Gravity (2013) (1 Viewer)

[Tino]

I certainly hope he survived

 

[Tino]

Btw, seeing it again in IMAX 3D on Sunday AND Monday!

 

[Sean Bryan]

Well, that was truly excellent!

 

[Nelson Au]

Just saw it and can't add more to the praise! Also can't wait to see the blu-ray.At first, I thought the camera work was a bit showy with all the changing views, but it was very cool as it was just one long shot as Clooney is flying around the shuttle. Once the action started, it was a terrific piece of work, a feast for the eyes. Funny, also once the film was underway, I didn't hear the score! I was more into the story. So everything, score and camera work melted away into this total immersion into the piece. And I didn't see it in IMAX, regular 3D.

 

[DaveF]

I heard the score! The first rain of debris, the score uses the strongly electronic, almost noise-like, music. And it ratcheted up the stress immensely. It also surprised me, because I think of Pans Labyrinth when I think of Cuaron, and it has a dreamlike score.

 

[Mike Frezon]

I saw it tonight (IMAX 3-D), too!

I heard the score...and I REALLY heard the LFE. Bring on the Blu-ray!

It was a great ride...I just got the feeling that it was rendered a bit too unbelievable by all the "just miss" close calls.

But don't misunderstand me. I thought it was a lot of fun and really well done.

 

[Tino]

A terrific second week hold for Gravity..and still #1 at the box office. From www.boxofficeguru.com

Dropping a slim 21% from its record opening weekend, Warner Brothers Oscar shoo-in Gravity took in an estimated $44.3M this weekend bringing its total to a stunning $123M in 10 days. Buoyed by some of the best reviews of any film this year, the Sandra Bullock/George Clooner-starrer has become the must-see film of the season. And talks of the demise of 3D have been put on hold as 85% of all moviegoers have been willing to pay extra for the visual spectacular. Gravity's second weekend gross is the 3rd highest of the year, behind only Iron Man 3 and Monsters University, both of which were released during the lucrative summer season. Look for Gravity to end its run with at least $225M and possibly more as the awards start to roll in. Universal executives must be kicking themselves for selling the rights to Warner.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

I was expecting a decent hold, based on word of mouth, but that is really impressive.

 

[schan1269]

Just saw it.

Abso-fooking-lutely a must see.

For those belly aching about plot holes and "physics impossibilities"...

The one plot accelerator is something that won't happen to begin with. Maybe this is meant as a tome about the excess space junk up there causing issues with satellites already. There is no way the initial "chain of events" happens with live crews up in space. One of the reasons the ISS(and the Chinese station) exists is to take care of satellites. The plot point here would never happen.

But...it was in the script.

 

[Walter Kittel]

Well, I cannot speak to the odds of that sort of thing happening but there is a term for the "chain of events" -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome

If anyone wants to criticize the science of the film, then the orbits of the various entities depicted in the film is a good place to start -

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2013/10/04/ba_movie_review_gravity.html

- Walter.

 

[DaveF]

Just saw it.Abso-fooking-lutely a must see.For those belly aching about plot holes and "physics impossibilities"...The one plot accelerator is something that won't happen to begin with. Maybe this is meant as a tome about the excess space junk up there causing issues with satellites already. There is no way the initial "chain of events" happens with live crews up in space. One of the reasons the ISS(and the Chinese station) exists is to take care of satellites. The plot point here would never happen.But...it was in the script.

http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2007/01/19/china_shoots_down_satellite_drawing_protests_worldwide/Different orbit, but close enough for the sake of believing this movie's concept. Does the ISS service satellites? I don't think so, but not something I've followed.I was talking with a coworker who asked me how I got past the inaccuracies in orbital mechanics. Ultimately, this movie is close enough to be pretty realistic, while taking the right liberties to be a thrilling, emotionally resonant movie.

 

[schan1269]

That was one of the main reasons to have the ISS. Not used often. But last year pieces/parts of a satellite were sent up to the ISS, assembled, then launched.

 

[Walter Kittel]

FWIW, my last post was meant to be informational, not a critique of the film. Gravity isn't scientifically accurate, but the immersive qualities of the film and the abilities of the filmmakers to put you "up there" are such that I can make allowances for some liberties.

- Walter.

 

[Tino]

I'm willing to excuse any minor scientific inaccuracies due to the overwhelming overall quality of the film. Seeing it again this morning in IMAX 3D for the fourth time. Here's an international update on Gravity courtesy of Deadline:

Warner Bros‘ hit holdover Gravity had outstanding international holds in all key markets of 38 territories now in release, dropping only 27%. The cume now stands at $68M and the worldwide total at almost $200M. Upcoming are openings in Brazil, Korea, Mexico, France, Britain, Japan, and presumably China. Pic’s IMAX gross is the highest second weekend non‐holiday hold (‐21%) for a film opening over $55M, and the biggest second weekend non‐holiday hold (‐21%) for over 2,000 locations this year. It’s also now IMAX’S highest-grossing second weekend ever, besting previous records for films released in summer and holiday. This, even after 45 IMAX locations shifted to playing Sony Pictures’ Captain Phillips.

 

[Tino]

I like this quote from the Slate article Walter referenced above by Astronomer Phil Plait:

Obviously, there’s a lot to love and a lot to gnaw over in this movie. But the bottom line is clear: Go see this flick. The science errors won’t bug you, and if they do, you need to pull your head out of your assumptions of what a movie should be. As a demonstration of craftsmanship, and as a viewing experience, Gravity is astonishing. I loved it, and I’ll be going to see it again.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Most films are made to entertain people and not to be 100% accurate as far as the laws of science are concern.

 

[Walter Kittel]

Most films are made to entertain people and not to be 100% accurate as far as the laws of science are concern.

True, but most films do not rely upon science to enable their plot to nearly the extent that Gravity does, hence the scrutiny.

Having said that, I'm not looking for 100% compliance merely a reasonable attempt at plausibility (which this film certainly exceeds for me.)

- Walter.

 

[Robert Crawford]

[color=rgb(40,40,40);font-family:'Merriweather Sans', sans-serif;background-color:rgb(242,242,242);]True, but most films do not rely upon science to enable their plot to nearly the extent that Gravity does, hence the scrutiny. Having said that, I'm not looking for 100% compliance merely a reasonable attempt at plausibility (which this film certainly exceeds for me.)[/color]

- Walter.

True, but most people watching this film don't know what is scientific plausible or not.

 

[Walter Kittel]

True, but most people watching this film don't know what is scientific plausible or not.

True, but the filmmakers should. Okay, your turn.

- Walter.

 

[Robert Crawford]

True, but the filmmakers should. Okay, your turn.

- Walter.

I disagree, the filmmakers should be focused on making an entertaining film. If they do that then to hell with the nitpicking about scientific accuracy as only a small minority would care about such accuracy.