Gravity, t3h movie! Imax 3d.

[Hammerskjold]

When I first heard there was a space movie starring Sandra Bullock, George Clooney, set in space and shot in 3D. I thought it was going to be a joke.

Until I heard it's done by the same director as 'Children Of Men'.

Short and sweet review: It's one of the best films out this year. And I usually hate 3D, at best I see it as a poorly used gimmick.

'Gravity' however, uses 3D beautifully, and in service of the story. The film still works on regular screen, but it's worth the 20$ for an Imax 3d ticket.

[DeeBye]

I haven't seen Gravity yet, but I want to. The single trailer I watched has me interested. I've resisted watching anything else about this movie because of spoilers.

I did not know Alfonso Cuarón directed it. That makes me want to see it 100x more. "Children of Men" is one of the best movies I've ever seen.

[FireIceTalon]

Children of Men was great, but I could only watch it once because it was incredibly depressing. It resonated because I could see our society as heading towards some dystopia like that.

Gravity looks good, though also a bit disturbing in its own way. It looks like one of those movies that will confirm why I will never visit space. I haven't gone to a movie in a while, guess this is a good enough reason now though, until Desolation of Smaug comes out in December.

[Hammerskjold]

I haven't seen Gravity yet, but I want to.

I still think most directors\studios use 3d in a gimmicky way. Myself I'm actually fairly sensitive with certain 3d tech, in that I can get headaches from some of them in 15 minutes.

So it was a concern for me when I went to the Imax 3d version.
But thankfully I made it fine and didn't experience any headaches. I'd still say YMMV though, a friend of mine is sensitive with spinning\vertigo inducing motion, and there was some moments where he was worried. But overall it went fine for him as well. Just out of precaution however, I'd still say YMMV.

3d tech aside, I'm not stretching it when I say 'Gravity' is a once in a generation film. Long after the 3d\technical wizardry is dissected (and there are amazing shots and sequences here) it's story will still hold up.

The single trailer I watched has me interested. I've resisted watching anything else about this movie because of spoilers.

As careful as I can be with spoilers, 'Gravity' IMO is a beautiful, harrowing, terrifying, funny, and a human story.

On the tech side, while it's not a documentary (and never claimed to be). Some of the reviews I've read by people who have actually been in space\has real experience and knowledge ie astronaut Chris Hatfield and some NASA engineers. They praise how well the film did it's research. More than a few remarks of 'wow...they even got that little detail right!'

The few instances where some parts don't have a real life counterpart, or stretching it. I'd say it was properly used as artistic license, again in service of the story.

Besides I'd take Alfonso Cuaron's handling of artistic license any day over some 'can't into forest because of trees' wannabe critic, any day, all day, every day. Cuaron's solidly earned my attention with his previous work.

TL,DR: Kudos to the tech artists for the amazing sequences\shots, but also great kudos to the director\team and the story itself.

[shoju]

Hoping to find a way to go see it this weekend. Wont be imax, as I'm not driving 70 miles, and then paying 26 bucks a piece for myself and my wife to go, but I'll see it locally.

[LochnarITB]

When I watch the ads for this film, they scream "claustrophobia" at me. I don't think I could handle it.

[kandrathe]

When I watch the ads for this film, they scream "claustrophobia" at me. I don't think I could handle it.

They make me think it was good to ground the shuttle program. :-) And, then... We're gonna need a new space program to fix all that broken stuff. And... I thought NASA had good engineers.

[Hammerskjold]

Hoping to find a way to go see it this weekend. Wont be imax, as I'm not driving 70 miles, and then paying 26 bucks a piece for myself and my wife to go, but I'll see it locally.

26$? Ouch. I'm lucky that my neck of the woods was just 50 cents shy of 20$. 6$ may not seem much until as you mention, adding one more ticket. That's 52$ already.

I don't know if your area has 3d on standard screen, again I was lucky with the available choices. There's the standard screen version, standard + 3d (for some movies sometimes there is no ticket price diff between standard vs 3d), and Imax 3d for this film.

