Gravity

Posted by: steveg

Gravity - 10/05/13 12:57 PM

SEE IT!!!! shocked
Posted by: DLC

Re: Gravity - 10/05/13 02:39 PM

Will do. You've become my #1 movie critic... THANKS !!
Are you participating in RottenTomatoes.com ?

Should be.
Posted by: six_of_one

Re: Gravity - 10/05/13 04:24 PM

Just got back from the theater. Splurged on the IMAX 3D "experience."

The visuals are AMAZING. Really, really outstanding. GO SEE THIS MOVIE if for no other reason than the visuals. Get as big a screen as you can get. The effects shops have really outdone themselves. And although at times they do wallow in their prowess with overly-long pans and rotates, and some of the scenes are a bit over the top in stuff that's going on and the degree to which it happens, it really is a terribly impressive experience.

And any space film that has almost no sound out in space is a plus in my book - basically from the very first frame they tell you there's nothing in space to propagate sound, which just made the space geek in me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Some of the scenes where stuff just starts happening with little or no sound effects were really very amazing.

About the 3D: I saw Avatar and that pretty much put me off the current 3D trend -- it was nice but very obtrusive. I never got over the "hey! I'm watching this in THREE D!" feeling. Plus, the new technology wasn't quite there for me in terms of immersion.

Having said that: just as there are reference disks (like "300" and whatnot) for Blu Ray that are meant to show what the technology can really do, I'm going to say this film will be a reference for theater 3D moving forward. Really, a tremendous improvement over Avatar and actually stunning in some places (in spite of the many gratuitous things flying at the camera that directors/effects houses seem to think is necessary for 3D). Most of the time I actually was able to ignore the fact of the 3D and just enjoy the effect. Highly recommended if you can afford the Cadillac price ($18 where I saw it). I'll have to rethink my 3D boycott now.

As far as the story goes: a pretty much boilerplate, almost golden-age sci fi yarn. Well-done, but does require a bit of disbelief suspension in some actually quite a lot of instances, now that I think about it. The writing was wonderful in parts, not-so-great in others (the plot exposition by Mission Control was just horrid, for example; many of Sandra's bits were great). Nothing crippling or award-winning; it got the job done.

George Clooney plays George Clooney, which is always entertaining but nothing really remarkable. I could watch him read a phone book, though, and thoroughly enjoy the experience, so I'm definitely not knocking him. I'm also a Sandra fan, so I thought she was great (again, hobbled a bit by the writing, but I think she worked through it acceptably). Ed Harris as the voice of Mission Control (channeling his Gene Kranz role in Apollo 13, perhaps?) was good but would have been better if he didn't have to read that horrible exposition.

Anyways, I'll second Steve's recommendation to see this film -- it's absolutely worth every penny to see in a theater, especially if you can get any or a combination of digital, IMAX and/or 3D =)
Posted by: steveg

Re: Gravity - 10/06/13 02:59 AM

What, no storyboards? grin
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Gravity - 10/06/13 07:38 AM

Originally Posted By: steveg
What, no storyboards? grin


Will a Trailer do? grin

Posted by: Celandine

Re: Gravity - 10/06/13 07:43 AM

Originally Posted By: six_of_one

Ed Harris as the voice of Mission Control (channeling his Gene Kranz role in Apollo 13, perhaps?) was good but would have been better if he didn't have to read that horrible exposition.

Poor Ed Harris continues to be "cursed"
by being a 'dead-ringer' for John Glenn. smile smile

Posted by: six_of_one

Re: Gravity - 10/06/13 07:59 AM

Originally Posted By: steveg
What, no storyboards? grin

I have trouble keeping my reviews to two words ;-)
Posted by: steveg

Re: Gravity - 10/06/13 08:21 AM

Amateur. laugh
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Gravity - 10/06/13 09:02 AM


I thought it was a great review, it touched on every point...
Initially, I had no idea what the thread was about:

GRAVITY.. SEE IT!

laugh h'okay!
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Gravity - 10/06/13 12:07 PM

I heard it sucks.
Posted by: steveg

Re: Gravity - 10/06/13 01:57 PM

Well there's no single movie that the world to a person loves. Sucking is in the suckness of the suckee. confused
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Gravity - 10/06/13 03:32 PM

?
No..no..no..
I meant gravity.. smile
Posted by: lanovami

Re: Gravity - 10/06/13 04:01 PM

Just watched the trailer Cel put up. I am embarrassed to say I heard Sandra Bullock and I just assumed Gravity was a euphemism for something romanticy, never guessed it was some astronaut thriller. That alone sounds pretty cool.

I suppose I should see the movie, but if she gets spinning like that (as in the trailer), there is no gravity to stop her spinning, she's stuck like that until something or someone intervenes. Freaky. Will have to see it.
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Gravity - 10/07/13 12:27 PM


NASA/TheWeatherChannel
Discuss current "SPACE DEBRIS"

Posted by: SgtBaxter

Re: Gravity - 10/07/13 02:15 PM

Great movie, I really enjoyed it. Incredible cinematography.

But... if you know anything about space travel you have to suspend a bit of disbelief.

1. Comm sats orbit at 22,000 miles. They wouldn't have been affected by the cascade which was taking place at around 380 miles, or at least not as quickly as portrayed in the movie.

2. No way in hell they're going from the Hubble to the ISS, and to the Chinese stations all of which are in different orbits and inclinations with only a backpack and no navigation.

