Gravity

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Thanks guys. I'm definitely gonna choose 3D if I have the option. :duff

Even if you don't... My IMAX was only 3D, no non-3D available. I'd been reading a lot online as to whether or not I should do regular or 3D IMAX. Then I noticed my theater only had the 3D version, and my decision was made.

But yeah, I'm not down with 3D at all, and I thought it really was icing on the cake.
 
Just got back from seeing this. IMAX 3D is teh way to go.

Quite possibly the best movie I've seen this year. Cuaron is such a fantastic and visionary director.
 
I saw this in XD 3D this week (the next best thing to IMAX?), but I haven't felt a need to post about it until now, for some reason. It's definitely been in my head.
Thoughts: Visually stunning; I was incredibly impressed walking out, and the whole experience was just really immersive. The writing was well done, and the metaphor wasn't too heavy handed, but it wasn't too subtle as to go unnoticed.

Clooney and Bullock were both great; I suppose a flick like this is any character actor's dream, considering the fact that it's pretty much 100% character development and you only have to share the spotlight with one other person. With that being said, it seems like Clooney kind of took a backseat the whole time. He was something of an archetype to move Bullock from Point A to Point B. He did a fantastic job, but, ultimately, I kind of wish they'd delved a little deeper with him than what we saw.

The film really was a roller coaster ride, though. There were times when it was almost serene, and then, there were others where it was virtually terrifying. All in all, though, it was one of the best films I saw this year.
 
I agree that Clooney's character "was something of an archetype to move Bullock from Point A to Point B". But I had no problem with that. He did a great job of being a veteran astronaut with the 'right stuff'. Cool as a cucumber even in the worst situations.


I plan to see this again on Sunday in IMAX 3D.
 
BWTZtDJCMAAfRw2.jpg:large
 
Well, no. Not really. This is CGI done right. Used in the right way.

But for films like GI Joe: ROC, or The Expendables movies, it tends to rub people the wrong way.
 
Astronauts in space encounter a disaster, and are forced to find another way home via space stations.
 
Well, no. Not really. This is CGI done right. Used in the right way.

But for films like GI Joe: ROC, or The Expendables movies, it tends to rub people the wrong way.

It is to the people who say that practical is always better. The only difference in quality compared to things like Avatar is that this is real stuff that they're trying to replicate which means they have something they can exactly reference and people don't already know it's fake. Like how the interior of the ISS is CG but you wouldn't know that otherwise because you wouldn't normally expect it to be CG.
 
The CGI and visuals in this were pretty impressive. I don't think there should be much hate for that with this movie.
 
It is to the people who say that practical is always better. The only difference in quality compared to things like Avatar is that this is real stuff that they're trying to replicate which means they have something they can exactly reference and people don't already know it's fake. Like how the interior of the ISS is CG but you wouldn't know that otherwise because you wouldn't normally expect it to be CG.

For monsters, and Zombies, practical is the way to go. Period. For robots, and sometimes space ships (I'm still kinda partial to models but I don't mind CG ships)

That being said, and like I said, if it's used in the right way, it's totally brilliant. Which it was in this film. The problem is, people get sick of bad CGI, such as the CGI in World War Z, which I found to be atrocious. But when used by directors who know how to make it work, and how to make it visually pleasing and work with the story, then it's great and shows why it's a good tool to have.

But for every movie that does it well, 15 others do it so terribly. So despite the fact that this movie worked in favor of CGI, the hate of the tool won't go away until more directors start to understand it better.
 
Also, there's a lot of really interesting subtexts and metaphors peppered through out. They're pretty easy to spot, but still, appreciated.
 

Stuff like that is what makes me really appreciate the performances. I can only imagine what their processes must've been to get such authentic performances in such an artificial setting. You probably really do have to block everything out and visualize. It's just insane to think that they're capable of pulling it off without seeming stuff or fake in any way.
 
I viewed this in IMAX 3D last night. I enjoyed the visuals, Clooney & Bullock performances however, the story after a point became redundant. That would be my only complaint with the film....
 
I viewed this in IMAX 3D last night. I enjoyed the visuals, Clooney & Bullock performances however, the story after a point became redundant. That would be my only complaint with the film....

Awww what do you know about films anyhow...??????

:rotfl

I haven't seen it yet but understand the experience is one of the key factors that make this film special..so they say
 
Cuarón really has become a master of the long shot. I can't wait for all the "making of" material for Gravity.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBfsJ7K1VNk[/ame]
 
Saw this today in "standard" 3D. I thought it was a very powerful film.

I will continue to avoid 3D movies though. I just think it's more of a distraction than anything else.
 
Back
Top