Gravity - Part 1

Toldja must have a thing for ousted WB execs, since Nikki Finke again gives Jeff Robinov too much credit for making this happen. True, he brought it out of turnaround from Universal, and agreed to move the release date back to allow Cuaron to finish it properly.

But the marketing campaign was handled by Sue Kroll, and the final product was all Cuaron's doing. She forgets the forest for the trees... again.
 
Yeah it's possible he's getting too much credit from Nikki. But know knows? Do you think it was a mistake to get rid of Robinov?

From what I know, it could be a personality thing because supposedly he's very introverted and not very personable, which may rub some people the wrong way. Also, he didn't exactly help with the DC movement. Well no one did at WB.

The funding and distrubution rights for Spike Jonze's 'Her' and Paul Thomas Anderson's 'Inherent Vice' was NOT done by Robinov (at least not that I know of) so I'm getting the feeling there are many forces involved with these deals who aren't getting enough credit in the trades.
 
Yeah, it's Cuaron's project but somebody has to greenlight, fund and market the thing also. Word of mouth was only a percentage.
 
Its strange to think that this was the original sci-fi movies I was looking forward to the least this year and it has ended up being by far the best.


:up::eek::up:

bQaDbTa.jpg

guOadCl.jpg

hRUQvFz.jpg

olknkd8.jpg


iQb8DYH.jpg

59rVb0i.jpg

Sn5kK0c.jpg

Man Sandra still has some fine legs on her, loved her since Demolition Man but she is still hot as hell and she was great in this.
 
I just saw Gravity last night. I loved it!

If I could sum it up briefly, it was a very personal story on an enormous scale about being reborn and a way of prayer.

A great experience overall, I went to the IMAX 3D, and it was just an spectacle to behold. A great movie experience.
 
Number one for the third week in a row. Fantastic.
 
This film held at number 1 for the third week in a row making another $31 million!
 
^Great to see it doing so well, the movie thoroughly deserves it.
 
An original movie, not a franchise or a remake/reboot/knock off of some other movie. Shows there's still something for originality left in Hollywood.

Although it's also unfortunate that in the next several years we're going to see new iterations on this that fail to live up to it.
 
Well to be honest, people technically claim this was Cuaron's attempt at 2001.
 
Which doesn't particularly make sense. Besides being set in space there aren't really that many similarities.
 
I also dont understand the comparison. Yes the action occurs in the same space , but that's kinda it.

disney would never give him the freedom. to bad

Why not ? They have so many crappy properties making humongous amounts of money , throw a little to actually make a great one. Fincher. Water. That is enough to sell the movie.
 
Emphasis on "action". snickers I kid, I kid.

But also just about what the films are about, the things that literally go on on screen as well as the themes are quite different. Both have some fetal imagery but if both focus on "rebirth" they mean it in very different ways.
 
Action as in the progression of events , and space being , off course , the area where it occurs.
 
As I said, I kid.

I know. Just so that no one else made the joke :woot:

As for the themes , that's where Gravity is at his worst. It's kinda tacky , overbearing , and as subtle as a hammer in the head. But i understand Cuaron. If the studio couldn't support the silence , imagine if the characters were simply there to survive. He also had to cast Bullock and Clooney. Which were perfectly fine. Both good actors. But this would have been so much better with an unknown face.
 
Well to be honest, people technically claim this was Cuaron's attempt at 2001.
Not having seen 2001 (one day... I'll get through it) I can't say how similar they are but my knowledge of 2001 says they aren't.

There was:
No HAL analogue
No giant space baby
No 20 minutes of dialogue-less introduction
No Monolith like construction
No man versus machine/computer
No great orchestra scenes
No extremely long running time
No WTF ending to it all (ie; space baby again)

So outside of taking place in space and with a very broad "rebirth" ending theme (hardly original to 2001), there's not a lot in common between them storywise. This was a story of survival and then of prevaling and being "reborn" as a stronger person.
 
An original movie, not a franchise or a remake/reboot/knock off of some other movie. Shows there's still something for originality left in Hollywood.
Indeed. I loved that it was 'realistic' and original. In space but nothing flashy. It was non-stop suspense and scenario. When the escape pod landed in the water, I thought the ordeal was all over. Home and hosed. Then the water gushed in. She got out, but the spacesuit was too heavy. Then nearly tied up in those reeds. Poor Sandra. :funny:
 
^ I'm sure I wasn't the only one who thought 'she went to all this trouble to get home only to now drown at the very end', lol. I felt genuinely exhausted after watching this film, like I needed to take a nap to re-energise myself.
 
Yeah, it's Cuaron's project but somebody has to greenlight, fund and market the thing also. Word of mouth was only a percentage.

As far as I know, Robinov only did those two. He left the studio before the marketing campaign started -- and marketing is a BIG factor in helping get butts in seats. I'd give the trio replacing Robinov that credit, especially getting folks to shell out for the premium shows in 3D and IMAX.

Robinov deserves kudos for several things, but if the movie wasn't marketed well or failed to live up to expectations -- he would've gotten the blame. Nikki must have it out for Sue Kroll and Greg Silverman -- they aren't fawned over at Deadline like Robinov was.
 
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"