GRAVITY -- directed by Alfonso Cuaron

[Ryan Farnes]

Just saw it.

I don't think I've seen a more white knuckled film in years. Scenes were immensely intense and I felt the need to avoid debris and avoid collision and so forth. Interesting how visceral it felt on a 2D screen. I keep seeing people laud 3D so I think I may go back for a second helping.

Good stuff.

 

[homestar_kevin]

http://www.examiner.com/article/astronaut-kicked-out-of-movie-theater-for-heckling-gravity

This is one of my favorite stories ever

 

[Allan Black]

Pretty sure Hadfield won't be going again, probably send Isabelle Tremblay ... and her boyfriend.

Cheers.

 

[Finnegan]

On that note, I can't wait to go to space. I think it'd be so awesome to shoot up there where everything's weightless. I bet what makes great photographic composition up there is totally different than what makes it great down here, in terms of framing elements.

 

[Allan Black]

Well if you pony up the deposit, Richard Branson is your pilot and Ms Tremblay lead singer >>>

Cheers.

 

[Batutta]

http://www.examiner.com/article/astronaut-kicked-out-of-movie-theater-for-heckling-gravity

This is one of my favorite stories ever

This originated on a spoof website, The Beaverton, Canada's version of The Onion, but other outlets are running it unaware as though it really happened--

http://www.thebeaverton.com/chris-h...movie-theatre-for-loudly-heckling-gravity.htm

 

[Gord.T]

Vacuum is only an insulator if it is a contained barrier between two temp gradients. It doesn't insulate if you are in the vacuum at -400 degrees.

I see your point, yes. And yes one has nothing directly to do with the other.

 

[Tokpaler]

I was reading about the reviews and comments about how the film is scientifically inaccurate and it reminded me about one other story that had much verisimilitude that it caused panic to masses of roman catholics and christians alike (in my part of the world, at least).

After all said and done, what people fail to remember is that this is all ficion, and a damn good one at that!

 

[refocusedmedia]

This is is the only 3D movie I've ever seen that I could not imagine seeing in 2D. I don't understand those who said it "doesn't feel like a 3D movie"... so much of this film works precisely because of the 3D space it explores. The spatial proximity of objects to characters, characters to space ships/stations, all the while exploring their relationship in the vastness of outer nothingness was so distinct and ingrained in the 3D. This not only "felt" like a 3D movie, but it felt like a movie that lived and breathed in 3D.

The cinematography was stunning in every way. The effortlessness of the camera movement was extraordinary to experience. I think my favorite moment was in the opening sequence when Sandra is drifting away, the camera slowly moves in on her face as we experience her fear and hopelessness... and then it actually pushes into her helmet and we see her POV, exacerbating the experience. A truly brilliant example of using CGI and digital effects to enhance and serve the storytelling.

The VFX were some of the best I've ever seen. It felt like I was an alien fly on the "wall" of space, witnessing this event unfold. What I saw never once rang as false, even though my brain knew it was. For those interested, here is the FXGuide article on the making of the film.

The sound design and music were superb. If I had a complaint, it would be that they used the "static/noise buildup to a climax and sudden silence" effect one too many times.

As for the infamous tether scene... I'll be honest, I didn't have an issue with it. I was too engrossed to over-think it, I guess. I accepted that the force of his pull was so strong that his sacrifice was necessary. Also, they were orbiting pretty fast as they were attached to the ISS at that point, right? Perhaps that enhanced the effect?

Anyway, here are some interesting observations and interpretations I've seen around the web.

Gravity is an ode to mankind:

The movie has a lot of themes, but I would say that the main idea is a metaphor for the birth, evolution, and survival of mankind.

The very start of the movie says "Life in space is impossible."

This is trying to set up how impossible the rest of the film is. How impossible it is that Sandra Bullock will be able to survive the ordeal ahead of her. One thing I heard from a lot of moviegoers was that it seemed fake how lucky Sandra Bullock was to survive. That the odds were stacked too high against her. But this is the point of the movie! Sandra Bullock's character represents the creation of man, and the impossible circumstances that allowed humans to be. It's not fake. It's what happened.

What happens in the opening scene of the movie? A big bang. This sets all of the events of the movie in motion. Sound familiar?

The movie also starts off in space and ends on Earth. This is how humans came to be as well. We started as stardust and ended as humans.

We begin with three characters as well, but end up with only one. This is survival of the fittest. Sandra Bullock has to survive the entire movie in order to exist.

The most prominent visual in the movie is Bullock's womb image signifying her birth, and the last scene in which she crawls out of the water.

Obviously the crawling out of the water symbolizes evolution. Shortly after she stands up and the camera looks up at her. She's looks like some kind of giant monument. She is a masterpiece.

In space, we do not belong to a country, we all belong to the human race. Sandra is an American in a Russian suit, in a Chinese capsule.

One very strong hint that it is correct is the frog that swims past Sandra Bullock as she is struggling out of her spacesuit in the water. The frog represents metamorphosis, evolution, the tadpole that has struggled out of its restrictive suit that keeps it in the water and found a way to evolve to a new plane of existence.

She is floating in space, looking like an embryo. And then when she takes her first steps on land ... it was like a child taking it's first steps!

An alternate viewpoint:

I think it is ultimately a reflection on the pain of loss, and the journey we go through to deal with that pain and keep living. Cuaron uses immersion to approximate the feeling of being adrift in earths orbit, the entire world filling your vision yet out of reach at the same time, and he parallels this feeling with the pain of loss. The sparse backstory then provides a sort of blank canvas onto which we can project our own feelings of loss, reaching a state of catharsis. The re entry into orbit "living", is supposed to be frightening, thrilling, hopeful and painful, yet when you make it and stand on your own two feet, the colors are all the brighter for your journey and you have found new strength. (edit to add a couple sentences)

Ryan's struggle is about choosing to live (rather than merely exist), the struggle not to be passive and "give up on life," but to fight, despite her grief. Saw this film as a metaphor for stages of grief. So she reawakens to live again (in that way, it's rebirth). Overall very touching, just lost me at the beginning in terms of the characters being introduced (with sparse, awkward dialogue).

