• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

GRAVITY |OT| - From Director Alfonso Cuarón

I'm kinda wondering now if I should have paid the $3.50 extra for the true IMAX screen here in Houston instead of LieMAX? I guess I'll just have to see.
 
Did you see it in 3D? I'm sceptical of post-prod conversions versus films natively shot in 3D.

Make no mistake about it, this movie is best in 3D. It's not even a contest. 2D is totally fine too, but this is the good stuff right here, 3D wise.
 
My anticipated movie of the year. The closest IMAX where I live is near my university so I could go to the thursday showing right after class. Wondering if it's worth it or not....
 

Platy

Member
Did you see it in 3D? I'm sceptical of post-prod conversions versus films natively shot in 3D.

They can render the cgi in 3D like if was native.

Look at the link I posted and you will notice that it is praticaly natively shot in 3d =P
 
First IMAX 3D film I'll ever see. Been to IMAX before, been to 3D before, but this... this film looks awesome. So pumped. Will see it this weekend as a slightly-early birthday gift to myself.
 
I hope the animation/composition of the actor's heads into the suits is less jarring in the full film than it is in the trailer. I seriously could not appreciate the trailer, but the reviews have me anxious to be proven wrong.
 

Majine

Banned
Anticipating this greatly, I have sort of a thing for space thrillers without music. The silence of space is scary as fuck to me.
 
I don't have a problem with Sandra Bullock but it's interesting that Marion Cotillard was also looked at for the role. She probably would've killed it too.
 

Ollie Pooch

In a perfect world, we'd all be homersexual
Stunning film, some shots were just mind blowing. What a ride - really, really enjoyed it.
Quite moving in parts, too.
 

Mengy

wishes it were bannable to say mean things about Marvel
I'm seeing it tomorrow night, can't freaking wait. Taking the gf out for dinner followed by this. I may just watch Children of Men tonight to hold me over. I really like his directing style, I'm still excited that he is doing a space movie. Even more excited that it's time to see it!

Strangely I'm also not the biggest Sandra Bullock fan. I don't hate her, I've just never seen her do anything of note really other than Speed. And the trailer kind of made this movie look like 90 minutes of Sandra panting and screaming. I know it's not going to be that, but the trailer gave that impression and I've heard many people state that opinion. I've done my best to change their minds and convince them to see the movie, but my gf and I are going alone because none of my friends wants to go. I hope it does well at the box office.
 
One of the most viscerally engaging films ever put to screen. The sense of being there with the character/s in space is palpable. Honestly just one of the most mind-blowing technical achievements ever. This is an experience film through and through.

The photography is stunning. As is par the course with Lubeski between his work with both Cuaron and Malick, everything has a certain naturalistic ebb and flow about it as if one were drifting organically into the space - whilst still serving as an example of precisely executed choreography. All the lighting comes across as natural - which while is also a staple of Lubeski, is incredibly impressive given how much of Bullock and Clooney's work was shot on a soundstage. And the continuous takes in this film are incredible and really do well to lynch-pin you (because I couldn't say 'ground') to the literal space these characters are occupying at any one moment. It does a lot to establish a realistic sense of geographical space and give audiences a relative guide as to how far or large things are when moving through what is essentially a blank canvas. The 3D works very well to heighten that sense of verisimilitude.

The film puts you through the wringer, plot-wise. There are very few films this side of Aliens and perhaps Cuaron's own Children of Men that can sustain tension for so long. So the plot itself is rather good.

The one downside I'd peg this movie with is how the script deals with its characters. Where every effort has been made toward creating something that feels real, the characters and their dialogue do not. And this isn't on either Bullock or Clooney - whose performances served the film very well. In a film that strives from frame to frame in real-time to approximate an authentic experience for audiences to the point of literally putting us inside Bullock's helmet, the on-the-nose characterization and dialogue callbacks that would be a big tick on the checklist of any other movie are jarring in this one. It's not bad character writing, it's just misplaced. With a film that abandons most of the tenets of mainstream cinema, it comes across as odd that it imbues a real-time document of an event with telegraphed character arcs, where it perhaps should have just played it straight.

Overall, it's easily the best visceral experience you're likely to have in a cinema this year. It's one of the best films of the year without a doubt, but Before Midnight still reigns supreme.
 
One of the most viscerally engaging films ever put to screen. The sense of being there with the character/s in space is palpable. Honestly just one of the most mind-blowing technical achievements ever. This is an experience film through and through.

The photography is stunning. As is par the course with Lubeski between his work with both Cuaron and Malick, everything has a certain naturalistic ebb and flow about it as if one were drifting organically into the space - whilst still serving as an example of precisely executed choreography. All the lighting comes across as natural - which while is also a staple of Lubeski, is incredibly impressive given how much of Bullock and Clooney's work was shot on a soundstage. And the continuous takes in this film are incredible and really do well to lynch-pin you (because I couldn't say 'ground') to the literal space these characters are occupying at any one moment. It does a lot to establish a realistic sense of geographical space and give audiences a relative guide as to how far or large things are when moving through what is essentially a blank canvas. The 3D works very well to heighten that sense of verisimilitude.

