Am I the only one who thought this movie wasn't very good? Yes, the cinematics were amazing and spectacular, but the story, yikes. The two main characters had the most paper-thin backstory I have ever seen. I didn't care about the characters. They failed to make me care and that is horrible storytelling. I didn't care if they all died in the vaccuum of space. It was almost as if they added the daughter-death backstory as a token gesture to force us to care about this woman. And don't get me started on George Clooney's character. Talk about 2-dimensional. Ugh... What did you all think? Is the hype warranted? Did I miss something? ~ JJ
I have not seen the movie, but my experience with what I see and what I'm told about screenplay writing: It's the push toward action orientated spectacles. They don't spend a great deal of time/pages on backstory because you have at most, 120pgs to work with. Screen time is precious and you want characters doing something and flashbacks tend to be a no-no as well. In the case of a survival movie, all attention is on surviving.
I thought the movie was so-so. I agree the story wasn't all that good, and there were so many improbablities. She would have been better trained. George Clooney wouldn't be just zooming around for no reason. Why would a Chinese satellite that was not intended to return to earth have a re-entry capsule? I did think Sandra Bullock did an excellent job, though. And the cinematography was just spectacular -- I think the movie is worth seeing for that alone. But yeah, the story left a little bit to be desired.
The Chinese "satellite" was identified in the movie as a space station. It was intended for human occupancy.
Ah, okay. But, then, why was no one in it? Apparently, it was hit by the space junk, and was going to fall to earth.
Yeah, don't get me started on that. It's awfully coincidental that just as she gets there, she has a matter of seconds to escape in the capsule before the whole station burns up in the atmosphere.
I'm a bit late but, however. When Sandra Bullock strips off and is floating, weightless, in fetal position, I was struck by how perfect her skin looked. Even at the end when she drags her way out of the water, the only injury she appears to have suffered is slight abrasion to her left shoulder. Given I spent half the movie cringing as her body slammed into large chunks of metal, I expected to her to have at bit more bruising, if not the odd fracture to show for it. As much as the cinematography was superb, there really wasn't much else.
SPOILERS! I talk about loads of details of the film so don't read it unless you're cool with that SPOILERS! I watched it cus everyone said it was amazing. I thought it was... well, I think the director tried hard. I appreciated how realistic some elements were, such as Sandra Bullock not being able to swim in her spacesuit. However, those are also moments where a little less realism would've been better. I actually *giggled* when I saw her flapping her arms uselessly in a fat spacesuit. That's not a moment when you want your audience to giggle! George Clooney is George Clooney - his character is the same in every single film: the cliche, smooth, wiser man whose pearls of wisdom can change your life. He was all right. I mean, I liked him because he's a nice guy. I was surprised at how fast he died - that was quite unexpected I must say, which I appreciated. But at the same time, it all felt a little... contrived. So George Clooney had just enough gas to get Bullock to safety and then he conveniently dies? Given some of the realism present in the film, this quite common piece of plot device became rather jarring. I just wish films nowadays would explore more character. Nowadays it's always about the plot and action. Gravity is one of those films that really needed to be heavily character-centric, considering it's basically a one-woman show, and yet it didn't deliver in this aspect. There was almost no story to begin with, so the fact that it fell flat even on character development left it a little... meh. I actually found it hilarious when Bullock got into the first capsule, swung around like a ping-pong and then realised she'd run out of gas. Again, a little too convenient - she had enough gas to tug at those ropes (I haven't a clue why the parachute was already out). And then just as she is actually free, she runs out of gas? Then when she couldn't operate the keyboard cus everything was in Chinese - I'm sorry, that just broke the tension for me cus it's frigging hilarious I couldn't tell if much of the humour was intended or not, and even if it was intended it was certainly misplaced. It was always at the most climactic moment that I found things funny! Also, just before I watched the film, I found this link, which told me that water - and tears - stick to your face in space. So when Bullock's tears were floating around, I couldn't help but remember... http://themetapicture.com/how-everyday-things-work-in-space/
SPOILERS AHEAD!! You haven't seen "Burn After Reading," have you? I noticed the same thing. I actually found myself thinking like a writer when I saw that movie. I was thinking, "I bet the screenwriters really wanted to make this an entirely one-character movie. The first draft probably only has Sandra Bullock in it. But they couldn't figure out how to get her from here to there, so they finally gave up and put in another astronaut, just to get around that plot issue. Then they got rid of the other astronaut as soon as they possibly could." Yeah, Clooney was just a plot device in that movie. He does what he has to do, then he dies.
I'm sure that was a marketing decision. They didn't need Clooney to play the role; any actor (including ones who cost a lot less) could have done it. Sure, they rewrote the script (I believe) when they got Clooney so they could give him some decent lines another actor wouldn't have gotten, but that doesn't change the function of the role in the story. The reason they got Clooney was so they could put another big star's name above the title. When it comes to selling tickets, "Bullock and Clooney" looks a lot better than "Bullock" alone.
Yeah, sorry, I suppose I should talk about Gravity, shouldn't I? My opinion (SPOLIERS!): 1.) Fantastic visuals. 2.) Simple goal for the MC (which is always nice). 3.) Wish there was more of Clooney; when he died, I wasn't sad for the character, but sad that I wouldn't see him for the rest of the film. Of course I was wrong, but it was still too small a role! 4.) Even though her performance wasn't award-winning, Bullock held her own. 5.) The drowning scene at the end was over-the-top; there was absolutely no need for it. 6.) I didn't like the ending. I would've changed it. 7.) I agree she suffered minimal injuries for a major event. 8.) I also agree that you didn't care about the characters at all. It was all about the story, baby.
My benchmark for a movie like Gravity is relatively simple: did I enjoy the movie? Was it fun? Answer for this one is "yes." I had a good time watching it and thought it qualified as a fun movie. No further analysis necessary for what is essentially light entertainment
I thought it was an interesting watch but nothing about it was memorable. I wouldn't give it a second viewing if I saw it on TV. It was better than Ender's Game anyway. I knew that movie was doomed when I found out who was directing it.
You know, this is what I mean - character. For such a character-centric movie, it was surprisingly lacking in ANY character development. If Clooney's character were a full human being, his death wouldn't have been as jarring. And I think they should've cast an unknown character and then given him a whooping good role - would've been more effective, don't you think? The directors would've been forced to actually give the character some real significance because they wouldn't be able to rely on his fame, and somehow it would've been all the more surprising and therefore enjoyable. Whereas Clooney - like, because of his fame you expected more, so when he delivered so little, it was actually rather a downer than anything else. Plot device. Hit the nail on the head there! And nope never seen Burn After Reading - don't even know what it's about! I watched Up in the Air and My Descendants. My Descendants were particularly bad, and soooo misogynist.
It was ok. There were two nagging things for me. One was that Bullock's hair did not move as though it were in micro g. The second was that there is no way that those satellites would all be orbiting that close to each other. Couldn't stop thinking about those two things. It was entertaining watching objects fly around in front of your face with the 3D. It's pretty clear the 3D was the star rather than any character. It could have been greatly improved as cinema if Bullock was the only character and it was a silent film and her struggle to survive against the mechanical forces of physics was the script. Trim the fat.
