What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Gravity (3D) (1 Viewer)

Saw it in 3D, not IMAX 3D. Sounds like I should have gone for the IMAX.

I don't think I'll be watching it again, though. Movie seemed very similar to Avatar -- super basic, cliched story, giving us the minimum amount of plot to let the special effects shine through. The effects were outstanding, but I don't think (like Avatar) I'll have any desire to watch this movie when it's on TV in a few years.

 
Saw it in 3D, not IMAX 3D. Sounds like I should have gone for the IMAX.

I don't think I'll be watching it again, though. Movie seemed very similar to Avatar -- super basic, cliched story, giving us the minimum amount of plot to let the special effects shine through. The effects were outstanding, but I don't think (like Avatar) I'll have any desire to watch this movie when it's on TV in a few years.
Like I said, it's a ride not a movie.

 
Saw it in 3D, not IMAX 3D. Sounds like I should have gone for the IMAX.

I don't think I'll be watching it again, though. Movie seemed very similar to Avatar -- super basic, cliched story, giving us the minimum amount of plot to let the special effects shine through. The effects were outstanding, but I don't think (like Avatar) I'll have any desire to watch this movie when it's on TV in a few years.
Really can't think of a worse movie to compare it to. What exactly was cliche?

 
Saw it in 3D, not IMAX 3D. Sounds like I should have gone for the IMAX.

I don't think I'll be watching it again, though. Movie seemed very similar to Avatar -- super basic, cliched story, giving us the minimum amount of plot to let the special effects shine through. The effects were outstanding, but I don't think (like Avatar) I'll have any desire to watch this movie when it's on TV in a few years.
Like I said, it's a ride not a movie.
:goodposting: I was squirming in my seat at times...great tension and action

 
Just got back from it with the girlfriend and her Dad who was visiting. We saw it in non 3D/Imax because we both get sick from 3D. Girlfriend enjoyed it especially for the scenery and Clooney, but was hoping things would have been different witht he story. Her Dad thought it was meh but he thinks every movie needs action 24/7. I thought it was great. Loved the experience, scenery, music, and enjoyed the story and thought it didn't hinder anything.

 
Just got back from it with the girlfriend and her Dad who was visiting. We saw it in non 3D/Imax because we both get sick from 3D. Girlfriend enjoyed it especially for the scenery and Clooney, but was hoping things would have been different witht he story. Her Dad thought it was meh but he thinks every movie needs action 24/7. I thought it was great. Loved the experience, scenery, music, and enjoyed the story and thought it didn't hinder anything.
He didn't think there was enough action?

 
Just got back from it with the girlfriend and her Dad who was visiting. We saw it in non 3D/Imax because we both get sick from 3D. Girlfriend enjoyed it especially for the scenery and Clooney, but was hoping things would have been different witht he story. Her Dad thought it was meh but he thinks every movie needs action 24/7. I thought it was great. Loved the experience, scenery, music, and enjoyed the story and thought it didn't hinder anything.
He didn't think there was enough action?
:lmao:

 
Just got back from it with the girlfriend and her Dad who was visiting. We saw it in non 3D/Imax because we both get sick from 3D. Girlfriend enjoyed it especially for the scenery and Clooney, but was hoping things would have been different witht he story. Her Dad thought it was meh but he thinks every movie needs action 24/7. I thought it was great. Loved the experience, scenery, music, and enjoyed the story and thought it didn't hinder anything.
He didn't think there was enough action?
Its tough to see movies with him, basically if its not the Avengers or the Expendables its going to be a yawner for him. Anything story intense orientated has one at all, loses him quickly. He is a pretty shallow dude that goes the superficial route. The world is all about his image.

 
I thought it was ok. Effects were good, but didn't stand out to me that much compared to everything else out there. I dunno, as someone who's played a lot of videogames the style wasn't as "OMFG" to me. Those first person shots are apparently a big deal in a movie setting, but they're used all the time in gaming cutscenes. It actually kind of reminded me of the beginning of the first Bioshock game. Granted, that was awesome, but it was like 7 years ago so it's not really some new thing.

 
I think the acting, direction, and cinematography were all excellent in this movie.

I didn't think the story was super cliche, although I honestly was wondering if she was just going to die and that was it. It should have happened that way, but since it's an American movie there has to be a happy ending.

 
I think the acting, direction, and cinematography were all excellent in this movie.

I didn't think the story was super cliche, although I honestly was wondering if she was just going to die and that was it. It should have happened that way, but since it's an American movie there has to be a happy ending.
It had a happy ending?

