Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Gravity Returns Space Movies To Their Former Glory  
User currently offlineAloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4477 posts, RR: 15
Posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1490 times:

Having just seen Gravity for the second time...this time on IMAX...I have to say this is truly the most remarkable space film I have seen in a long time.

Sure, we have a ton of great sci-fi space movies, but it's a bit more rare these days to see a space movie in the vein of Apollo 13 featuring modern-day or near modern day space technology, and doing so with the artistry and compelling cinematic grace that Gravity has shown.

In other words...the movie is spectacular. It is beautiful, but also thrilling. The acting is fantastic...the score is perfect, and despite some forgivable creative license with the physics of moving between orbiting craft in space, a very believable film that pulls you right into its action and drama. I was especially blown away by the beauty of the Tiangong sequence...my god...that whole scene was just spectacular. Remembering that there is no sound in space was also a nice touch.

If you haven't seen it...do it. On the biggest screen you can. If you have seen it, what did you think?

The movie is now in its third week at #1...and I can only hope this inspires studios to green-light more "realistic sci-fi" space movies in the near future.

24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinexjramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2460 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1479 times:

It was probably one of the worst movies I have seen since the remake of footloose. But my opinion seems to be one of the few of this film.


Look ma' no hands!
User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3003 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1471 times:

I liked it, but I felt it was rushed. Consider it a Cast Away in space, except the main characters are already in Space and once they land, there's no further dialogue.


"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2989 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1450 times:

Quoting Aloha717200 (Thread starter):
If you haven't seen it...do it. On the biggest screen you can. If you have seen it, what did you think?

I saw it in 3D and thought it was quite good, the actors seem to fit your previous perceptions of their characters.
Quite a few instances of artistic license but it is a movie.
My best description is that one of the few 3D movies that actually had some sort of a script/storyline instead of trying to find a storyline to match the 3D effects.
The tears were a good touch and a good attempt at non gravity fire.

I would agree 3D minimum, Imax if you can.
One of my customers went to see it in Imax and had to duck out of the theater a several times during the movie because of motion sickness. That is somewhat interesting because he is does scaling and climbing for a hobby.

Okie


User currently offlineLittleFokker From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 269 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1444 times:

I was more impressed with the cinematography than the story. They almost lost me on the scene where Sandra Bullock is so desperate that she uses a fire extinguisher to propel herself. That was borderline hokey. But I'm glad I saw this one in the theater (in 3D though I wish I had seen it in IMAX) - watching it on HBO/online wouldn't do the movie justice (not to mention it's a terribly boring movie after you've seen it once).


"Toughest wind I ever played in....straight down!" - W. C. Fields
User currently offlinedarksnowynight From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1347 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1340 times:

Loved it.


But seriously, it's not sci-fi. They're just in low orbit space...



Posting without Knowledge is simply Tolerated Vandalism... We are the Vandals.
User currently offlinecptkrell From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3220 posts, RR: 12
Reply 6, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1285 times:

Sorry this is a dumb question (I haven't been to a movie in many years), but at a 3-D movie does one still have to wear those special glasses or has technology advanced so far that personal viewing aids are not needed to get the 3-D effect?

I like space stuff and this sounds interesting enough to bite the bullet and wait in line, but was just curious about the glasses thing, not that the requirement would deter me from going. Thanks...jack



all best; jack
User currently offlineBraniff747SP From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 2967 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1272 times:

Quoting cptkrell (Reply 6):
but at a 3-D movie does one still have to wear those special glasses or has technology advanced so far that personal viewing aids are not needed to get the 3-D effect?

Yes.



The 747 will always be the TRUE queen of the skies!
User currently offlineAloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4477 posts, RR: 15
Reply 8, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1258 times:

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 2):
I liked it, but I felt it was rushed

Actually, the run-time is meant to match the 1h30m orbital time of the space debris.

Quoting LittleFokker (Reply 4):
it's a terribly boring movie after you've seen it once).

I still loved it the second time around, this is one I could actually enjoy repeatedly because the artistry of it is just so good.

Quoting darksnowynight (Reply 5):
But seriously, it's not sci-fi. They're just in low orbit space...

