# Gravity - Upcoming sci-fi thriller directed by Alfonso Cuaron



## Xaios (May 13, 2013)

Without further ado:



Neat looking trailer, and being directed by Alfonso Cuaron is about as surefire a guarantee of quality as you're likely to find.


----------



## groverj3 (May 13, 2013)

I just wonder how they're going to make this interesting for the running time. It's a pretty interesting idea though. I'll see it.


----------



## Xaios (May 13, 2013)

Indeed. It has a sort of "Open Water In Space" vibe.

Spacesharks? Please?


----------



## Mexi (May 14, 2013)

Certainly a far cry from Children of Men (which I thoroughly enjoyed) but no doubt he'll do an excellent job with it.


----------



## bozothedeathmachine (Jun 17, 2013)

The dude has finesse with a camera. If you haven't, check out the special feature of Children of Men where they show how he shot was made in the van. The guy really likes long, complicated shots. This movie is going to allow him to do whatever he wants with the camera unencumbered by any dimensions and no objective up or down. It's going to be rad. I guarantee it will make people dizzy at some point.


----------



## Xaios (Jun 17, 2013)

Indeed. The cinematography in Children of Men was just mind-blowing. I was _in awe_ when I watched that movie.


----------



## erotophonophilia (Jun 17, 2013)

This is the first movie I'll travel 2hrs to see in Imax.


----------



## halomojo (Jun 17, 2013)

Glad to see more movies like this coming out. There aren't enough clever sci-fi movies in my opinion (like 2001, Moon, Solaris, etc). It seems most sci-fi movies fall back on the action and special effects and don't do much in the way of story telling. Very excited about this one.


----------



## Alberto7 (Jun 17, 2013)

Wow, that does look really awesome. Perilous situation, that is. It reminds me of the excellent sci-fi anime "Planetes." Definitely gonna go watch this one when it comes out!


----------



## Xaios (Oct 3, 2013)

Alright folks, seems as if this movie the real deal. Score of 98% on Rotten Tomatoes after 88 reviews, and a score of 94 on Metacritic.


----------



## Alberto7 (Oct 3, 2013)

Holy shit, I'd totally forgotten about this film! I might actually go watch it in IMAX this Friday.


----------



## wankerness (Oct 4, 2013)

I wish there was an imax within 50 miles of me !


----------



## Leuchty (Oct 4, 2013)

Yeah this looks sweet!


----------



## Xaios (Oct 4, 2013)

After 204 reviews now on RT, it's STILL at 98%, and it's up to 96 on Metacritic. I CANNOT WAIT to see this movie!


----------



## fwd0120 (Oct 4, 2013)

Looks so good! Can't go watch it because it doesn't really follow real space physics. Wish I could watch it, though!


----------



## wankerness (Oct 4, 2013)

fwd0120 said:


> Looks so good! *Can't go watch it because it doesn't really follow real space physics. *Wish I could watch it, though!



That's some epic trolling!

I think I'm going to drive the 60+ miles to see it in imax 3d by myself, haha. This movie seems worth the extra money and gas mileage and fact I won't be able to drag anyone else along.


----------



## Alberto7 (Oct 4, 2013)

Just came out of the IMAX theater.......

....OH MY GOD....

...everyone make the trip to the nearest IMAX theater. It'll be worth every penny. Not apt for the faint of heart though. Shit's the most nerve-wracking film I have ever seen. Will write a bit more about it once I get home!

EDIT: actually, I don't know what I could say about the movie other than the fact that it is the most visually stunning film I've ever watched (10-15 minute long shots of the most beautiful and absolutely terrifying space images you'll ever watch!), the acting is FANTASTIC, the script is great (although it verges on just slightly cheesy at a few points, but a good kind of cheesy), the overall and incredibly immersive atmosphere of sheer terror and desperation, and this almost overwhelming feeling of pure bliss and wonder while watching Earth from space and the beautifully nauseating feeling of zero gravity that the movie conveys so well. The other thing is that this movie HAS to be watched in 3D. An IMAX theater would be ideal. There were scenes where I literally jumped out of my seat trying to avoid an oncoming piece of debris.

So friggin' good. I can't recommend it enough. Seriously.