LochnarITB wrote:

When I watch the ads for this film, they scream "claustrophobia" at me. I don't think I could handle it.

Again, as careful as I can be with spoiler. There are moments for me I was feeling agoraphobic vs claustrophobic. Then again I have more of 'bad feeling similar to drowning in a vast ocean' kind of phobia. I've watched enough Discovery channel clips to remember astronauts train in water for similar micro gravity effects.

If space is star ocean, 'drowning' in it is far more terrifying to me. Not to say that claustrophobia is a real factor in some scenes, I guess I'll just say the film has both type of phobias to choose from.

[DeeBye]

Children of Men was great, but I could only watch it once because it was incredibly depressing. It resonated because I could see our society as heading towards some dystopia like that.

Children of Men is a happy utopian romp compared to The Road. I've watched Children of Men at least 4 times, but I can't bring myself to watch The Road again. It's an incredible movie though.

[Alram]

I plan to see the movie eventually--I'm looking forward to it.
This thread reminded me of when I lived and worked near the Cape where they launched the shuttles. One of my patients, who was a NASA employee, claimed that NASA always took the lowest bidder on computer systems (this was 1985-1989), and as a result they had compatibility issues with software, etc.
Whenever there was a launch, everyone in the facility, patients and staff alike, went out to see it; it was just a light ascending into the sky from our distance, but still...
The first one I witnessed was the Challenger. Everyone who had previously seen launches immediately knew something was wrong from the plumes of smoke in the air.

[Hammerskjold]

I plan to see the movie eventually--I'm looking forward to it.
This thread reminded me of when I lived and worked near the Cape where they launched the shuttles. One of my patients, who was a NASA employee, claimed that NASA always took the lowest bidder on computer systems (this was 1985-1989), and as a result they had compatibility issues with software, etc.

Reminds me of this article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/12/techno...2NASA.html

it was just a light ascending into the sky from our distance, but still...

There's something poetic in the above sentence, I likes it.

The first one I witnessed was the Challenger. Everyone who had previously seen launches immediately knew something was wrong from the plumes of smoke in the air.

I was just a wee lad when that happened, and I saw it on the news footage. Still one of those unforgettable moments for me though.
Without veering off into a political rantings\ravings (heavens to brown betties we absolutely have so little of that lately!) territory.

I do think space exploration will be our species next step. Provided we don't kill each other off first. There are and will be problems. EG: There are very real threats and temptations of weaponizing space.

But again, just my own soapboxing on it. There's something inherent in the human spirit I think, that calls for exploration. Whether that's a literal physical frontier, or a metaphorical one.

The dinosaurs got wiped out by a falling space rock despite being the top tier life form of their era. Humans have the capacity for learning and the frightening ability to adapt. What's our excuse?

TL;DR: I think we as a species need to explore the 2 last physical frontiers left. The oceans, and space\other planets. And because hot green alien women are not going to have hot interspecies relations by themselves. (not counting the giant amoeba 'female..?' shape shifting xenomorph from Rigellus 7.)

[kandrathe]

One of my patients, who was a NASA employee, claimed that NASA always took the lowest bidder on computer systems (this was 1985-1989), and as a result they had compatibility issues with software, etc.

When I worked for the railroad in the 80's the government required us to follow rigid procurement rules, or risk losing their business. When the Canadians bought a majority share of stock and replaced all the top executives, they wanted us to buy computers from an Italian subsidiary. It was a hellish scenario. Trying to placate the Canadian owners, who wanted us to buy their Olivetti (M24) computers from Italy, ship them in cargo containers to Montreal, and then by rail to Minneapolis and risk ticking off our US government minders who were using us to payoff their political cronies. I just wanted them to let us alone to make good vendor relationships and get the best quality product at a reasonable price. Our entire shop was IBM, and we had 24x7 on call service for any problem on any component. I don't think Olivetti had any repair people in the US at that time. Anyway, I started by getting M24's for the executives and their support staff.