Technically it is sci fi...it's a science based story that is more rooted in real-world space than most sci-fi movies...but it is still a work of fiction. Had the events in the movie actually happened then we could call it a hollywood-adapted docuthriller like Apollo 13 or Captain Phillips.

Quoting cptkrell (Reply 6):
does one still have to wear those special glasses

Unfortunately, yes, but the glasses themselves have advanced and are no longer those red and blue paper glasses that used to be required for 3D movies.


User currently offlinedarksnowynight From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1347 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1236 times:

Quoting Aloha717200 (Reply 8):

Technically it is sci fi...it's a science based story that is more rooted in real-world space than most sci-fi movies...but it is still a work of fiction.

No more so than Breaking Bad. Or Hunt for Red October for that matter. The only fictitious part was the drama itself. If this is a Sci-Fi, than so is Air Force One. All the movies I mentioned had less technologically plausible events, and required more suspension of belief after all... Not all Space Movies are SciFi, and not all SciFi is in Space.

Much of the film was devoted to her past anyway...



Posting without Knowledge is simply Tolerated Vandalism... We are the Vandals.
User currently offlinealberchico From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 2911 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1215 times:

There was a good film directed by Clint Eastwood called Space Cowboys that attempted some technical realism about shuttle operations

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PAZBAV43Zw



short summary of every jewish holiday: they tried to kill us ,we won , lets eat !
User currently offlineAloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4477 posts, RR: 15
Reply 11, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1215 times:

Of course, I'm not saying because it is space related that it is sci-fi, I am saying that because it is a merger of science and fiction, that it is sci-fi.

User currently offlineWestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1830 posts, RR: 10
Reply 12, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1195 times:

Quoting LittleFokker (Reply 4):
I was more impressed with the cinematography than the story.

This. The cinematography was brilliant but the story was lacking. I would have preferred the story followed Clooney a little more after he let go. I also would have like to have seen what happened after Bullock landed. For example, how long does it take to track her down? Is there a period where she has to survive on her own before they find her?

Quoting LittleFokker (Reply 4):
They almost lost me on the scene where Sandra Bullock is so desperate that she uses a fire extinguisher to propel herself. That was borderline hokey.

It took all my might to not open my mouth about Hubble, ISS, and Tiangong all being within spitting distance of each other.



Flying refined.
User currently offline4holer From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 2999 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1181 times:

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 2):
once they land, there's no further dialogue.

Well now that I know how it ends, guess I have no need to see it.



Ghosts appear and fade away.....................
User currently offlineBoeing717200 From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 803 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1176 times:

I fell asleep. This movie was way too overhyped.

User currently offlineWestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1830 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1172 times:

Quoting 4holer (Reply 13):
Well now that I know how it ends, guess I have no need to see it.

Well there's a fairly discernible risk associated with going into a thread about a new movie...

But still, even if the end is spoiled for you, the cinematography alone is enough to go see the movie in theatre anyway (if you're into that kind of thing - some people just want to go for the story).



Flying refined.
User currently offlineBoeing717200 From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 803 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1168 times:

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 15):
the cinematography alone is enough to go see the movie in theatre anyway (if you're into that kind of thing - some people just want to go for the story).

Is it really cinematography though? It was done in a machine.

I'm actually kind of stoked that Abrams is going old school with the new Star Wars flick. Will be a nice change (for a big budget project) from what has become a largely CGI world of SciFi.

[Edited 2013-10-21 10:42:44]

User currently offlineWestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1830 posts, RR: 10
Reply 17, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1148 times:

Quoting Boeing717200 (Reply 16):
Is it really cinematography though? It was done in a machine.

My understanding of "cinematography" is that it encompasses filming and development, so I assume that the development of the CGI is considered cinematography.

Either way, visual effects were awesome.  



Flying refined.
User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3003 posts, RR: 8
Reply 18, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1131 times:

Quoting 4holer (Reply 13):
Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 2):
once they land, there's no further dialogue.

Well now that I know how it ends, guess I have no need to see it.

The effects are awesome. Don't get me wrong. It's one thing to have a "meh"-ish story but with great effects. But for the hype, I was expecting more.

