Alfonso Cuarón's Gravity

[Matt C 452]

I think Fincher, Cameron, and del Toro were the ones who convinced Cuaron to shoot digitally -- not in 3D.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Digital and 3D are not mutually exclusive.

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

Remember that an enormous part of the film is CGI, so that was rendered in 3D anyway.

And all the live action footage was set up and film with the intention to convert them to 3D.

Yes thats true. Its just that converted films have obviously always looked obviously converted...at least the ones I've seen in trailers.

[Romão 2,274]

Gravity had an amazing 20% drop in its second weekend for a $44,265,000 gross and a $123,400,000 total. I honestly think this could hit 300 mil

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It still has to open in the UK for some reason

[Koray Savas 2,251]

I think Fincher, Cameron, and del Toro were the ones who convinced Cuaron to shoot digitally -- not in 3D.

I think he thanks Del Toro on all his films, no? those two and Innaritu are like the three Mexican amigos.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Cuaron, as great as he is is no Martin Short!

[mrbellamy 6,272]

I think Fincher, Cameron, and del Toro were the ones who convinced Cuaron to shoot digitally -- not in 3D.

I think he thanks Del Toro on all his films, no? those two and Innaritu are like the three Mexican amigos.

Yeah, I believe Del Toro, Cuaron, and Inarritu regularly help each other on their films, particularly in the writing and editing stages, so they always show up in the Special Thanks. They talked about that in their Charlie Rose interview in 2006, among other things: http://blip.tv/ovation/charlie-rose-alfonso-cuaron-guillermo-del-toro-alejandro-gonzalez-inarritu-237499

With Fincher and Cameron, I think their role was more about helping Cuaron break down the script and giving him general technological advice, basically telling him to wait a few more years. Cuaron has said in interviews that he always wanted it to be 3D.

[Matt C 452]

I think Fincher, Cameron, and del Toro were the ones who convinced Cuaron to shoot digitally -- not in 3D.

I think he thanks Del Toro on all his films, no? those two and Innaritu are like the three Mexican amigos.

I don't think Cuaron thanked del Toro in the credits for Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, though. But you're right, those three are close friends and bounce ideas off each other. I think del Toro mentioned that Cuaron and Innaritu helped him in the editing room for Pacific Rim, shaving off a few minutes and rearranging a few scenes for clarity.

[karelm 2,903]

Just saw Gravity today in IMAX 3D. I loved it! Very moving and also made me want to throw up from being flipped around so much. I actually got vertigo with the 3D effects. It's important to see it in a nice big theater and hopefully when it's empty like in the morning or something. This is not the kind of film to see with a lot of talkers/popcorn munchers. Sound design is VERY important in this film and there are large stretches with silence. Loud eaters breaks the mood. Sandra Bullock was great and very endearing...it actually made me angry that she was placed in such precarious situations throughout the film...yes, yes, more a statement on the effectiveness of the film than on my lack of emotional restraint.

[russds 8]

...It's important to see it in a nice big theater and hopefully when it's empty like in the morning or something. This is not the kind of film to see with a lot of talkers/popcorn munchers. Sound design is VERY important in this film and there are large stretches with silence. Loud eaters breaks the mood...

Actually we saw it in a packed theater, and one thing i noticed was the absolute silence during moments of the film. No dialog or music, or sound fx, and absolute silence, you could hear a pin drop in there. Luckily no kids I guess. But for us it worked even in a large crowd. I agree the sound design was amazing.

[Uni 306]

You're kidding. You people actually liked this movie? This sad, contrived, bloated, egotistical mess. . . ?

Heh. Just kidding. Saw it and loved it. Not much to add to the excellent reviews offered so far. It was everything that's been said: technically brilliant, beautifully rendered, very well-performed, and spot-on in almost (almost) every way. And it was intense. I realized afterward that's a term I don't often use in describing movies anymore. Most these days are loud, fast, scary, action-packed, whatever--but very few literally have you wringing your hands in your seat like this one did.

One other thing I really appreciated about the film: it always seemed to make the right decision when it came to scale. By that, I mean it knew when to make a shot an extreme close-up, when to give it a medium angle, and when to take in a broad swath of visuals at once.

The best example of the latter would be when Stone is pulling herself into the airlock of the Chinese space station. The choice you'd expect would be to follow her in again, keep things tight when the debris is flying and the action is going full-throttle. But instead Cuaron backs off to an extremely wide shot, and we see her desperate wiggling into the hatch as one small detail in an array of chaos.

Just a great film, ingeniously executed. **** out of *****

The film looks like they shot it on location and destroyed a bunch of space satellites.

Best, and most accurate, description I've read about the movie's astounding realism.

2. Some of the visual effects. 90% of them were flawless. But there were a few times when the on-set footage was clearly just the actors and the set, and they decided to CGI in a waving hose or something, and it never looked realistic. And why do special effects companies continue to have huge issues making CGI flames look right. Anyways, these are minor quibble, as most of the special effects were flawless, which honestly is what makes the few times something looked bad really stand out.