3. Astronauts wear a suit under the space suit (the LCVG) that regulates body temperature and moisture. They also wear a large diaper to pee in. Sandra Bullock wouldn't have come right out into her skivvies. Okay, so I can forgive that artistic license wink

4. Mission Control mentioned the debris field started below their orbit and was working up. The second time around it would have been above them. Also, I'm not sure how it would have been flat.

However, the micro gravity interactions were fantastic and more realistic than I've ever seen. The debris punching through the shuttle, the ISS... was intense, and all the more frightening because there was no sound other than her breathing, and what you could hear muted through her suit when she was attached to the arm.

So it seemed they took great care and effort to recreate the details of weightlessness, and interaction of the debris with the spacecraft. Then for the macro movements they went Star Wars.

Still, it was incredible and enjoyable. I saw it in Real D. I really want to go back and see it in IMAX.
Posted by: six_of_one

Re: Gravity - 10/07/13 06:41 PM

Spoilers, probably ...

Yeah, I really had to shake my head with "the Shuttle's right there, and the ISS is right over there, and see that large blob of light? That's the Chinese space station also conveniently within line of sight ..."

Also, Clooney buzzing around the Shuttle taking a joy ride? Not really sure I bought into that (I think they have to be tethered regardless in case something, you know, goes wrong). I *really* didn't buy him finding Sandra again after she spun-off the arm, but I guess without that, no more movie =P

Other stuff I guess I could deal with until she got to the Chinese space station. The thing is in an uncontrolled reentry already, and the capsule she's in just happens to correct its uncontrolled tumble and settle into exactly the right angle / speed / altitude to not burn to a crisp? I *suppose* in her almost-random button mashing she could have hit the "don't worry, I'll take care of everything" switch, but if it was all autopilot from there, why did she have to manually separate the capsule? Anyways, I fought really hard to believe in that scene because it was otherwise spectacular -- VERY well put-together cinematically, and gave me shivers as it harkened-back to some pretty gutting moments of the Shuttle program.

Definitely try to find an IMAX -- the bigger the screen the better. It really is a great film despite its flaws =)
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Gravity - 10/08/13 01:48 AM


Yar, my ABC (Australian Broadcast Channel)
Science Forum tore it a new a-hole, but in
the end, concluded, "It's A MOVIE, fercrysake,
stop yer nit-picky whinging and ENJOY IT!"

...agreed... bigger the screen, the better.
Posted by: steveg

Re: Gravity - 10/08/13 04:23 AM

You guys crack me up. crazy Yeah, lots of inaccuracies related to reality. But remember these three little words:

It's.
A.
Movie!

smirk
Posted by: MacGizmo

Re: Gravity - 10/08/13 05:27 AM

Watching the trailer, It SOUNDS like two hours of Sandra Bullock grunting.
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Gravity - 10/08/13 05:45 AM


Seriously..

Guess wot?

Superman can't REALLY FLY...
...and Batman can't...whatever. crazy
Posted by: steveg

Re: Gravity - 10/08/13 06:06 AM

You wish you were the one making her grunt. blush grin
Posted by: six_of_one

Re: Gravity - 10/08/13 10:27 AM

Originally Posted By: Celandine

Seriously..

Guess wot?

Superman can't REALLY FLY...
...and Batman can't...whatever. crazy

And movies about those guys *never* get flack from Batman and Superman nerds ;-)

The cool thing about fiction based on science (as opposed to science fiction) is that armchair nerds like me get to nitpick -- that's half the fun =D
Posted by: DLC

Re: Gravity - 10/08/13 11:12 AM

DAMM gal !! next thing you'll be telling me is there's no Santa Claus or tooth fairy !!

SPOILER !!! mad

laugh
Posted by: SgtBaxter

Re: Gravity - 10/09/13 02:46 PM

Originally Posted By: six_of_one
Other stuff I guess I could deal with until she got to the Chinese space station. The thing is in an uncontrolled reentry already, and the capsule she's in just happens to correct its uncontrolled tumble and settle into exactly the right angle / speed / altitude to not burn to a crisp?


Actually, I didn't have an issue with that part. The return capsules aren't aerodynamically stable any way but heat shield down, and a similar scenario took place with soyuz 5. The service module didn't separate, and it entered the atmosphere pointed in the wrong direction. Eventually the service module broke off, and the capsule tumbled a bit then righted itself.
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Gravity - 10/09/13 03:11 PM

Originally Posted By: six_of_one

The cool thing about fiction based on science (as opposed to science fiction) is that armchair nerds like me get to nitpick -- that's half the fun =D

CHEESE!
I remember watching war movies with my brother
great fun.. until a Jap general pulls up in a
truck -- and my brother would yell;
"HEY! That's a 'GM' Truck!" shocked _____cheese thanx frown
Posted by: lanovami

Re: Gravity - 10/10/13 10:40 PM

Funny, I have to stop associating Ms. Bullock with romantic comedy/straight comedy so much. There's Gravity - and then last night my wife made me sit down and watch The Blind Side. I suppose many here have seen it, as I guess Bullock won an Academy Award for it.

The movie was decent. I thought it toned down some of the subject matter and scenes from how it actually went down in real life, maybe to keep a PG rating so a family could see it together? Either way the movie did clue me in about the family who took in Michael Oher, a kid in and out of foster homes and helped him to help himself. I had heard of Oher, a star player for the Ravens, but didn't know his story. A true success story.
Posted by: NucleusG4

Re: Gravity - 10/11/13 05:02 AM

Don't forget Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close.
No comedy, that one.

Speed,
Speed 2,
The Net.
The Vanishing with Kiefer Sutherland.
or.. 28 Days .. where she is in a rehab.

And her most dramatic role ever... being married to that douchebag Jesse James.