[Hammerskjold]

.....

So do you have any interest at all in seeing the film, discussing it, or are you just here because you read the word -NASA-, ipso facto bingo bango "GOV'T!1111"?

If even someone like commieus maximus can give his one note trumpet a rest for one thread, I'm sure you can learn too.

Protip: NASA in this film is a -fictional- version. Fick. Shuhn. Nuhl.

[kandrathe]

So do you have any interest at all in seeing the film...?

Maybe. I've heard it is good, but that one must suspend a bit of reality to accept the proposed science. I guess they need to do that to create the drama -- things in space fly around at the speed of bullets. You wouldn't see it coming, and also, the engineers know about it and plan for it, shield for it, etc. Hubble, the ISS, and the Chinese space station are not in the same orbits, or even the same shaped orbit.

So beyond the shaky science and physics stuff. I'm a bit worried its another "towering inferno" in space -- or in other words, drama for drama's sake. Let's set up some suspenseful scenes where our good actors can get all dramatic.

And... also, I was writing above about Alram's note about procurement, which was messed up at a non-government corporation.

[Hammerskjold]

Maybe. I've heard it is good, but that one must suspend a bit of reality to accept the proposed science. I guess they need to do that to create the drama

Why yes hon! This film never claimed it was a science documentary.

So beyond the shaky science and physics stuff.

Well I don't want to spoil the movie by mentioning certain things, in case anyone is 'maybe' interested in actually seeing the film. What I will say though is what the film is not\or does not have:

- It doesn't have laser guns like Moon Raker.
- It doesn't have Jedi powers like Starwars.
- It doesn't have a cryptic Monolith like 2001.

This film. -Not- a documentary. Some suspension of disbelief may be required on the part of the audience. If you can handle that, you're good to go. Maybe.

I'm a bit worried its another "towering inferno" in space -- or in other words, drama for drama's sake.

Are you an investor in the film? If the answer is 'No', then you have nothing, nada, zilch, fat effin goose egg to worry about. Not a single cent has been taken from your pocket if you are not an investor in this film.

Did you perhaps buy advance ticket(s), and are now having second thoughts about going?

In most theatres, you can get a full refund for any reason if you go to the courtesy desk within 15 minutes of the movie starting. If you don't like the first 10 minutes, I suggest you walk out promptly. However don't say you hate the movie, even though you are entitled to a refund for that reason. Just say that you were supposed to meet with a friend there, but they didn't show up. Or you got bad seats and you can't see and you're hurting your neck because of it.

Now I haven't bought tickets online personally, but I would hazard a guess it might even be easier to cancel your online tickets purchase vs traditional meatspace transaction.

If you didn't buy advance tickets, and have spent -nothing-, then you have...that's right! Zero, cause for concern.

And... also, I was writing above about Alram's note about procurement, which was messed up at a non-government corporation.

Of course you did dear, of course you did. Which is why you put up a picture of a lovely and famous US GOV building, with the caption of:

'Government: If you think the problems we create are bad, just wait until you see our solutions'

You must've just wanted to use the nice looking picture (and it is a beautiful photograph) of the building, and never mind the text caption underneath. Of course.

And this?

...our US government minders who were using us to payoff their political cronies.

Why it must be a non sequitor of an anecdote. That must be it.

By all means, I certainly welcome your opinion and discussion about this film, if you've seen the film. Trailers and googling spoilers will only take one so far after all. However I also quite welcome related discussions such as the director, his previous work, even the trailer that was shown during this film. (For my showing it was the Hobbit 2 in 3D: the Dragoning!)

If you want to talk about something else however, oh I dunno, like 'government' or something or other etc etc. Supposedly there are other existing and active threads with that topic already. Maybe. Or, try that 'New Topic' button. I always did wonder what that thing does.

[LennyLen]

I hadn't even heard of this one. But it's screening at the cinema across the road from me in 3D, so I think I'll go see it.