EDIT 2: Oh, and yeah, the above has to be some high-caliber trolling. I feel bad calling this movie a "sci-fi" movie, just because it feels more like science fact. All technologies shown are not only feasible, but actually exist, and the physics applied are some of the most credible I've ever seen in film. I mean, using a drill in space, and hearing nothing but the faint rumble of its vibrations being transmitted to the space suit and into the astronaut's ears... this movie is full of little details like that, and they're one of the things that make it so incredible.


----------



## Furtive Glance (Oct 5, 2013)

Nearest IMAX theater... 423 km away. Goddamnit.

This movie does look really damn good. I've read the opening shot is 17 minutes long with no cuts. Sounds like Alfonso for sure.


----------



## Alberto7 (Oct 5, 2013)

^ That was the first thing I noticed; the length of the shots. I swear there were like 4 shots only in the entire movie  (exaggerating, of course... but they were very, VERY long). It's one of the things that made it so fantastic. I just keep wondering how on Earth they filmed this movie... one could easily believe that they actually filmed this in space.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Oct 5, 2013)

Xaios said:


> Indeed. It has a sort of "Open Water In Space" vibe.
> 
> Spacesharks? Please?


 
yeah that was my first thought as well.

If it was my plot to tweak I would mix the Open Water vibe with a Five People You Meet In Heaven sort of concept.

Like have a drifting astronaut who knows they only have an hour left of air and that they are 100% going to die at that time, and have them internally taking inventory of their own life and trying to reach a inner peace with themselves before death.

No action, no explosions, no save the day heroics , just certain soon death and an attempt to deal with it gracefully.


----------



## wankerness (Oct 5, 2013)

I drove 90 miles in a rainstorm both ways to see it in imax 3d today! It was totally worth it. This is the only time that 3D has ever been truly justified in my experience. It was really shocking seeing a trailer for the 2nd hobbit movie and seeing how ....ing awful the 3D looked there, like, all the actors and monsters looked like 2d that were on different fields, like some kind of shitty diorama. This, though, felt completely 3D and so many of the effects were just amazing. One of the most-used ones is the point of view shot from the astronauts, where their helmet visor is over the camera lens and you can see their breath fog it up and see some HUD on it at times. It's like nothing else I've ever seen.

I wonder what it is going to be like in 2d/on tv. It will probably still be good, but man it has such unique and weird usage of the depth afforded by 3D. Apart from the gimmicky stuff like I mentioned, there's other stuff like a little tiny object will be off in the distance and you don't even notice it unless you're looking at it but it just slowly and silently comes up into the foreground and matters VERY MUCH all of a sudden. It had me constantly looking around in the background for little specs of debris while the characters loomed in the foreground.

Another one of the unique things about that movie that became one of the main threats in the film was just the way gravity worked, something that repeatedly was happening in itwas that you'd have something swinging on a line or something and would be moving due to inertia in zero g and then would hit the end of the line and snap back. and every time it was treated with this bizarrely affecting sense of weight, like the whole audience would hold their breath as whatever object it was would rubberband past and wait for the inevitable snapback. The movie did that a TON and it really made everyone in the audience understand the physics of that and it became the main obstacle in several sections of the movie. It first starts with astronauts tied to each other by a lifeline and later trying to get an escape pod out of a space station that's snagged by the parachute, and then all the times when they're trying to stop a spin by using a fire extinguisher or the landing jets in the pod or whatever.

And even besides all this amazing depth of field stuff and uniquely physical perspective on the action is that the way it's filmed is just bizarre, like seriously the first 15 minutes of the movie have no cut at all. It's just one really long shot that goes all over the place, starts really far away from them goes all around them in various directions, even goes into the helmet of one of them and switches to their POV. I mean, obviously it could have been (and probably was) more than one take spliced together, since there's tons of special effects and there's a couple seconds where it pans to the earth or something else that's entirely CGI, but it still lends a completely unique feeling to the action that would have been lost with standard editing.

That movie is a gd masterpiece of some sort. The plot is sort of a typical hollywood arc but nothing else is, that's for goddam sure, and the fact it is somewhat standard in the plot department probably is the only thing that kept the movie something that most audiences would even remotely be able to handle.

I loved how they handled sound effects too, like most of the clunks and smashes were simply like the dull thud that went through the astronaut's suit after they hit something, while like a big explosion a little ways away is silent.

