My viewings of Gravity were beautifully moving experiences.
For me, Gravity is about a mother who lost her child and stopped living her life. She was stuck going through the motions and life, for her, lost it's meaning. When circumstances put her at the center of a tragic disaster her natural instinct for survival kicked in. But as she moved through the ordeal she found that not only did she not want to die, but she wanted to start "living" again. Through the tragedy and challenge of survival she was reborn. That the setting of the story was in space and visually spectacular was an added bonus.
This movie isn't a documentary about space travel. It is a piece of entertainment that has a STRONG emotional resonance with the majority of its viewers. If it wins best picture, it won't be because it was an amazing looking "space adventure" that was 100% accurate with all of its physics. It would win because of the story of a mother who lost her reason for living finding that she wanted start living her life again. The exotic setting of surviving a disaster in space certainly enhanced this and is a great part of the tapestry of the film's experience, but it's still secondary to the emotional journey of Ryan Stone and the wonderful job Ms. Bullock did with the role.
To those who seem to not get (or care about) that and are hung up on whether or not all of the orbital mechanics were 100% accurate I would say "Mr. Savik, you go right on quoting regulations."
Thanks Sean, you typed the words right out of my keyboard much better than I could ever hope to.
(and your post made me google that quote, just shows I'm obviously not a Trekkie )