Should have placed the spoiler warning.



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6142 posts, RR: 30
Reply 19, posted (9 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1115 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I too liked the cinematography much more than the story. I believe the cinematography is pretty creative and original. The movie itself is a good one. I don´t think it´s overhyped. Bullock gets on my nerves and sometimes I wish she would die already but that happens to me with most of her characters. No exception here.

It´s worth seeing it. Maybe not twice, but I think it´s the best of this fall season.



MGGS
User currently offlinecomorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4896 posts, RR: 16
Reply 20, posted (9 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 953 times:

I believe this movie restored Sandra Bullock to her former glory.

User currently offlineTheRedBaron From Mexico, joined Mar 2005, 2194 posts, RR: 8
Reply 21, posted (9 months 1 day ago) and read 763 times:

Sandra Bullock ruined this film.... Charlize Theron should have been casted.

I always hear hear her talk, and talk, and talk...

TRB



The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
User currently offlineakiss20 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 604 posts, RR: 5
Reply 22, posted (9 months 1 day ago) and read 754 times:

SPOILER ALERT

I seem to be the odd man out in my circles in that I thought the movie was basically terrible. Was it very pretty? Yes. Did the shots from the character's perspective and all the floating look nice? Yes

Besides from the pretty-ness factor, the movie itself was basically terrible imo. Filled with plot holes (both technical and non-technical, but as an Aero engineer, the technical ones were gaping), lacking almost any character development, predictable as all hell. The only scene I thought was at all interesting was where she imagines Clooney comes back. The movie could have saved itself if they let her die in re-entry; just something to make it at all a)believable (although earlier bits already destroyed that a million times over) and b)interesting. Instead, shocker, she somehow manages to make it back to Earth and survive.

Ugh, waste of the $18.50 I had to go see it! But it was pretty  



Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are
User currently offlineMarcus From Mexico, joined Apr 2001, 1781 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (9 months 1 day ago) and read 741 times:

Quoting akiss20 (Reply 22):
The movie could have saved itself if they let her die in re-entry;

SPOILER ALERT!!!....

I have found with friends that saw the movie and some internet forumns that some people like the idea that maybe they all died, ala "The sixth sense"...

1.- A few minutes after they get hit by debris the first time, there are a few seconds of darkness and no sound in the movie, some people interpret this as the part where she dies.

2.- She dies in reentry



Kids!....we are going to the happiest place on earth...TIJUANA! signed: Krusty the Clown
User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3003 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (9 months 23 hours ago) and read 727 times:

-----------------SPOLER ALERT-----------------------

Quoting akiss20 (Reply 22):
The movie could have saved itself if they let her die in re-entry

It's only acceptable that she survives re-entry. However, I didn't really like the fact that she landed safely and that's it. I would have loved to see perhaps a sort of epilogue where after 'X' time she has been dating or has a family. If the movie showed her in fetal position and then walking from water to land (evolution), it would have been a great ending if she would have also evolved emotionally speaking.



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Will A.net Return To Its Former Glory? posted Thu Oct 10 2013 16:36:39 by LFutia
Will The UK Return To Its Former Glory? posted Fri Oct 4 2013 23:03:16 by United Airline
Will Taiwan Return To Its Former Glory? posted Fri Oct 4 2013 23:00:53 by United Airline
Solar Flares From Huge Space Storm To Cause Mayhem posted Fri Jul 2 2010 04:12:40 by MadameConcorde
Movies To Watch / Favorite Movies posted Sat Feb 27 2010 09:35:41 by eaa3
Georgia Lets It Go To Their Head? posted Tue Feb 19 2008 14:54:04 by BR715-A1-30
Uploading Movies To The IPod; Help? posted Sun Feb 11 2007 17:38:23 by FXramper
How To Upload Movies To IPod Video? posted Fri Oct 6 2006 12:02:14 by Pawsleykat
Politicians In Contradiction To Their Religion posted Fri Oct 14 2005 00:25:40 by Tsaord
450 Sheep Jump To Their Deaths In Turkey posted Fri Jul 8 2005 16:18:54 by TedTAce