As a couple of people have said, this gets a pass because fire in zero-G won't behave like it does down here (any more than liquid does).

Even though I give it full marks, though, it isn't completely perfect. There is one overriding problem with the thing, and Jason put it best:

it's the score by Stephen Price. I thought it was ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE IN EVERY WAY. Not just the music itself, but also the spotting of the music in the film - there was WAY TOO MUCH of it. As Stefan pointed out, there is a moment in the first 5 minutes of the film where Clooney asks Ryan what her favorite thing about being in space is, and she says it's the silence. As they are having this conversation, this ANNOYING SCORE CUE begins playing!!! It makes no sense! And it gets worse from there. There are many times throughout the movie where I wished there was no score at all, and sat there trying to ignore the blaring, bland score blasting out of the speakers.

Even if John Williams or Jerry Goldsmith had scored this movie, and gave their best score ever, I would have wanted less of it to be in the film, because it simply didn't need it! And what's worse is that the score we got is so truly terrible. The main and end titles especially are cringe-inducing!

I would love to see a cut of the film with all music removed (both score and Clooney's country music). In fact, I would not be surprised if a fan makes one once the blu ray comes out. I'd love to see that.

Bingo. It was just noise most of the time, even when it should've been something better. It had a couple of decent moments . . . one of which I can't discuss openly:

The final descent in the burning rubble of the Chinese station did work pretty well.

But overall it was a noticeable distraction. And the final scene, which is as profound as Jason said (it practically screams the title of the movie throughout) is nearly ruined by the overwhelming loudness of the music. It wasn't well conceived, composed, and certainly wasn't mixed into the picture very well at all.

But the movie was good enough to overcome the score, and I'm determined not to let it take anything away from such an epic experience.

- Uni

[Quintus 5,399]

Well, I thought it was pretty rubbish. Really disappointed to be honest.Half the time I couldn't even see what was going on due to the copy being so dark, and I don't what the guy doing the filming was doing but the camera just wouldn't stop friggin' shaking, probably in the bag he was hiding it in.

Movie is all hype.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

be sure the pass the torrent link to Alexcremers.

[Quintus 5,399]

I thought the special effects were supposed to be dazzling in this? It was just a blurfest.

[Uni 306]

Although I gave the film full marks, I'm rethinking that decision now. Something felt like it was missing at the time, though I couldn't put my finger on it. Today it hit me: it was a problem with the music. Not just the cacophonous ravings of Mr. Price, but the one obvious musical choice that they missed by a mile.

I'm sure you've already guessed it yourselves: they should've made "Gravity" from the soundtrack to Cocoon the central song of the film, maybe given it a full run during the end credits. (What the hell were they thinking?)

Might have to deduct half a star for that one. . . .

- Uni

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

You guys make me be ashamed to be a fellow Englander.

[Matt C 452]

We finally got a 2D version this week. And yes, it doesn't have that immersion and depth to the image that the 3D does, and it really makes a difference. Strangely, there weren't as many people seeing the 2D version; more opted to pay more for the later 3D shows.

And I've never heard many complaints about the 3D either.

[Jay 37,322]

Well, it's certainly the best use of 3D I've ever seen in a film, by a mile.

And Uni I'm glad someone besides me didn't like the score! I am still surprised by how many people positively mention it. I thought it hurt the film.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It's the weakest aspect of the film by far.

[KK 3,307]

It is. But I didn't feel it was as intrusive as people here make it out to be.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It was in a few moments.

[ChrisAfonso 186]

It definitely was in the "What I like most is the silence" moment. But for me that has to do with this line triggering an expectation of experiencing a moment of this silence. Without it I'd find the music there to be wonderfully spotted. It portrayed that awesome long lingering panning shot over the Earth's surface rather well.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

In some scenes the score replaced sound effects a little bit too well. The launch of the Chinese escape capsule for instance.

I wonder if price was hired because he started out as a sound effects editor.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Possibly, but he isn't a sound effects editor, he works in the music department. He said that when they hired him he thought he was going to be a music editor and was surprised that they wanted him to write the music.

[Romão 2,274]

I saw this tonight. I thought the effects were flawless and it had probably the best use of 3D I've seen thus far. But still, it still feels somewhat half cooked. Like a full length demo reel for a more ambitious layered project. It's a wonderful technical exercice and it's definitely immersive, but like a sort of rollercoaster ride, you only enjoy it while you're in the ride itself. I didn't take much with me when I left the theatre

[Jay 37,322]

Funny, I've been thinking about it a lot since the one time I saw it, it's totally stays with me. I hope I get a chance to see it again in the theater.

Maybe it's cause I can relate to having to overcome tragedy to move onward, I dunno.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Same here Jason. I wanna see it in the cinema again.

