Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 111
  1. Collapse Details
    #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    7,021
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Sage View Post
    With Newton's 3rd law, he would be effectively saving her by pushing away
    ...Did he push away? I thought he was just tethered to her, so pushing a "rope" would do nothing.


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    Alfonso Cuarón talks Gravity: The science of sound (Dolby Atmos)
    #52
    Exclamation
    Alfonso Cuarón and Re-recording Mixer Skip Lievsay:
    Creating a dramatic sound scape to a dark and vast outer space environment.

    Momentum: The Sound of Gravity


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #53
    Senior Member KyleProhaska's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    2,475
    Default
    Something I was thinking about regarding the 3D (which I generally dislike) is that for the great majority of the film the distance between foreground and background elements is so vast, that the 3D is fairly subtle which (to me) is what made it work for me. It was definitely there and in some shots very deep but in general the depth was kept to a manageable level.

    The 3D trailer for The Hobbit beforehand though? Mind-numbing. Arrows in focus and faces out, crazy fast moving shots and tons of cutting. Drove me crazy...


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #54
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by TheDingo View Post


    < Spoiler Alert: Don't read any further if you haven't seen this film... >



    ...I don't get why George Clooney's character had to detach ? Once his angular momentum had been equalized, he would not have any additional "drag" effect on Sandra Bullock. It's not like there is any "wind" in space. This was the only tiny minor thing that bugged me with an otherwise very believable simulation of space.
    Same here. Had he been drifting away from her and knew that his inertia might pull her out with him, and then detached BEFORE that... they would have had me.

    As is, the jolt from being attached to her takes place and then he detaches long after they are stable. In fact, he probably would have started drifting back towards her following the initial jolt when the tether stops him from going any further.

    But screw all that. I loved this movie.


    MONSTERFEST : 4th Place - Sustained Excellence Award - WESTFEST: 3rd Place - THRILLFEST: 3rd Place


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #55
    Default
    Just saw this one yesterday. I liked it a lot. Suspenseful. Visually beautiful. Original and innovative. I for one have been waiting for Hollywood to make a film of this calibre that is not yet another remake, reboot, or derivative rehash. Gravity feels fresh. There was a great attention to detail. They correctly depicted space as silent for example. That said, there were some plot-points that bothered me while watching it.

    MAJOR SPOILERS:


    Quote Originally Posted by TheDingo View Post
    ... I thought he was just tethered to her, so pushing a "rope" would do nothing.
    That's how I remember it. They were tethered together, and he just released himself and fell away. It made no sense, physically. There shouldn't have been any force pulling Cloony away from Bullock's character. The tether and tangle of lines would have stopped his outward momentum by that point already. His self-sacrifice was pointless and it took me out of the movie for a while.

    Also, in real life, Hubble and ISS are in completely different orbits. Hubble is much higher up than ISS by hundreds of miles and moving at a different speed along a different path. There would be no way for two astronauts with nothing but a jet pack to make the necessary course corrections to rendezvous with the ISS from Hubble's position. Even under ideal conditions, getting two orbiting spacecraft together is tricky. It's a bit like trying to intercept a bullet with another bullet, and have them gently touch in mid-air. Of course, the only realistic conclusion to the scenario presented in the movie is Bullock and Clooney slowly dying of asphyxiation after the initial accident, which would admittidly make for an unsatisfying movie.

    Same problem presents itself with Bullock getting to the Chinese station. It's not quite as much of a stretch there. At least she has a damaged Soyuz, but even a fully functioning Soyuz probably wouldn't be able to make it.

    The only way that the premise of this movie could possibly work is if at some point before the movie takes place, for some reason, NASA decided to spend billions of dollars moving the Hubble into an orbit where it rendezvous with the ISS, an orbit in which it not intended to go. On top of that, the Chinese decide to go to similar great effort to position their station within spitting distance of the ISS.

    There are some other issues, but those are the main ones.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #56
    Default
    That is a good point. It did seem like it was just an untethering. I want to believe there was a push there, and her backwards movement at that point would match that (if I remember it correctly).
    Last edited by Sage; 10-07-2013 at 11:42 AM.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #57
    Senior Member GrahamH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    950
    Default
    Cuaron had this to say about the untethering scene in an interview with Huffington Post: "What happens is she's grabbing the tethers and he comes with momentum. His momentum pulls her. They're moving together. There's a wide shot that shows they keep moving and you can see the background keeps on moving. What happens is, if he lets go, his force stops and the force of the tether takes over. And, look, by saying that, this is not a documentary. We took certain liberties"
    http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4018865

    Neil deGrasse Tyson was unconvinced though: http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/40572...=entertainment


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #58
    Default
    Thought about it for a bit, and came to this - given that they are moving away from the station, the motion of the two stabilized at this point (he is not exerting accelerating force on her anymore), by detaching he would significantly reduce the mass of the collective body, thereby significantly lowering the reverse force needed for the loose ropes to reverse her momentum.


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #59
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Sage View Post
    Thought about it for a bit, and came to this - given that they are moving away from the station, the motion of the two stabilized at this point (he is not exerting accelerating force on her anymore), by detaching he would significantly reduce the mass of the collective body, thereby significantly lowering the reverse force needed for the loose ropes to reverse her momentum.
    Either way, that scene just doesn't "work" in the movie. Everyone I saw it with had issues with it and it seems like some people here do as well.
    It just doesn't work. Took me out of the movie.

    And the fact that Cuarón is trying to explain it away isn't a good sign either.

    Clooney drifted away from her and then the tether stopped him from going any further. He might have even started drifting back towards her after his momentum was altered with the jerking motion of being stopped/pulled back. It just had no feeling of "I better cut myself loose or she's dead!"

    All that being said, I'm nitpicking. I really want to see this movie again, I liked it that much.


    MONSTERFEST : 4th Place - Sustained Excellence Award - WESTFEST: 3rd Place - THRILLFEST: 3rd Place


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #60
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by TheDingo View Post



    ...I don't get why George Clooney's character had to detach ? Once his angular momentum had been equalized, he would not have any additional "drag" effect on Sandra Bullock. It's not like there is any "wind" in space. This was the only tiny minor thing that bugged me with an otherwise very believable simulation of space.
    The same principle would be in operation if the two were in water(*), and Sandra had a connection to the craft by means of a weak line. As she pulls on Clooney, she would require her foot to be fixed, other wise she would pull towards Clooney. If Clooney pulls, he would exert a force on Sandra, which the flimsy line could not withstand.

    The craft was 'in motion', relative to the pair, and so, when Clooney disconnected, he 'remained' and she moved off with the craft.

    Of course from the POV of the craft it would appear that Clooney was moving away...

    Well that's how I interpreted it...

    *There is of course some drag which the water would produce on the two, which would not be present in space... but the drag would be far, far less than say a firm footing on a 'fixed' object... like the ground...


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •