Jump to content

Alfonso Cuarón's Gravity


Jay

Recommended Posts

So it's another boring RCPish synth/electronic score , that tries to sound more "classy".

Is there literally nothing you'll give quarter to if it isn't sumptuously or bombastically orchestrated and played by a fucking symphony orchestra?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: The Lone Ranger. I've actually seen it. It doesn't have running time problems per se. It does have different ones, a problem with female characters for example, and a series of details that could be trimmed for a more fluid experience, but between cutting one thing and fixing the other you end up with something of more or less the same length. Around 140-135 minutes it could be and work fine with a simple non-traumatic rewrite and a re-edit. No, we don't need the Rango-ish CGI bunnies.

Gravity will probably be the best or among the best big films of the year. Where the summer releases are concerned I preferred The Lone Ranger, which was in an entirely different league from other summer blockbuster entries despite being a big, dumb, cartoony Bruckheimer production, which is interesting.

Chaac - who actually likes long films(*), but realizes Gravity is limited in running time due to being almost an animated film that must look as photorealistic as possible and that it doesn't have a complicated story.

(*)Provided they don't become boring. The Tree of Life was merely 139 minutes and once the interesting parts were over I felt I was going insane. It was So. Insanely. Boring. On the other hand, the long cut of The Fellowship of the Ring just flies through. What? Is it already over?

Agree with everything you said about The Lone Rager. Not about The Tree Of Life :P I'm sure the 'interesting parts' for you was just the creation scene.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Narhuchi has been banned for a month. Pretty sure it's Augie / Elder Joseph Harbinger / Van Houten / John Willliams again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with everything you said about The Lone Rager. Not about The Tree Of Life :P I'm sure the 'interesting parts' for you was just the creation scene.

Actually I liked other scenes as well but it's a bit fuzzy right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will be seeing this tonight. What theater did you see it at, Jay? AMC, Regal, or other?

I saw it at a true, real IMAX theater in Providence, not one of those fakey IMAX things. It's a National Amusements / Showcase Cinemeas now, but I believe it was an AMC before that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just saw it in Vienna. It IS very good but KM is right (cue broken clock joke): the score and especially the last 15 minutes seriously harm the picture. It`s the good old Chevaliers-cue from DaVinci Code and damn if it does not destroy any higher ambition the movie might have...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will be seeing this tonight. What theater did you see it at, Jay? AMC, Regal, or other?

I saw it at a true, real IMAX theater in Providence, not one of those fakey IMAX things. It's a National Amusements / Showcase Cinemeas now, but I believe it was an AMC before that

Nice. I would love to see it at the Smithsonian but it's not playing there. The website shows times for their typical IMAX docs for tonight but then there's a notice that all the museums are closed because of the government shutdown. Have to settle for faux IMAX.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In line with the unfolding events of the movie I do yes. But I am aware that most here - the core score enthusiasts - allow the music to take centre stage with their attention regardless of what's happening on screen. It's an approach I can't begin to fathom (it's fundamentally anti-score to watch a movie just for its music), but there you go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lee, what the hell are you on about?

Give specific examples!

The finale of ET would quality as intrusion like you describe it!

I know what you're getting at and I can see your point, but no: I try not to separate the various entities involved in a scene's making, in this case its underscore, during my first viewing. I immerse myself in the audiovisual package completely throughout something like E.T., the imagery and sound become a single aesthetic response which I feel in my eyes, my mind and soul. Not to sound like a pretentious soppy tit here (too late...), but when I respond emotionally to something I experience during a movie, when the hairs on my arms stand up, it's EVERYTHING that went into making the moment so perfect that I appreciate and respond to all at once; not just the score here; the photography there; the writing here; the performance there. It's everything together.

It's upon reflection afterwards that I'll eventually begin to pick apart the craft and many nuances which made me take notice and react the way I did.

Really difficult to articulate this stuff, but I did my best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't seen Gravity so I don't know, I did give an example earlier though, which I've been over in the past. TWBB's much lauded Jonny Greenwood score was a friggin' annoying headache of a score, non more so than in its extended intro sequence at the mine. It just got on my bloody nerves.

I consider a lot of John Debney stuff to be intrusive, too "LOOK AT ME", little in the way of discipline, as well as David Arnold (when he seems to forget he's scoring a movie and not actually performing live at the Albert Hall with Dame Shirley Bassey). John Williams has overstepped the mark on occasion too, such as in parts of Hook (great orchestral music which I love in its own right, but during the movie it just needs to reign its bloody excitable neck in a bit).