WHAT A GREAT MOVIE! I will go see it in 2D next week and see if it's still as effective, if it isn't, I'll probably have to go make the trek to see it in imax at least once or twice more. I dunno if it will work on video at all. It's probably the best movie visually i've ever seen in terms of detail and stuff going on and how visually driven it is. 

It's really remarkable and I don't know if we'll see anything like it again, especially if it flops, which I fear it might since it's a spectacular effects movie without any villains or aliens or superheros starring two actors of appropriate age who are more often associated with romantic comedies and dramas. It looks like it was ungodly expensive, and it was dropped off in the no-man's land of october (too late for summer box office receipts, too early for oscar consideration). The audience where I saw it was weird, it was sold out at 2:25 PM, but the audience was mostly annoying high schoolers and people who brought little kids that probably shouldn't have seen some of the sights in this movie. However, despite how annoying they all were before the movie started, you could have heard a pin drop - everyone in the room was just blown away and completely engrossed by the movie up until the big chinese radio scene (if you've seen it, you'll know what I'm talking about), but it won them back pretty quickly again after that. I think this will be one of those movies where people mostly only go to see it if they're nerds like me or go by accident cause they thought it was about robots hitting each other but everyone who DOES see it will probably love it.

Man, Sandra Bullock has one of the most unfortunate careers. I love her so much and she's such a great screen presence but she's basically never in anything worth watching. I was so overjoyed to hear she was the star of this since I knew she'd be great in it, and she sure was. I think she might scare away some people that associate her with junk like crash or bad romantic comedies, but I think she'll win over anyone that actually watches it.

If you appreciate sci-fi movies or astonishing visuals or movies that don't feature robots hitting each other or gunfights or whatever else idiots watch, you should definitely see this in the biggest theater you can find.


----------



## Alberto7 (Oct 5, 2013)

^ Thank you for that. It seems you managed to keep it together after the movie  now you've reminded me of a lot of things and have sort of unclogged my mind, which went rather numb after the shock.

You pointed out something that I also noticed and which I found really interesting/somewhat saddening: the theater was half-empty (actually, more like 75% full), despite being Friday night and premiere date in an IMAX theater right in the very middle of friggin' downtown Montreal (where IMAX is their pride and joy). I was a little baffled by that, as I was expecting the theater to be flooded with people.

Like you also said, most of the audience were either families with children, or annoying teenagers... who shut the f*ck up right when the very first breathtaking images came on screen. The shots are irresistible, and I'm pretty sure that applies no matter what kind of person you are or what your interests are. It's just breathtaking. I feel that the sound effects were used to great effect in the film, with the right amounts of ear-drum-shattering noise followed by the sudden deadening silence of space. During those silences, I could actually hear half of the audience panting and a few that were bawling their eyes out. It was quite something. The soundtrack, while not especially memorable (aside from maybe that really soft and daydream-y tune), was very very effective in conveying all of the emotions in the film.

Oh man, and those long shots where the camera would seamlessly and slowly shift from being outside in space to being inside of the astronaut's helmet... I had the biggest friggin' smile on my face every time that would happen.

The 3D was used to literally vomit-inducing extremes. I found myself struggling to find my center of mass at some points in the film, and it would become rather disorienting. I guess that is as close as I am ever going to get to the level of disorientation that astronauts experience when first in space from the cushiony comfort of my chair. It was incredible.

It is a fact that the long shots were basically different "subshots," so to speak, that were spliced together. But what counts, for me at least, is the level of artistry employed to envision how the overall shot would look, and the net effect it would have on the viewer. Technically speaking, it is quite possibly the best film I've ever seen. Scratch that; it IS the best film I've ever seen in that department (and in many others, too). It blends both beautiful cinematography and the highest ranking CGI I've come across.

I was never a Bullock fan, as I associated her with lesser "flicks." I didn't think anything bad of her, I just didn't care. But the fact that she always got such roles left me scratching my head about the outcome of Gravity when I learned she had the lead role. She left me speechless with her performance. It is so genuine, and the emotions she expresses feel very real. The viewer relates a lot to her and is able to feel that desperation and claustrophobia of being trapped in the vastness of space with no way back home.

The plot is actually very simple and straightforward, and I suppose that is what will keep the "regular" viewers coming back to it. But, honestly, it doesn't matter that the plot wasn't complicated, because it is executed masterfully.