 
FreeBaGeL said:
I thought it was ok. Effects were good, but didn't stand out to me that much compared to everything else out there. I dunno, as someone who's played a lot of videogames the style wasn't as "OMFG" to me. Those first person shots are apparently a big deal in a movie setting, but they're used all the time in gaming cutscenes. It actually kind of reminded me of the beginning of the first Bioshock game. Granted, that was awesome, but it was like 7 years ago so it's not really some new thing.
I thought it was exactly like the intro video to BioShock from the Big Daddy pov when they used it. Also it felt like they borrowed a lot from the begining of Mass Effect 2. Also much of the music was similar or worse than that.
 
Saw it in 3D, not IMAX 3D. Sounds like I should have gone for the IMAX.

I don't think I'll be watching it again, though. Movie seemed very similar to Avatar -- super basic, cliched story, giving us the minimum amount of plot to let the special effects shine through. The effects were outstanding, but I don't think (like Avatar) I'll have any desire to watch this movie when it's on TV in a few years.
Really can't think of a worse movie to compare it to. What exactly was cliche?
Just another movie about astronauts getting caught in space because the Space Shuttle gets wrecked by space debris. If you've seen it once you've seen it a million times.

 
Another movie that Generation Meh poo-pooh's. Some people are impossible to impress, I guess.

It was terrific and a technical marvel.

 
Watched it a few days ago and thought it was decent. Loved the visuals in 3D and I originally was expecting the movie to have some long dull parts but I found it interesting throughout.

Not a movie that I'd enjoy watching more than once and is better suited for a theater sized screen.

 
There are a lot of thematic angles to this movie that allow for multiple viewings.

You could look at it as a simple journey from childhood, through adolescence, to adulthood. Ryan starts off literally connected by an (umbilical) cord to her "parent". Then she moves to adolescence where she performs the tasks that have been taught to her. Finally, she achieves adulthood by being able to handle the situation on her own, synthesizing her past and improvising her rescue.

Or

It's symbolic of Buddhist thought (of which I know nothing about other than what I can glean from Wiki). In fact, the only way that the Buddhist angle could have been made more obvious would have been if the statue that Cuarón fixated on in the Chinese capsule had had a neon sign above it saying "This is Buddha". From what I can gather, the film seems to have basic elements of Samsara which is "defined as the continual repetitive cycle of birth and death that arises from ordinary beings' grasping and fixating on a self and experiences. Specifically, samsara refers to the process of cycling through one rebirth after another within the six realms of existence, where each realm can be understood as physical realm or a psychological state characterized by a particular type of suffering. "


The teachings on the Four Noble Truths are regarded as central to the teachings of Buddhism, and are said to provide a conceptual framework for Buddhist thought. These four truths explain the nature of dukkha (suffering, anxiety, unsatisfactoriness), its causes, and how it can be overcome. The four truths are:
-The truth of dukkha (suffering, anxiety, unsatisfactoriness)
-The truth of the origin of dukkha
-The truth of the cessation of dukkha
-The truth of the path leading to the cessation of dukkha

The first truth explains the nature of dukkha. Dukkha is commonly translated as “suffering”, “anxiety”, “unsatisfactoriness”, “unease”, etc., and it is said to have the following three aspects:
-The obvious suffering of physical and mental illness, growing old, and dying.
-The anxiety or stress of trying to hold onto things that are constantly changing.
-A subtle dissatisfaction pervading all forms of life, due to the fact that all forms of life are changing, impermanent and without any inner core or substance. On this level, the term indicates a lack of satisfaction, a sense that things never measure up to our expectations or standards.[e]

The second truth is that the origin of dukkha can be known. Within the context of the four noble truths, the origin of dukkha is commonly explained as craving (Pali: tanha) conditioned by ignorance (Pali: avijja). On a deeper level, the root cause of dukkha is identified as ignorance (Pali: avijja) of the true nature of things. The third noble truth is that the complete cessation of dukkha is possible, and the fourth noble truth identifies a path to this cessation.

Ryan seems to follow this path.

Or

It can be seen as a straight religious awakening, moving from chaos, to logic, to salvation through faith (eeeny, meeny, miney, moe).

Or (and this one is a stretch)

It's a criticism of western civilization as when Ryan is on the American space shuttle her life is chaos, then when she's in the Russian ship it's "by the book", but when the reaches the Chinese capsule it all evens out because she finds peace.

Anyway. I loved it and am anxious to see it again.

