso) co-wrote the screenplay.

Finally again, if you do not have physical problems in seeing 3D, then I sincerely recommend to see it in this format to enjoy it to the fullest.

I can hardly wait to add it to my blu ray 3D collection and also hope that I get the opportunity to see it in IMAX too 8-)

Cheers

_________________
The pen is truly mightier than the sword
The Joker (Batman - 1989)


Sat Oct 05, 2013 7:26 pm
Profile WWW
Gaffer

Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 8:48 pm
Posts: 29
Post Re: GRAVITY
Just saw the movie in 3-D. The best use of 3-D since Avatar. Very suspenseful, well acted survival thriller.


Sat Oct 05, 2013 7:52 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:11 pm
Posts: 348
Post Re: GRAVITY
This is movie was correctly labeled the complete package in the original review. This is why movies were invented so you forget your in a theater,sitting on the edge of your seat and mentally transported to the filmmaker's universe. Finally a movie where the use of 3D is perfectly suited and almost indispensable to the story. The photography and camera work here is on a level of artistic genius. The environment looks real,beautiful and terrifying not the laughable cartoonish video game look of Avatar.

This is an old fashioned classic man vs nature story that would have had Hemingway slamming drinks and thumping his chest in the afterparty. Space is the third character in the story with it's unforgiving nature. I have never seen a movie where Isaac Newton's 3 laws of motion play such big part for good and bad in the story. What was the most surprising thing is seeing Sandra Bullock actually act here. She really makes you care what happens to her which is easier said than done.Better actors than her have tried and failed at that.


Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:41 pm
Profile
Gaffer

Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2009 4:00 pm
Posts: 21
Post Re: GRAVITY
Certainly a visually stunning movie. They were able to exploit every (possible) realistic visual you could pull from the setting of the movie (auroras, sunsets, sunrises, earth city lights, moon rises, spaceship explosions, debris fields, atmospheric drag).
I recommend avoiding trailers in order to enjoy the whole experience better. Get good seating and go to the biggest theatre you can.

Maybe my expectations were too high, but I found the movie a bit underwhelming..

[Reveal] Spoiler:
A few nitpicks:

- The emotional payoff and soundtrack was... weaker than it could be. For example, compare this scene of Sunshine compared to any part of Gravity. Despite characters in both movies doing almost the exact same type of actions, the musical score and high stakes set up in Sunshine still amount to a far more powerful experience (even if Sunshine was an uneven movie as a whole).

- Sandra Bullock and George Clooney are great stars, but I don't think they were the best to cast for these roles. Their persona's distract from the setting of the film.

- The story and outcome is too predictable (she's going to survive, make it back to earth, and grasp the ground... who didn't see that coming?).

- The movie climaxes mid-way through with the ISS explosion, and struggles to come back from the power of those scenes in later parts.

- Some of the inner-spaceship scenes with Sandra Bullock straddle a bit into uncanny valley because of the heavy use of CG. Funny enough, some of the inner ship scenes are actually beaten effects wise by Apollo 13, simply because they shot those scenes in *actual* zero g via vomit comets.


Overall though, a very strong visual experience nonetheless, and a movie I would recommend to others. I just don't think it has achieved the level of "classic" that other movies like this deserve because of the weakness of its screenplay.


Sun Oct 06, 2013 5:05 am
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 2:49 am
Posts: 333
Post Re: GRAVITY
I'm staggered by the notion that this film is the "complete package." It's the polar opposite of that to me. It's visually neat and that's it. There's no character, no thematic ideas, no development of plot or people... I respect the technical merits very much, and I'll be appalled if it doesn't earn a cinematography nomination. But that's the only great thing about it.


Sun Oct 06, 2013 5:08 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 2897
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: GRAVITY
Shade2 wrote:
I'm staggered by the notion that this film is the "complete package." It's the polar opposite of that to me. It's visually neat and that's it. There's no character, no thematic ideas, no development of plot or people... I respect the technical merits very much, and I'll be appalled if it doesn't earn a cinematography nomination. But that's the only great thing about it.

That's exactly what I was fearing, i'm sure Bullock will get an Oscar nom for this, but this looks like a role that pretty much anyone could play, as it appears it dosen't require her to do much other then act scared in front of a green-screen for 90 minutes.


Sun Oct 06, 2013 6:32 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 2:49 am
Posts: 333
Post Re: GRAVITY
Vexer wrote:
this looks like a role that pretty much anyone could play, as it appears it dosen't require her to do much other then act scared in front of a green-screen for 90 minutes.


I don't think that's quite fair. It's a very physical performance -- she's not just sitting in a chair on a set yapping about NASA terms no one understands. She's fine, but there's nothing in the script to work with.


Sun Oct 06, 2013 6:51 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 2897
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: GRAVITY
Shade2 wrote:
Vexer wrote:
this looks like a role that pretty much anyone could play, as it appears it dosen't require her to do much other then act scared in front of a green-screen for 90 minutes.


I don't think that's quite fair. It's a very physical performance -- she's not just sitting in a chair on a set yapping about NASA terms no one understands. She's fine, but there's nothing in the script to work with.

Ah Ok then, still this looks one case where maybe it would've been better to use a cast of relative unknowns rather then A-listers.


Sun Oct 06, 2013 7:06 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:07 pm
Posts: 1438
Post Re: GRAVITY
Saw it in 2-D. ***1/2.

An entertaining at times white knuckle and emotionally effective movie? Yes. Game changer? Don't think so.

This isn't on the same level as Avatar which suffered once the 30d was out of the equation. But it's basically an 127 Hours in outer space. I don't mean that as an insult as I thought 127 Hours was a very good movie.

So it's definitely good to great and might find a spot on the year end top ten. But I still like Cuaron's previous effort Children Of Men better. That one I'd give **** no question.

