Gravity

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

I've been contemplating an hour drive myself to see this in an IMAX, I guess it's still up for debate.

 

[:eek:]

Alfonso Cuarón Plans Smaller, Darker Films

By Garth Franklin Monday September 23rd 2013 02:17PM
Acclaimed filmmaker Alfonso Cuarón ("Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban," "Children of Men") returns to cinemas with the highly ambitious big-budget studio picture "Gravity" next month.
Enjoy the scale now though, because the filmmaker has vowed to return to much smaller and darker fare in the future. Cuaron tells Vulture:

"Film is my means of survival, and 'Gravity' was a miscalculation of time. It’s not the best investment I’ve ever made."
​

The quote refers to the overall production on "Gravity" which went for ultimately over four years - far longer than originally anticipated due to all sorts of hurdles in terms of technology, casting and post-production. Cuaron adds:

"I enjoyed every single bit of the process, but I would never do it again. It was fun and exciting it was full of challenges. The film was not unlike the journey of the character in the film... It was filled with adversity, things falling apart. You learn to go through and it's weird to say, but some of the adversities were enjoyable. So, all of that was great, but I would never do it again."
​

He does hold a lot of praise for Warner Bros. Pictures though who essentially put a lot of faith in him to deliver a film that they frankly wouldn't see results from until a long time after the practical live action stuff was shot:

"You know in all these stories [you hear], I have to say that the studio was amazing. The expression 'Houston in the blind,' and pretty much the studio was in the blind. They invested so much time and money into the technology and then into the shoot, not knowing if the technology would work. They didn't see see anything until about 8 months to a year after the shoot. I have to say they were really amazing. No one's happy to hear that you have to bump the release a year later, but they were very supportive."
​

Still, Cuaron is now moving on to smaller and less technologically challenging fare. From the sounds of it he's keen on doing a horror film:

"I don’t mean slasher. Something more psychological, more emotional, something that festers."
​

 

[Boom]

My body is ready.

 

[SuperJediHero]

Anyone know if any movie theaters are doing an event for this or not?

 

[Liam_H]

What do you mean by event?

 

[SuperJediHero]

8pm showings, exclusive posters, 3D glasses and such like they done before with other movies.

 

[Zeus]

My body is ready.

I'ma IMAX this baby hard

 

[redhawk23]

http://bloody-disgusting.com/reviews/3256203/bd-review-gravity-is-terrifying-inspiring-and-human/

Bloody Disgusting went outside their normal horror content to review this movie and even admit that it was kind of weird for them to do so. They went on to give the film a perfect score. In the 6 years I've been reading this sight, I don't think I've ever seen anything receive a perfect score from them.

 

[Liam_H]

The only thing I really disagree or maybe don't agree with as much is how effective the film draws you into Bullock's emotional arc. It's certainly there and it works well enough.

But I certainly agree with his last sentence that this film was a spectacle, you can fully enjoy it on that level.

 

[redhawk23]

To be fair "Working well enough" is lightyears better than the emotional content available in most of the films BD reviews.

 

[Liam_H]

On that level, very true.

 

[UncertainPerson]

You guys think this is worth seeing in IMAX?

ive read about seeing it in the biggest screen possible but it wasnt recorded with IMAX cameras or anything

drive is about 45 minutes vs 10-15 to see it it regular 3D (albeit in a nice theatre, not some rundown dump)

 

[jmc]

Finally saw the movie, review as follows.

I honestly don't know where to begin with Gravity because I am so exhausted from the experience of watching it, for 91 pulsating minutes I was in a constant state of tension, my eyes glued to what was happening not knowing where things were going to head next, what problems were in store and whether any solution could be found to the predicament George Clooney and Sandra Bullock's characters find themselves in.

First to Alfonso Cuarón, I must tip my hat to you sir, you've somehow managed to take rather simplistic survival story in possibly the least interesting location and made it work. There are brief moments where the situation lends itself to let the audience rest, but for the most part there's this urge to know what's going to happen next, you want to get to the end not because the movie is bad, but because you need to know how it ends.

The first thing you notice is a distinct lack of ambient sound, which whilst accurate is very eery and unsettling, it comes to ahead especially when destruction to the space vehicles starts happening. Having been so use to films where sound follows the big explosion to see a space vehicle getting destroyed in complete silence seems all the more horrifying for some reason. It's not until about 20 mins into the film the score kicks in, and it is as dramatic as it gets and increases the tension even more.

Visually, space has probably never looked so good, or so realistic, it genuinely feels like the film was shot on board the space station. Shots of Earth are beautiful, probably the best rendered images I've seen yet of the planet on film. In fact you're going to be hard pressed to find a flawed CG shot in this movie, I don't think I've seen a more flawless use of GCI on film ever. Cuarón is one of the few directors who uses CG as a tool as opposed to a crutch, and the expert use of that tool in in full view here. There are some breath taking shots, many of them long and uncut (or at least stitched together to make it look uncut), some of them changing from third person perspective to first person perspective, it's a visual treat.

In terms of story there frankly isn't much depth going on here, it's a simple survival story, and to be honest some of what happens is a little implausible and on occasion silly. We learn a little bit about Sandra Bullock's character, but ultimately who she is and what her life was like doesn't really add all too much to the film. Part of that is the character, part may be down to Bullock's performance who's an actress I've never really rated very highly, my big problem with her is that she never seems to become a character and is always essentially playing an extension of herself. Whilst she holds the film together firmly I didn't really feel she produced anything special, I'll go so far to say that any number of actresses could have pulled off an equal performance. Ultimately though who the characters are aren't as important as the journey they go on in order to survive.

In conclusion Gravity is without doubt a spectacle that has to been seen in the cinema. There isn't a 4K TV or 7.1 surround sound system that's going to be able to replicate the experience this movie deserves. It may be light on character, emotion, and depth, but it's big in spectral, high in drama, nerve raking and heart pounding. It's ironic that one of the biggest spectacles of the year is so minimal in its concept, but the best directors can squeeze every ounce of potential out of even the most basic of stories, and Cuarón manages to do exactly that. Sometimes simplicity is the best thing.

9/10

 

[AnneFan]

Good review, jmc. I have got to see this.

 

[Liam_H]

Normally the best seat in a theater would be around the center heading towards the back so you can see everything. But the long continuous shots in this movie makes it a lot easier to follow oppose where we usually have many cuts/edits. Plus the weightless movements add more to the clarity. So sitting a few rows back from the front for this movie might be ideal.

 

[Mr.M]

25$ IMAX/3D for the win!!!

 

[Kane52630]

Not that it means a whole lot, but I can't help but to see the score on RT. It's currently stands at 98%.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/gravity_2013/

 

[redhawk23]

98% after 100 reviews? That is great!

 

[Liam_H]

The average rating matches the % too at 9.0 currently.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

The NY Times loved it.

98% is pretty crazy.

 

[Zeus]

The film is being compared as a classic in the same vein as 2001 A Space Odyssey

 

[bapi]

I'm not a technological geek but I have to admit: first 25 minutes... PHENOMENAL! However the rest is a bit repetitive. 8/10

 

[MrMaooz]

I hated 2001.

Is this similar in pacing and stuff?

 

[bapi]

I hated 2001.

Is this similar in pacing and stuff?

No, it's a non-stop action. But becomes very repetitive in the end. Two different movies.

 

[MrMaooz]

Yes!