 
I thought it was ok. Effects were good, but didn't stand out to me that much compared to everything else out there. I dunno, as someone who's played a lot of videogames the style wasn't as "OMFG" to me. Those first person shots are apparently a big deal in a movie setting, but they're used all the time in gaming cutscenes. It actually kind of reminded me of the beginning of the first Bioshock game. Granted, that was awesome, but it was like 7 years ago so it's not really some new thing.
I thought it was exactly like the intro video to BioShock from the Big Daddy pov when they used it. Also it felt like they borrowed a lot from the begining of Mass Effect 2. Also much of the music was similar or worse than that.
That's like saying Titanic was a lot like when I drowned my Weeble Wobbles in their houseboat in the bathtub when I was a kid.

 
Another movie that Generation Meh poo-pooh's. Some people are impossible to impress, I guess.

It was terrific and a technical marvel.
IMHO, a product of stim 24/7/365. Like that thread discussing the downside of too much internet pron- it can become almost impossible to get it up for the good stuff.

 
Andy Dufresne said:
[excerpt from great post above]

Or

It can be seen as a straight religious awakening, moving from chaos, to logic, to salvation through faith (eeeny, meeny, miney, moe).
To me, Dr. Stone's story is clearly one of re-birth (born again, in religious vernacular). I found it to be a spiritual re-birth, but perhaps that is my take-away based on my own background and worldview.

Or

It can be seen as a humanist manifesto of sorts. There is no salvation in the heavens. There is a Christian icon in the Russian ship; a Buddhist one in the Chinese ship. Neither place provides safety, and are both destroyed (more symbolism: by the debris from other "heavenly" objects). Stone only finds salvation when she reaches Earth.

 
It can be seen as a humanist manifesto of sorts. There is no salvation in the heavens. There is a Christian icon in the Russian ship; a Buddhist one in the Chinese ship. Neither place provides safety, and are both destroyed (more symbolism: by the debris from other "heavenly" objects). Stone only finds salvation when she reaches Earth.
Sort of. She did make it back to earth in the Chinese capsule.

But continuing the religious theme, she was "born again" after being "baptized" in the lake. And I like that she said "Thank you" when she reached the beach. Who do you suppose she was thanking?

 
It can be seen as a humanist manifesto of sorts. There is no salvation in the heavens. There is a Christian icon in the Russian ship; a Buddhist one in the Chinese ship. Neither place provides safety, and are both destroyed (more symbolism: by the debris from other "heavenly" objects). Stone only finds salvation when she reaches Earth.
Sort of. She did make it back to earth in the Chinese capsule.

But continuing the religious theme, she was "born again" after being "baptized" in the lake. And I like that she said "Thank you" when she reached the beach. Who do you suppose she was thanking?
her agent for getting her a point on the back end

 
It can be seen as a humanist manifesto of sorts. There is no salvation in the heavens. There is a Christian icon in the Russian ship; a Buddhist one in the Chinese ship. Neither place provides safety, and are both destroyed (more symbolism: by the debris from other "heavenly" objects). Stone only finds salvation when she reaches Earth.
Sort of. She did make it back to earth in the Chinese capsule.

But continuing the religious theme, she was "born again" after being "baptized" in the lake. And I like that she said "Thank you" when she reached the beach. Who do you suppose she was thanking?
Science for creating the technology that got her back to Earth safely.

 
Loved the movie. Saw it in regular 3D because that's what was playing when I was able to go, may go see it again in IMAX.

The plot was basic, the acting wasn't anything special but I friggin love survival movies and I love space. The debris silently hitting and destroying the space stations was thrilling.

 
It can be seen as a humanist manifesto of sorts. There is no salvation in the heavens. There is a Christian icon in the Russian ship; a Buddhist one in the Chinese ship. Neither place provides safety, and are both destroyed (more symbolism: by the debris from other "heavenly" objects). Stone only finds salvation when she reaches Earth.
Sort of. She did make it back to earth in the Chinese capsule.

But continuing the religious theme, she was "born again" after being "baptized" in the lake. And I like that she said "Thank you" when she reached the beach. Who do you suppose she was thanking?
you're right about the capsule, but didn't the larger station get destroyed? can't remember all the details.

my take, as mentioned, was that it was a spiritual rebirth, so i thought she was thanking God.