The film puts you through the wringer, plot-wise. There are very few films this side of Aliens and perhaps Cuaron's own Children of Men that can sustain tension for so long. So the plot itself is rather good.

The one downside I'd peg this movie with is how the script deals with its characters. Where every effort has been made toward creating something that feels real, the characters and their dialogue do not. And this isn't on either Bullock or Clooney - whose performances served the film very well. In a film that strives from frame to frame in real-time to approximate an authentic experience for audiences to the point of literally putting us inside Bullock's helmet, the on-the-nose characterization and dialogue callbacks that would be a big tick on the checklist of any other movie are jarring in this one. It's not bad character writing, it's just misplaced. With a film that abandons most of the tenets of mainstream cinema, it comes across as odd that it imbues a real-time document of an event with telegraphed character arcs, where it perhaps should have just played it straight.

Overall, it's easily the best visceral experience you're likely to have in a cinema this year. It's one of the best films of the year without a doubt, but Before Midnight still reigns supreme.

What do you mean by 'visceral'?
 

Fxp

Member
Saw it yesterday, unforgettable experience. One of few movies you should see only in cinema, only in 3D. Happy for Bullock, now she's got one more movie to be remembered for, except "Speed".
 

Ollie Pooch

In a perfect world, we'd all be homersexual
Visceral would be how I describe it. A few moments I really flinched from
what was going on onscreen, haha.

The characters really seem so vulnerable and they really succeeded in portraying a hostile environment. Gonna go see again to take it all in.
 

Helmholtz

Member
So is this best viewed in Imax? I'm going to be staying near times square in NYC for the next week, anyone know the best (nearest) theatre for imax there?
 

jtb

Banned
So is this best viewed in Imax? I'm going to be staying near times square in NYC for the next week, anyone know the best (nearest) theatre for imax there?

Lincoln Square isn't too far (just take the 1 line up a couple stops) and it's got a great real IMAX screen. Might even be the only one on Manhattan, I'm not sure. It's a pretty decent cinema all around. That's where I'm seeing it tonight.
 

Helmholtz

Member
Lincoln Square isn't too far (just take the 1 line up a couple stops) and it's got a great real IMAX screen. It's a pretty decent theater all around. That's where I'm seeing it tonight.
Cool, looking forward to it. Liked Children of Men a lot and this sounds pretty groundbreaking.
 
Me Tested, Sculli Approved! ^_^

Basically I'm right with him on everything he said, except the Before Midnight thing. ONLY because I haven't seen it yet.
 

Lynd7

Member
Just got back from it, technically it was fantastic. Although, some of the dialogue and the overall plot felt a bit average. The last sequence also felt a little un-realistic in what happens.
 

Sec0nd

Member
Will be going to this film in 2 hours. Pretty excited. Haven't seen any trailer but I've heard it will be glorious film. I'm surprised by the length though, 90 minutes is pretty short for films nowadays.
 

Divius

Member
Will be going to this film in 2 hours. Pretty excited. Haven't seen any trailer but I've heard it will be glorious film. I'm surprised by the length though, 90 minutes is pretty short for films nowadays.
The runtime fits perfectly, don't worry about it.
 
This sounds like my dream movie. But, like I'm sure countless others have said, Sandra Bullock is really offputting for some reason. I don't have anything specifically against her, but it's a strange casting choice.
 
I've been looking forward to this film for ages now. I'm seeing it tomorrow night in 3d. So excited. Cuaron is one of my favorite filmmakers working today so I'm glad to see him finally get back to directing.
 

iammeiam

Member
Seeing it tonight at 7:30, quite hyped. Will be viewing in glorious 3D-converted-to-2D via lens-swapped glasses which will probably hurt the experience a little, but I've come to accept that most early showings will be 3D exclusive.

I also have no objections to Sandra Bullock being in the movie; she seems like she ca freak out well and based on the trailer that's pretty much what I'd be doing in that situation.

And the hour and a half running time! So many 90 minute movies insist on lasting 2 hours; a movie content to tell it's story in under two hours is a good sign.
 

Tom_Cody

Member
Simple question: Does it have a sci-fi bend or is meant to be completely reality based? Please just answer directly without broader spoilers.
 

UberTag

Member
Simple question: Does it have a sci-fi bend or is meant to be completely reality based? Please just answer directly without broader spoilers.
Reality based.
You will rightfully question the reality being presented to you at one point in the film but that's the reaction you're supposed to have.

Overall, it's easily the best visceral experience you're likely to have in a cinema this year. It's one of the best films of the year without a doubt, but Before Midnight still reigns supreme.
You, sir, have exceptional taste. <virtual high fives>
 
Top Bottom