A24 5,022 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Why? Perhaps Quint felt it was an out of place Brian De Palma moment in an otherwise very Cameronesque movie.
Sharkissimo 1,977 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 It was obviously a half-brained attempt to recreate the ending of 2001 with the star child/womb imagery. Nothing De Palmaranian about it.
A24 5,022 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Well, not that you can see. Remember, you believe The Matrix was influenced by Dark City. Nuff said.
Sharkissimo 1,977 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 I've seen every film De Palma has ever made, and am one of his tireless defenders.Re: Dark City - I was referring to the film's aesthetics.
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 11,799 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 I would agree, i dont see the DePalma reference.
Sharkissimo 1,977 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 I'm guessing Alex is talking about Mission to Mars. Nothing in that film's highly spiritual finale is as stupid as Bullock going into foetal position.
A24 5,022 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Yes, Mission To Mars has similar rotating anti gravity shots. Very good, Mr Shark.Anyhoo, the were other moments way more cringeworthy than that shot.Alex
A24 5,022 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 I don't remember exactly but one of those moments went like: Sandra: "It's time to go home!" (with incredibly cheesy crescendo music). Or what about the family photo floating next the astronaut with half of his face missing?! How sentimental can it get? I hated the overly narrating score, BTW. I already felt something was wrong when the music was making 'whoosh' sounds during the 'accident'.But technically, wow, I simply don't know how they pulled it off. Sharkissimo 1
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 11,799 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 It's all done with computers!Cameron is a great admirer of the film btw.
A24 5,022 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 I can image he is, since his movies are cutting edge too.Alex
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 11,799 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 He's been pretty critical about how "his" 3D is used by film makers.
Jim 6,161 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 I hadn't realised till recently the true extent to which cg effects make up the film. It's almost like a hyperrealistic Pixar film, with human faces pasted in.
Jay 45,118 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 The Blu Ray will poportedly offer a version of the film with the score removed.
Jim 6,161 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 That would be worth watching as long as it retains the score's sound effects.
Sharkissimo 1,977 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Yes, Mission To Mars has similar rotating anti gravity shots. Very good, Mr Shark.As does... DUM! DUM! DUM!!! 2001: A Space Odyssey.
filmmusic 2,995 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 It's all done with computers!Cameron is a great admirer of the film btw.I can image he is, since his movies are cutting edge too.Alex Cameron films (well, maybe except Avatar) have a soul that I didn't see in Gravity!(and I think this soul is largely the result of use of miniature sets and such stuff, and the real action, instead of CGI)
Marian Schedenig 11,304 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Gravity: Technically very, very impressive but that's about it. Emotionally and cerebrally, it felt like watching a Cameron movie. I expected more. 5/10 I don't think they could have made it more without ending up with less.
Sharkissimo 1,977 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 That would be worth watching as long as it retains the score's sound effects.What?The wooosh and sub-bass sounds.
Marian Schedenig 11,304 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Yes, Mission To Mars has similar rotating anti gravity shots. Very good, Mr Shark. Which were inspired by 2001 - as was the ending. I don't remember exactly but one of those moments went like: Sandra: "It's time to go home!" (with incredibly cheesy crescendo music). Or what about the family photo floating next the astronaut with half of his face missing?! How sentimental can it get? So you actually wanted less rather than more?
Sharkissimo 1,977 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Gravity: Technically very, very impressive but that's about it. Emotionally and cerebrally, it felt like watching a Cameron movie. I expected more. 5/10I don't think they could have made it more without ending up with less.Less $?
Jim 6,161 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Knowing Steef he probably means he thinks the film is 10/10. When he falls for someone he falls hard.
Code 000. Destruct. 0. 4,261 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 And he comically scrambles to defend it, something he criticizes others for frequently! I'm guessing Alex is talking about Mission to Mars. Nothing in that film's highly spiritual finale is as stupid as Bullock going into foetal position.God it's refreshing to see someone talk about that film like that.
crocodile 9,516 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Gravity: Technically very, very impressive but that's about it. Emotionally and cerebrally, it felt like watching a Cameron movie. I expected more. 5/10AlexThere are days when I love you Alex Cremers.Karol
Sharkissimo 1,977 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 He's a freak of natureBut we love him soHe's a freak of natureBut we let him go
A24 5,022 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Of course, it all goes back to 2001, for it is after all the grandad of modern sci-fi (not that Gravity is sci-fi, but hey). Oddly enough, I though I was the only one who was disappointed with Gravity. Honestly, I thought the film was celebrated by almost everybody. I guess I was wrong.Alex
Code 000. Destruct. 0. 4,261 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 I think it was deeply hurt by the hype around it. Blew it into something far more than it was.
crocodile 9,516 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Kind of like it Inception, really. First few reviews suggested it was like a Kubrick meets Blade Runner and shit hit the fan. Strange because it is essentially a really fun, but silly film.Karol - who didn't like Gravity the film but enjoyed the experience of watching it
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 11,799 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 I think it was deeply hurt by the hype around it. Blew it into something far more than it was.Deeply hurt in that it made close to 700 million dollars? Which for an autumn release outside of the blockbuster season is excellent.And it did so without a fancy and expensive viral marketing campaign. Just a few trailers and lots of word to mouth!
Code 000. Destruct. 0. 4,261 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Kind of like it Inception, really. First few reviews suggested it was like a Kubrick meets Blade Runner and shit hit the fan. Strange because it is essentially a really fun, but silly film.Karol - who didn't like Gravity the film but enjoyed the experience of watching itAgreed - about your feelings on Gravity, that is. I don't find Inception to be silly.Deeply hurt in how I and apparently a good deal of others responded to it, Steef.
Code 000. Destruct. 0. 4,261 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 That's not what I said....
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 11,799 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Well I saw it on openings day, after seeing the first two trailers, which looked great. And the movie didnt disappoint on that level.The emotional autists that worship the emotionally detached styles of Nolan and Fincher might take offense with some of it. I am certainly the first to admit that the symbolism in the movie is plain for all to see. But none of this detracted from the amazing visual experience. Which is what the film is ultimately about.
Sharkissimo 1,977 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 The emotional autists that worship the emotionally detached styles of Nolan and Fincher might take offense with some of it.I despise Nolan, Fincher and Cuarón. Where does that leave me?
Code 000. Destruct. 0. 4,261 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 That's fine, and I'm glad you enjoyed it, and I'm not saying you shouldn't have. It was a visual treat yes. What I am saying is that much of the marketing, at least here, made it seem like something much more than that, something that would resonate emotionally in a powerful way. And it just didn't.
KK 3,310 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 I agree with Stefan. Sure, its not the most subtle with its symbolism and such, but Gravity is really about the experience. And its been a long time since I've seen so immersive a film in the cinema. I think its one of the best films of the year.
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 11,799 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 What I am saying is that much of the marketing, at least here, made it seem like something much more than that, something that would resonate emotionally in a powerful way.What marketing did that?The trailers?The ones I saw were a very accurate representation of the film.
publicist 4,650 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 The emotional autists that worship the emotionally detached styles of Nolan and Fincher might take offense with some of it. Why should they? This not a pitch between GRAVITY and SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION, there isn't that much of a difference.
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 11,799 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Autism is cool, anyway.KarolAutism/Aspergers is seen as very cool nowadays. Just look at Sherlock, or Sheldon from Big Bang Theory.
Naïve Old Fart 12,643 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Autism is cool, anyway.KarolI'm sorry. Can you explain that, or did you mean "auteur-ism"?
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 11,799 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 The emotional autists that worship the emotionally detached styles of Nolan and Fincher might take offense with some of it. Why should they? This not a pitch between GRAVITY and SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION, there isn't that much of a difference.They seem to object of the rather obvious emotional angle of parts of the film. The backstory of Dr. Stone's dead daughter being hissed at the most I believe.
Code 000. Destruct. 0. 4,261 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 What I am saying is that much of the marketing, at least here, made it seem like something much more than that, something that would resonate emotionally in a powerful way. What marketing did that?The trailers?The ones I saw were a very accurate representation of the film.Commercials. Also when the trailer used one of Arvo Part's pieces, that just rubbed me the wrong way. Very try-hard.
crocodile 9,516 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Autism is cool, anyway.Karol I'm sorry. Can you explain that, or did you mean "auteur-ism"?No I meant autism. I know quite a few autistic people and they are really interesting individuals. Hence, I'm not offended by being called one.Karol
Sharkissimo 1,977 Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Christopher Nolan: The Autistic Auteur
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now