And I'm not sure I could call this science fiction, as it is, from what I can tell, science fact. The physics involved and the way they were portrayed (which wankerness did a wonderful job at picturing; that "heaviness") makes this movie come across as a very real situation that could very well happen. Indeed, it could. Hopefully, it won't.

Pretty sure I'm gonna go watch it again this week. Too good.


----------



## Xaios (Oct 6, 2013)

Saw it tonight. Man, kiss the ground after you come out of this movie, because you'll never be more glad to have your feet planted on Terra Firma. 

But yeah, it was a really incredible movie. Probably the most "hard sci-fi" that Hollywood has ever produced. The effects were just absolutely stunning. The only other movie with visual effects that can touch it is Life of Pi, and those are of course in a completely different style.

And man, talk about tension. It was edge of your seat material, through and through.



Spoiler



And man, the scene where they retrieve the other astronaut that got killed by debris, and they reveal that the debris that killed him literally just annihilated his whole face... I swear I could just feel my heart stop at that moment. They did NOT shy away from showing just how badly space debris can .... you up out there.



So great. Will be seeing again in short order.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Oct 6, 2013)

So, I guess this'll be the "2001: A Space Odyssey" of the 21st century?


----------



## Jzbass25 (Oct 6, 2013)

I'm probably going to go see it but I'm going to have some issues with suspension of disbelief on some of the shit he messed up lol. I'm going to try my hardest to believe it is an alternate universe where all of my qualms can be overlooked. 

I feel like a nerd knowing so much about space but knowing astronauts as a little kid made me a little obsessed, and now I have friends working there! I feel like Ethan Hawke in Gattaca since I want to work for them as an engineer but my genetics (inherited horrible chronic migraines) is restricting me. =/ Also sorry for my weird tangent lol.


----------



## wankerness (Oct 6, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> So, I guess this'll be the "2001: A Space Odyssey" of the 21st century?



Not really comparable, 2001 is like an IDEAS MOVIE and also would definitely be sci-fi, this is just an action thriller/survival movie that happens in space. This wouldn't even qualify as sci-fi based on any definition I've ever seen. I guess the way it could be compared to a modern 2001 is just in a technical sense, that it is such a big step forward with SFX and using them in a new way.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Oct 9, 2013)

wankerness said:


> That's some epic trolling!





No, THIS is some epic trolling:

Neil deGrasse Tyson Trolled "Gravity" On Twitter, And It&#39;s Pretty Hilarious


The physics and tech/science in it aren't as "hard" sci-fi as they're cracked up to be.

5 things that couldn't happen in 'Gravity' - CNN.com


----------



## hairychris (Oct 9, 2013)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> No, THIS is some epic trolling:
> 
> Neil deGrasse Tyson Trolled "Gravity" On Twitter, And It's Pretty Hilarious



I haven't seen the movie but that popping up in my Twitter feed did make me laugh.

Neil deGrasse Tyson is an absolute champ.


----------



## skeels (Oct 9, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> So, I guess this'll be the "2001: A Space Odyssey" of the 21st century?



I thought that was 2010.


----------



## Alberto7 (Oct 9, 2013)

at Tyson's tweets.  And yeah, I did find it strange that all those things were in pretty much the exact same orbit. And the gentle tug part left me with doubts. I didn't really think about those things much though, as I was (still am) so taken aback by the film itself. But it's true it does have a few scientific flaws. Here's one review by Phil Plait (Bad Astronomy) that goes a little more in depth (SPOILERS GALORE!!):

*MEGA SPOILERS AHEAD*

Bad Astronomy movie review: Gravity.

With that said, I am more than willing to overlook them to rejoice in this movie's utter awe


----------



## wankerness (Oct 9, 2013)

I couldn't care less about science inaccuracies, this isn't a documentary.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Oct 9, 2013)

Just sayin'. _You're_ the one who said someone who mentioned scientific inaccuracies was "trolling."


----------



## wankerness (Oct 9, 2013)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> Just sayin'. _You're_ the one who said someone who mentioned scientific inaccuracies was "trolling."



No, I said saying "I refuse to watch it cause it's too scientifically inaccurate" was trolling!

Those articles are interesting, btw. I mean, I'm interested in what's accurate but I don't care about it at all in the context of how much I enjoyed the movie.


----------



## toiletstand (Oct 9, 2013)

When i first started hearing the hype about what Cuaron was doing with this film almost two years ago i decided to go in cold and avoided all the promo/clips/articles that were released and im glad i did. it was a sweeeet movie experience.