_________________
This ain't a city council meeting you know-Joe Cabot

Cinema is a matter of what's in the frame and what's out-Martin Scorsese.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1347771599


Sun Oct 06, 2013 7:27 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 10:42 pm
Posts: 1062
Location: Bangkok
Post Re: GRAVITY
I maybe kind of agree that it might be good to cast one half of the two-man show with a relative unknown. Bullock did a great job, but an unknown might have some more cinematic balance behind it (a relative space newcomer and a veteran). I love Clooney in the role though. He did have baggage with him, but it's the right kind of baggage that helped with the characterization within a limited amount of time.

I also find some common thematic ideas with Children of Men, enough that I wonder if it's going to be recurring themes with Cuaron's works now. There's a lot of birth (and death, also not as overt) imagery throughout the film, which is reflected through the storyline. One scene (that's in the 2.30 trailer) involving fetal position is particularly striking.


Sun Oct 06, 2013 7:33 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 4:52 pm
Posts: 264
Location: North Carolina
Post Re: GRAVITY
Awesome film! As the final scene came up and faded into the end credits, all I could think was: For the last 90 minutes, I have been in the hands of a master director. It's been a long time since I felt that.


Sun Oct 06, 2013 7:52 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:11 pm
Posts: 348
Post Re: GRAVITY
Shade2 wrote:
I'm staggered by the notion that this film is the "complete package." It's the polar opposite of that to me. It's visually neat and that's it. There's no character, no thematic ideas, no development of plot or people... I respect the technical merits very much, and I'll be appalled if it doesn't earn a cinematography nomination. But that's the only great thing about it.


I will steal this quote from Matt Zoller Seitz on rogerebert.com as a counterpoint to the alleged "weakness" of the screenplay and Sandra Bullock's performance

For long stretches, Cuarón trusts Bullock to give us a one-woman show, and she delivers. Her work here constitutes one of the greatest physical performances I've seen, and the filmmakers frame her in ways that make each moment resonate. The way she twists and turns and swims through zero gravity (or its studio simulation) is a master class in how to suggest interior states through gestures. An image of Ryan curled up womblike in zero gravity packs a primordial wallop: it's a dream image dredged from the Jungian muck. Some of the shots of Bullock's face through her helmet visor evoke Carl Dreyer's "The Passion of Joan of Arc," the film that perfected the emotionally expressive closeup. "Gravity" evokes that silent classic and others—including Maya Deren's experimental short "Meshes of the Afternoon," whose most analyzed sequence, a series of shots boiling evolution down to four gestures, might have influenced the unabashedly metaphorical closing scene of Cuarón's film.

If anyone asks me what "Gravity" is about, I'll tell them it's a tense adventure about a space mission gone wrong, but once they've seen and absorbed the movie, they'll know the truth. The root word of "Gravity" is "grave." That's an adjective meaning weighty or glum or substantial, but it's also a noun: the location where we'll all end up in time. The film is about that moment when you suffered misfortune that seemed unendurable and believed all hope was lost and that you might as well curl up and die, and then you didn't. Why did you decide to keep going? It's is a mystery as great as any in physics or astronomy, and one we've all grappled with, and transcended.


Mon Oct 07, 2013 3:13 am
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 2:49 am
Posts: 333
Post Re: GRAVITY
oakenshield32 wrote:
The root word of "Gravity" is "grave."


That's factually incorrect. The root word for both gravity and grave is the Latin word grav, which means heavy or weighty. The word gravity has nothing to do with a grave in terms of death -- linking them makes as much sense as linking the word to "aggravate."

Which kinda makes my counter-point for me: Seitz's interpretation, and those who may feel the same way, it certainly a valid take, but it doesn't dismiss my stance. What does Seitz make of the fact that every single line of dialogue is a cliche?

Again, it's fine to love the film, but to imply that I don't because I'm missing something is pretty silly in this case, I feel.


Mon Oct 07, 2013 3:49 am
Profile
Gaffer

Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2009 4:00 pm
Posts: 21
Post Re: GRAVITY
Shade2 wrote:
I'm staggered by the notion that this film is the "complete package." It's the polar opposite of that to me. It's visually neat and that's it. There's no character, no thematic ideas, no development of plot or people... I respect the technical merits very much, and I'll be appalled if it doesn't earn a cinematography nomination. But that's the only great thing about it.


Shade nails it. The do try to add character development for Bullock by mentioning loved ones she knows on Earth, but that whole component felt tacked on and really didn't make me start to root for her.

A movie like Gravity is just begging for thematic ideas. Instead the filmmakers wow us with beautiful shots of Earth... then just have characters like Clooney remark about how great "the view" is, and we're supposed to act like they've made a thematically meaningful film.

There are so many thematic ideas and emotional strings to pull from, and the film mostly ignores them in favour of cliched dialogue and one liners. I left the theatre feeling like I watched a technically impressive movie showing what being in space is like. They missed a huge opportunity to use the awe-inspiring setting to provoke thought or further curiosity about a number of possible subjects.


Mon Oct 07, 2013 5:51 am
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:04 pm
Posts: 1538
Location: New Hampshire
Post Re: GRAVITY
I saw this in 3D.

Gravity is a fine film; it's visually striking, and really the first worthwhile use of 3D in a film that I've ever seen. The 3D effects really do give the impression of vastness and emptiness in space. It's not an exceptionally deep film, but it's not dumb either; Cuaron tells a simple story in a technically masterful way, and doesn't resort to cheap gimmicks and moronic action scenes to get his point across. These days, that's about all I hope for from the studios, so I liked this.

_________________
Death is pretty final
I'm collecting vinyl
I'm gonna DJ at the end of the world.


Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:31 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 104 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr