I agree about the score but as a "space drama" Gravity is a far superior film.
Also me and my wife despise 3D in almost every movie we see but it was quite phenomenal in Gravity. I had no problem noticing details or the whole composition of a scene. In fact I stopped thinking about it which I never do.
Were they employing some new technique here?
Why was it so good?
I think the reason is that partly the material fits the concept of a "3D" film perfectly, but also that the way it was filmed was conceived in a way which maximizes the impact of 3D as a visual medium.
The way the camera work is designed is something you would generally only find in 3 types of footage:
- documentaries
- animation
- videogames
The reason is that normal films do not employ a sort of third person active camera for the entire duration of the film. Documentaries tend to do it for immersion and detailed visual documentation. It is easy to employ in animation because it is a virtual camera. Same with videogames but with the added element of the camera being meant to track a specific character on screen.
Since Gravity uses only the third persona camera and first person views for the entire duration of the film, it is incredibly personal and immersive, and as such plays perfectly into the elements which 3D is meant to enhance. Never does it feel like we're watching a wide shot of characters and a background layered on the screen, nor are there moments where characters are just sitting there talking to each other in a flat 2D way (in terms of cinematography). Instead the entire film feels fully three dimensional at all times.
It's not a new technique so much as using old techniques which work brilliantly with the format they decided to go for.