Another take:

I will just say it was interesting that aside from her personal rebirth and struggle, it was as much about her rebirth as a citizen of Earth. At the start of the movie she was just a girl from Illinois, and after the iconic fetal position scene with the umbilical chord, then passing from station to station seeing each nation's religious icons, to then finally evolving out of the primordial goo of earth (all of the imagery here, no people around, very primitive setting, the frog passing by all contributed to the evolution of man imagery), not only is she reborn as a person, she is reborn as a citizen of the planet. Even her radio traffic in the cockpit was a garbled mess of communication from all over.It's just one more area where Alfonso Cuarón did his research - you always hear astronauts talk about seeing Earth from space and having it redefine how they view their role as a citizen of a planet, rather than a region of that planet.

One more:

Dr. Ryan Stone is faithless, still holding onto guilt and sadness from the accidental death of her daughter after the 4-year-old just "slipped" one day. Matt Kowalski, is her soul-image, her Animus. The opposite of Stone, talkative and charismatic, a seasoned veteran, constantly calm at all points of the movie. It's not exactly subtle, but he tells her she must "let go". To me, the meaning was two-fold. Not only must she let go of her daughter's death, but she must confront her own. And the Animus will not be ignored.

After the US station is injured, Stone says she should have stopped her procedure sooner. Kowalski assures her that doesn't matter: they still would have been hit. Like with her daughter, it still would have happened. The guilt has no place.
Once the station is destroyed, Stone goes flying into space by a tether, connected to Kowalski. Female and male sperm. As Stone explained, her father wanted a boy. And ultimately, after floating through space, trying to get to the space station, the male sperm is let go. The female sperm wins out. Stone is born a girl, not a boy. Stone has to come face to face with her Animus (it's the first time she actually stares at Kowalski). It lies within her. And as she enters the ISS, she takes off her suit, and floats in a cradled position like a fetus. The first steps of birth have been completed. The new Self is forming.

She cannot stay in the station. She has to make it further, to another station: the Chinese. But while in this ISS, she must confront the death of her daughter. Working to get to the Chinese station, she clocks her watch. Only 4 minutes and 30 seconds. A fire starts. Trying to put it out, she knocks her head. Note the 4 minutes, like her daughter dying at age 4, and Ryan hitting her head, like her daughter. When the blood comes out, Stone sees her own mortality. Death is a part of life. Stone gets away from the fire.

Here, Stone now can acknowledge her daughter's death by coming face to face with her own. She acknowledges that she never had faith, because no one taught her how. She has given up. Surrendered to the truth of her daughter's death. Surrendered to her own. Stone stares at her reflection (and her Shadow). Here, Stone cries (the water breaks). The 'stone' walls have broken. The fetus is ready for birth (and Stone is ready for re-birth). Just then, the dream of Kowalski. He tells her that she can do it. This vision from the heavens is faith incarnate (though it's just a dream). She needs to drive, take a chance, and fight. The Animus must be integrated. And Stone does just this.

Making her way to the Chinese station, her fire extinguisher (the tool of faith) doubles for an umbilical cord. Once inside, she prepares to exit the womb. She speaks out loud: she is ready for life, no matter the struggle and hurt, no matter the death. She is ready for the ride. And with a plummet to Earth, she emerges from her pod, water rushing in like a baptism. And, like a tadpole (sperm) becomes a frog (swimming next to Stone as she swims to the surface), she reaches the Earth to take her first steps.

Also like The allusion to praying. Every time they talk to Houston "in the blind" that was essentially a prayer to something you didn't know was there not. She said that she did not know how to pray because she was never taught, but she had been, over time she became more and more accustomed to speaking "in the blind" and at the end started speaking to Kowalski "in the blind". Beautiful Allusion to what designates as "prayer" right there. It can be anything, independent of religion.

Anyway, what did you guys think? Did you pick up on any of this, I haven't seen it discussed yet and I find it fascinating. I definitely picked up the fetal position and birth imagery, as well as the "first steps / learning to walk" at the end. I think if you read all the takes I posted that the combination of them makes for a really interesting amalgamation filter to view the film through.

I think this film is our 2001.

Finally, here is a half-hour interview with Alfonso Cuaron and one with the producer, David Heyman.

 

[Eric Boellner]

Couldn't find this on YT or I'd embed, but Jonas Cuaron wrote and directed this short film which shows the other side of Dr Stone's mayday communication with the man and his dog and child. Pretty interesting little short. Some of the communications felt a little rushed on this end of things, like Stone's lines were cut a little closer together than they were in the movie, but definitely an interesting companion piece to the movie.

Jonas Cuaron's "Aningaaq."

 

[Eric Boellner]

Of all people to partially thank for GRAVITY...Brett Ratner?????

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/how-director-brett-ratner-evolved-650017

BTW, just saw this while checking to make sure the short film hadn't been posted here already. I'm pretty sure Ratner had nothing to do with Gravity until it was close to release and WB brought Dune-RatPac and their big slate deal in on the film as a sort of token of good will - essentially cutting them in on the investment in hindsight and reducing their risks if the film didn't make bank. I've read that THR puff piece, and it seems eager to offer Ratner credit for anything it can (including a page worth of name-dropping), but the fact remains that Jeff Robinov deserves sole credit for agreeing to buy this film out of turnaround at Universal and wager such a risky investment. Ratner and his billionaire buddies just got cut in on a good deal.