[Hurmm 91]

I saw this tonight. I thought the effects were flawless and it had probably the best use of 3D I've seen thus far. But still, it still feels somewhat half cooked. Like a full length demo reel for a more ambitious layered project. It's a wonderful technical exercice and it's definitely immersive, but like a sort of rollercoaster ride, you only enjoy it while you're in the ride itself. I didn't take much with me when I left the theatre

I saw it again yesterday and I think I agree with this. Flawless technical execution aside, there's nothing much more to it that you can cling to after the first time. It's still a really good space thriller of course, one you could probably watch once every other year, thanks to its brief running time. But it's no Alien or Blade Runner or 2001: ASO in terms of lasting power.

Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think it will pass the test of time and be regarded as a classic ten years down the road.

[Jay 37,322]

Only time will tell!

I'm not sure how well it will even hold up on a 42" 1080p flatscreen in 2D at home compared to the enormous IMAX3D presentation I saw

[King Mark 3,626]

Saw it last night in IMAX 3D

Great movie.Was on the edge of my seat the whole time

[KK 3,307]

I wish we had a real IMAX location nearby and not one of those fake ones. As immersive as regular 3D was, I'd love to have been taken to that next level.

[Jay 37,322]

Glad you liked it KM

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

I saw this tonight. I thought the effects were flawless and it had probably the best use of 3D I've seen thus far. But still, it still feels somewhat half cooked. Like a full length demo reel for a more ambitious layered project. It's a wonderful technical exercice and it's definitely immersive, but like a sort of rollercoaster ride, you only enjoy it while you're in the ride itself. I didn't take much with me when I left the theatre

I saw it again yesterday and I think I agree with this. Flawless technical execution aside, there's nothing much more to it that you can cling to after the first time. It's still a really good space thriller of course, one you could probably watch once every other year, thanks to its brief running time. But it's no Alien or Blade Runner or 2001: ASO in terms of lasting power.

Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think it will pass the test of time and be regarded as a classic ten years down the road.

Does a film necessarily require something to 'cling on to' to have lasting power though? Just off the top of my head, Goldfinger, Jaws and Raiders of the Lost Ark are rollercoaster rides which have plenty of lasting power.

[King Mark 3,626]

I wish we had a real IMAX location nearby and not one of those fake ones. As immersive as regular 3D was, I'd love to have been taken to that next level.

What do you man fake one? some IMAX screens in multiplexes are smaller but I think the "real" full size ones are reserved for those science IMAX movies and never show regular movies

Still, there was no real IMAX shot sequences in Gravity like there was in The Dark Knight or Transformers, it was just widescreen presented on the IMAX screen

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Yes, real IMAX auditoriums are usually found in museums and other special venues, because they're too big to simply renovate into a normal theater complex. Thus you get fake IMAX, which utilizes two smaller projectors designed just for use on a screen too big for the auditorium it's in.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It's made 300 million

[Lewya 360]

Looking forward seeing it tomorrow night! I expect at least a 8/10 movie.

[Matt C 452]

It's made 300 million

It's impressive for an October release. It's on course to make around $550 million worldwide ($250M in North America, $300M international) once everything's said and done.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It's on $374,076,000 now according to Wikipedia, and it has yet to open is several countries including the UK, Ireland and Japan.

My prediction will turn out to be accurate...

I'd be very surprised if this movie hit those sorts of figures Steef.

I'll be giving it another 18 of my Euro's tomorrow Lee!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Here's an example of when a return to Earth in a REAL dodgy space capsule goes horribly wrong.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/krulwich/2011/05/02/134597833/cosmonaut-crashed-into-earth-crying-in-rage

[filmmusic 1,823]

I'm reading constantly in Facebook friends' status, that Gravity 3D is a lifetime experience!!

is it THAT good?

[Jay 37,322]

It was excellent!

[filmmusic 1,823]

It was excellent!

oh, so it was not a life experience for you.. That sounds more logical..

The thing is, that even a film director said (don't remember who) that he has seen so many films, but first time he felt like an 8year old etc..

Anyway, all this over-hype I'm sure will act negatively on me.. Let's see..

The sure thing is I know I won't enjoy it 100% because I can't enjoy to the fullest a film whose score isn't among my interests..

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

That's stupid!

I've enjoyed lots of films where the scores werent that good.

How do you get through films with a Zimmer, RCP, John Debney, Michael Gia etc etc score?

[filmmusic 1,823]

well, the first thing i notice in a film is the score, and it holds 50% of my total enjoynment of a film.

I never loved or enjoyed COMPLETELY a film whose score i didn't like.

it isn't stupid, it's just a different opinion.

[Jay 37,322]

I HATED the score to Gravity, and still LOVED the film.

There are tons of films I love with completely forgettable or downright bad scores. Shame you can't get around that...

[filmmusic 1,823]

I HATED the score to Gravity, and still LOVED the film.

There are tons of films I love with completely forgettable or downright bad scores. Shame you can't get around that...

I guess it's because I watch every film as a composer, and not as a film fan

(Oh, I hope this doesn't sound pompous)

[Jay 37,322]

It does.

[filmmusic 1,823]

It does.

well, I didn't want to sound like that, but i think it can be true..

Eg. a photographer wouldn't enjoy a film 100% if it had bad cinematography.

Anyway, I think I'm making it worse..

Moving on..