----------



## Steinmetzify (Oct 20, 2013)

Just came out of it in IMAX. Definitely worth the $. Best 3D I've ever seen. Usually I can't be bothered at all, and the 3D preview of the new Hobbit movie looked like a kid did it on his home PC compared to this movie. Sick.


----------



## Sean Conklin (Oct 23, 2013)

Just got back from seeing it..........WOW.


----------



## Lifestalker (Oct 23, 2013)

I saw it opening weekend. Incredible to say the least. Best 3d movie I've seen thus far.


----------



## technomancer (Oct 24, 2013)

wankerness said:


> I couldn't care less about science inaccuracies, this isn't a documentary.



When it's being presented as accurate in the marketing I do care as it's complete crap. If it was just an action flick I wouldn't care at all, but when you've got things going on like the actors saying it's a realistic representation of things in space it becomes a problem  (Bullock on the Daily Show did exactly that)


----------



## Rosal76 (Oct 24, 2013)

Question guys, for those of you who have seen it. This seems like a cool movie to watch and I'll try and catch it when it comes out on DVD/cable/whatever. Anyways, I was reading a review of the movie in the paper this mourning and it says that the movie has "disturbing images". Can anyone here tell me what they are talking about??? 

The only thing that I can think of is if someone got exposed into space outside of their space suit.


----------



## synrgy (Oct 24, 2013)

Super intense flick. Saw it last week and a ton of the images are still sticking with me. While I knew damn well going in that it would not be entirely 'accurate', it was close enough to help remove what little romanticism I still had related to the work astronauts do.

I'm usually not crazy about survival movies, but this was amazing, to me. Just a wild, wild ride. Quite the movie going experience.

Now that the gubmint is open again, I'm really hoping this will make it's way into the 'proper' IMAX theaters @ Smithsonian. If it does, I'll definitely go see it again.

If you're on the fence, I humbly suggest taking advantage of seeing it in the theater, rather than waiting for home release. It's one of those flicks that just won't have the same level of impact on the small screen as it does on the big screen.


----------



## wankerness (Oct 25, 2013)

Rosal76 said:


> Question guys, for those of you who have seen it. This seems like a cool movie to watch and I'll try and catch it when it comes out on DVD/cable/whatever. Anyways, I was reading a review of the movie in the paper this mourning and it says that the movie has "disturbing images". Can anyone here tell me what they are talking about???
> 
> The only thing that I can think of is if someone got exposed into space outside of their space suit.



A guy gets space debris through his head and you see a huge hole in his face.

DO NOT wait to see it on tv/dvd! I avoid the theater whenever possible but this is a special case.


----------



## Rosal76 (Oct 25, 2013)

wankerness said:


> A guy gets space debris through his head and you see a huge hole in his face.



Gotcha. 

It's just everytime I hear/read the term "disturbing images", I think of uber gore movies like the "Saw" and "Hostel" movies.


----------



## Alberto7 (Nov 5, 2013)

Reviving this thread for this:

WARNING: THE WHOLE MOVIE IS SPOILED IN THE FOLLOWING VIDEO


I LOVE listening to these three talk, and even more so when it is about Gravity. Very interesting podcast with Adam Savage (Mythbusters), Will Smith (Tested.com), and Norm Chan (Tested.com), as usual.


----------



## wankerness (Nov 6, 2013)

Good discussion, I listened to the whole thing. Thanks for linking.

I saw this movie in the theater again last week, on a much smaller screen. It wasn't quite as good as the first time but I still loved it and I think the part where the Russian station gets hit with debris might be the single best effects sequence I've ever seen.


----------



## Winspear (Nov 13, 2013)

Saw this tonight. Not much more to say than what has been said already. Absolutely mindblowing..


----------



## Jzbass25 (Nov 13, 2013)

technomancer said:


> When it's being presented as accurate in the marketing I do care as it's complete crap. If it was just an action flick I wouldn't care at all, but when you've got things going on like the actors saying it's a realistic representation of things in space it becomes a problem  (Bullock on the Daily Show did exactly that)



Finally someone (besides my friends working for NASA and my friends in space club) that is on my side. Personally I thought the whole movie was trying to use realism to be scary or suspenseful but it failed at the realism part so I felt 0 tension. It marketed away my suspension of disbelief so to speak.


----------