 
It can be seen as a humanist manifesto of sorts. There is no salvation in the heavens. There is a Christian icon in the Russian ship; a Buddhist one in the Chinese ship. Neither place provides safety, and are both destroyed (more symbolism: by the debris from other "heavenly" objects). Stone only finds salvation when she reaches Earth.
Sort of. She did make it back to earth in the Chinese capsule.

But continuing the religious theme, she was "born again" after being "baptized" in the lake. And I like that she said "Thank you" when she reached the beach. Who do you suppose she was thanking?
Science for creating the technology that got her back to Earth safely.
I thought she was thanking Matt (Clooney's character). That was the most positive-thinking dude I've ever seen in a movie.

 
It can be seen as a humanist manifesto of sorts. There is no salvation in the heavens. There is a Christian icon in the Russian ship; a Buddhist one in the Chinese ship. Neither place provides safety, and are both destroyed (more symbolism: by the debris from other "heavenly" objects). Stone only finds salvation when she reaches Earth.
Sort of. She did make it back to earth in the Chinese capsule.

But continuing the religious theme, she was "born again" after being "baptized" in the lake. And I like that she said "Thank you" when she reached the beach. Who do you suppose she was thanking?
Science for creating the technology that got her back to Earth safely.
I thought she was thanking Matt (Clooney's character). That was the most positive-thinking dude I've ever seen in a movie.
I thought I was being rhetorical. I think she's thanking God.

 
It can be seen as a humanist manifesto of sorts. There is no salvation in the heavens. There is a Christian icon in the Russian ship; a Buddhist one in the Chinese ship. Neither place provides safety, and are both destroyed (more symbolism: by the debris from other "heavenly" objects). Stone only finds salvation when she reaches Earth.
Sort of. She did make it back to earth in the Chinese capsule.

But continuing the religious theme, she was "born again" after being "baptized" in the lake. And I like that she said "Thank you" when she reached the beach. Who do you suppose she was thanking?
Science for creating the technology that got her back to Earth safely.
I thought she was thanking Matt (Clooney's character). That was the most positive-thinking dude I've ever seen in a movie.
I thought I was being rhetorical. I think she's thanking God.
Thanking God never occurred to me. Matt kept her calm, gave her instructions, told her she would make it, and even made an appearance in the daydream sequence which snapped her out of her suicide attempt and caused her to discover the solution.

To me it's more likely she's thanking the guy who got her through it than turning religious and thanking God.

 
I will be seeing this in the theater.

Question - Is it worth it to see in 3D? The only movie I've really thought was worth the 3D was Avatar. Does the 3D meet that standard?
This is the first movie I've seen in 3D, and I was pretty skeptical of it going in, but I thought it added quite a bit. Seems like the perfect movie for 3D to me.
I did see this and it lived up to expectations. I did see this in 2D due to timing and can see how 3D would have improved it, but absolutely no complaints.

 
3D has somehow gotten a lot better this year.

I've seen both Caroline and now Gravity in 3D this past month and enjoyed it quite a bit. I left without a headache which is a nice departure.

I think it's worth it to see in 3D.

 
It can be seen as a humanist manifesto of sorts. There is no salvation in the heavens. There is a Christian icon in the Russian ship; a Buddhist one in the Chinese ship. Neither place provides safety, and are both destroyed (more symbolism: by the debris from other "heavenly" objects). Stone only finds salvation when she reaches Earth.
Sort of. She did make it back to earth in the Chinese capsule.But continuing the religious theme, she was "born again" after being "baptized" in the lake. And I like that she said "Thank you" when she reached the beach. Who do you suppose she was thanking?
Science for creating the technology that got her back to Earth safely.
I thought she was thanking Matt (Clooney's character). That was the most positive-thinking dude I've ever seen in a movie.
:no: I think "in real life" Kowalski would not be towing her around in space but kill her to get get some extra oxygen for himself. It would be more awesome if Sandra Bullock's character does something unethical or controversial to stay alive.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pretty magnanimous of George Clooney to play Astronaut George Clooney.

Worst of the Oscar contenders I've seen this year, by a good stretch. 2.5/10.

 
Disagree as I only saw it in good 'ol 2D and it was still an excellent movie with great VFX.

Lead pipe lock to take home the Best VFX Oscar this year.

 
movie sucked.
Wife and I thought this too. What a I missing? All this critical acclaim why? The filming of it/effects are cool. No idea how they make it look so real. Beyond that? Eesh.
Alfonso was given absolute freedom to spend gazillions and all the time in the world to make this movie. Apparently Hollywood admires him for setting such an excellent example coz the guy has been sweeping all the Best Director awards.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top