[Taem]

Trying to get the wife to go see this with me before it leaves the IMAX 3D! I've been reading all sorts of positive reviews (across the board) about this movie, and when a movie generates this much buzz, it's always a sure sign it's going to be good! Keep in mind, I don't have cable, so when I'm seeing things about a movie that doesn't intentionally pander to special interests (i.e. the cable challenged), then I can be assured this movie has made quite a strong reaction, and when I see reviews that state that reaction is all positive, I get excited! Unfortunately, it's all about $$ at this point, between a birthday, two car registrations, and two VIP tickets to Universal Studio's Halloween Horror Fest for $239 each, I'm a bit stretched this month...

[kandrathe]

This film never claimed it was a science documentary.

My understanding was that Alfonso Cuarón has put off the film for years trying to get the realism correct. They invested vast resources trying to get everything accurate. It is a film that is trying for realism. It's not a film about 15 foot tall aliens called, Na'vi on a fictional planet Pandora. You asked me for an ON TOPIC opinion, then submitted it to a wall of text rant.

Now if you are so inclined, please, submit me to another of your sarcastic, condescending, and churlish responses.

[Hammerskjold]

My understanding was that Alfonso Cuarón has put off the film for years trying to get the realism correct. They invested vast resources trying to get everything accurate. It is a film that is trying for realism.

Is that understanding gleaned from watching the film? If you don't want to \can't see it during it's theatrical run for whatever reason, that's fine. No one, not even the government is forcing you to.

You can wait for the DVD to come out. Even that's not mandatory. If you wait long enough, it will likely be on TV. Whether that's cable, satellite, netflix type services, or absolutely free, over the air antennae is tomaytoes tomahtoes. Though again, not a single person will force you to view this film.

It does help immensely however, if you want to discuss the film more in depth, to see it. That probably applies to any film. Maybe.

But, If your understanding comes from just having a pre-conceived notion, then googling stuff to try to support those notions. Then you might as well join a book club where you review and discuss books solely by reading the back cover blurb.

Now if you are so inclined, please, submit me to another of your sarcastic, condescending, and churlish responses.

The first one is free (up to 300 words or one A3 standard size letter page at my discretion), after that I charge by the size and complexity of the responses, and the amount of churl requested, again at my discretion. I don't do hourly, I'm not government work.

[Hammerskjold]

Found this interesting (well to me at least) about how the film almost took a different turn. Specifically how it almost became a silent film.

Possible spoiler warning, proceed with caution etc.

http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/mov...olumn.html

I'll just pick out the non spoilery parts that I found interesting.

Cuarón was indeed ready to make Gravity silent, or at least wordless. Then he heard from his good friend Guillermo del Toro, who at the time was busy making his own blockbuster movie, the past summer’s Pacific Rim.

Del Toro was dead set against the idea.

“Guillermo asked me why I wanted to s--t where I eat. That’s literally what he said. And what he meant was, ‘Look, you have something that is amazing, conceptually it’s amazing. It has to be enjoyed, but you are just alienating audiences with that (making a silent movie).’”

Cuarón took the advice to heart, but he still had his way a little bit with that opening sequence, which approximates a silent movie.

I think Del Toro was spot on with his advice. No sound in the exterior shots would've been 100% realistic. Filming paint drying and grass growing in real time, is also 100% realistic.

But I doubt people outside of an art video installation crowd would flock to go see it. Though if it's done by an interesting studio\director, I'd be interested. Then again I subscribe to a Realism=\=Believability in a story theory. And I'd also pay money to hear James Earl Jones perform a live reading of a phone book. Not for the phone book, but for James Earl Jones. (I can't believe I have to spell that out, but some people may need help on that front.)

This one I quite like as well:

But for all of this talk of daring ideas and groundbreaking visuals, Cuarón also admits that he had something else in mind when he was making Gravity, something son Jonas wouldn’t let him forget.

“He kept on saying, ‘Make it fun! Make it entertaining! It’s a popcorn movie!’ It’s something that he’s so adamant about: ‘Stop your rhetoric!’

“He always criticizes my rhetoric.”