There's loads of "intrusive" score out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't have a problem with the score. I found it perfectly appropriate and thought it added a lot to the terror, and the climax was easily the most exciting I've seen this year. I got totally wrapped up in it, loved the whole package. And yes, the visuals were amazing and blah blah blah, but I was most happy to see how much they were tied to Bullock's emotional storyline. She was what made the movie great for me, and I thought her character's backstory was heartbreaking and revealed in a fairly authentic way, just little bits and pieces which all come rushing back by the film's end. I thought it was all quite powerful.

I'm actually a little worried about the visuals being so hyped up, because I don't want people walking into this expecting some kind of groundbreaking, game-changing mindfuck. That's not what this is and it's ultimately not what Cuaron is aiming for IMO. This is a simple but compelling story, thrillingly told and elegantly composed. Nothing more, nothing less, and despite its intensity and scale, it's relatively spare filmmaking and free of philosophical pretense. If not for a few contrivances in the film's action, it would actually be something close to a "day in the life" movie set in space. I'd like to see what you think, Quint, but for me, what you were talking about a few posts up was similar to what I felt here. Aside from one or two "obviously designed for 3D" moments, I didn't feel any of the shots called attention to themselves at all and on the whole, every aspect felt perfectly and seamlessly integrated to me. Great movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really share your sentiments.

Elaborate, how do you mean exactly?

If not for a few contrivances in the film's action, it would actually be something close to a "day in the life" movie set in space. I'd like to see what you think, Quint, but for me, what you were talking about a few posts up was similar to what I felt here.

I'm dying to see it if I'm honest and will divulge my thoughts immediately after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

free of philosophical pretense.

How is this ever a good thing?

I don't mean to suggest the film doesn't have a philosophy to it, just that it's not applied with a heavy hand or for example, explicitly forced in the dialogue. There's a particular metaphor that Cuaron is striving for regarding Bullock's character, and he uses a certain amount of visual symbolism to illustrate that, but I found it deftly handled and rather beautiful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really share your sentiments.

Elaborate, how do you mean exactly?

I don't have a problem with "look at me" scoring perse. Certainly not from the composers you mentioned in your example.

However I don't like overbearing music that brings nothing to the table then just sheer noise. Like parts of TDKR for example. Or quite a few of the lesser Bryan Tyler scores

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Noise" is bound to be subjective. I actually don't mind the new wave of synthetically constructed soundtracking so long as it fits the visual style of the movie. No, I'll take trainee RC composer and his textural experiments over yet another over-orchestrated MUST USE EVERY INSTRUMENT IN THE ARSENAL LIKE JOHN WILLIAMS DOES symphonic score any day of the week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, does not compute.

The textural synthy RCP stuff you mention plays it too safe most of the time. Indistinctive, not willing or daring to stand out or attempt to give any identical to the film.

I guess you have become a victim of the Nolan era of film scoring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, does not compute.

The textural synthy RCP stuff you mention plays it too safe most of the time. Indistinctive, not willing or daring to stand out or attempt to give any identical to the film.

I guess you have become a victim of the Nolan era of film scoring.

I didn't say the majority are distinctive (in fact most of it is downright shite), but I still prefer testing out new sounds and techniques over yet more bored out of their brains violinists and hornists going through the motions with generic sketched music vol.9693854.

Those tiers of scores are evidentially what keep this place a hive of activity I've noticed, in these JW starved times, during the dark periods. Famine breeds eager complacency.

If your definition of "daring" and "stand out" means another mickey mouse routine from classically trained composer number 152 then more power to you. It sounds symphonic so it's at the very least worthy by default.

Nah, not for me.

Oh i agree, there is a lot of mediocre orchestral film music out there. (Giachino, Brian Tyler etc)

But I dont think John Williams or David Arnold are prime offenders.

But they are offenders nonetheless, at times. You said the 'prime' part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RCP stylings by Zimmer underlings don't really constitute daring or experimental to me. It's just the latest phase of film music after the success of the Nolan Batman films, Inception etc.

It's not daring, or groundbreaking to cater to current trends.

A generic RCP type score has no more value then a generic John Debney one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.