Quote:

---

Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:

Well, there's more where that came from - I've been concerned about Kessler Syndrome for some time now...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome

See, when we shifted our space program from actual space exploration to corporate buttsucking (cause the shuttle was NO use beyond LEO and satellite placement & maintenence) people seemed to forget how short-sighted corps are, maximum profit right now and damn the longterm consequences, right ?

But it bothers me, cause I dun wanna look at the stars, I want to GO there, I want OFF this damn rock, out to the black and not coming back, yanno ?

Both me and Chris are also fans of an animated series based around resolving the Kessler problem, called Planetes, which while dated in its animation style, is remarkably "hard" in a sci-fi sense, as well it should be cause one of the primary consultants for it was NASA.

Ergo, the trailer for Gravity certainly caught my eye, this is a real and growing problem, the amount of "junk" laying about in satellite orbits, both from corporate apathy, and from all those spy satellites we're pretending so hard not to have, and a nightmare scenario like this isn't just possible, it's all too likely - the international space station has already been bounced once by debris, and satellites from both Russia and Ecuador have also been hit.

-Frem

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
If anyone sees this and has an opinion...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ecgordon:
Gravity can really get you down, sometimes in more ways than one.

http://templetongate.net/gravity.htm

I'm prepared to be blasted for my opinion. Hopefully it won't be as severe as the damage I saw in the movie.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ecgordon:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
If anyone sees this and has an opinion...

---

Scroll up to my post just above yours. I already gave you my opinion.

---

Select to view spoiler:

Select to view spoiler:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
I saw Gravity yesterday. As stated above, I had my doubts. And I'll say right off that yes, there are non-realistic short cuts the writers took to keep the action moving. I could list them in detail, but I don't see the need to nitpick. Of course short cuts need to be made in order to bring any story to the screen, and nothing here offended me over in an overwhelming way.

OK, except you know how the Bad Guys are really bad shots and somehow miss the Good Guys even when there's no way they could have missed? Turns out that space debris is the same. :/

Also, the writers really don't get conservation of momentum.

Anyway, but da-amn! I can't imagine a more visually interesting and fully engaging movie about being in space. It was gorgeous and if I didn't believe all aspects of the plot, my eyes believed what they saw. So beautiful to watch the view from space for an hour and a half. I will definitely go to this one again, and again I'll pay extra for the 3D and the good sound effects. Just absolutely beautiful.

I am an unwilling fan of this one, but I am now a fan. My goodness, the length of the shots. I was wondering for a good 10-15 minutes (or more?) if they meant to make the entire film without a single break. They didn't, but it went beyond Children of Men as far as that's concerned. I love how the camera and the actors and the ships danced together for minutes and minutes on end.

Also, Bullock and Clooney managed to not be annoying. Yay!

Select to view spoiler:

---

The misdirection with Clooney showing up was brilliant. The audience cheered when he came back, and when it was revealed to be a hallucination there was total silence.

Another kudos: the throwback to Wall-E and his use of an fire extinguisher as means of moving through space. They got the momentum right with that one!

---

*---------------------------------------*
The French Revolution would have never happened if Marie Antoinette had just given every peasant an iPhone.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THESOMNAMBULIST:
A great film that doesn't impede it's journey with extraneous plot and hyperbolic characterisation. It's a fantastic visual and audio achievement and a celebration of what cinema can do.

A landmark film of the 21st century and one that deserves it's place in the hall of fame. Great work by all involved.


I wasn't a fan of Cuarón's Children of Men because the camera work in that, while impressive and extremely clever, was far too self conscious and detracted from the basic story. (Which wasn't all that in the end).

With Gravity all the camera work and technical savvy works seamlessly with the story.


°...Well here I am.°

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by cljohnston108:
But it's painfully obvious that they didn't listen to any mission audio or read any transcripts, because not one line of dialogue sounds remotely similar to anything uttered over the space-to-ground frequency. . . . Maybe it's that I generally dislike English-language films written & directed by those for whom English is a second language, because even though English words are coming out of the actor's mouths, it still feels like badly-translated dubbing.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
I'm torn. The reviews make this sound like exactly the kind of movie that draws me to the pricey theaters of Times Square and their full 3D extra large screens with sexy sound effects and stadium seating, etc. But the previews I've seen were just lame. Sandra Bullock is spinning in space. OK. I can't make myself care. Spin away honey and have fun.

If anyone sees this and has an opinion as to whether there's plot and characters interesting enough to give all the pretty pretty space shots meaning, please share with as few spoilers as possible. I'm inclined to punt on this one, but I'd hate to miss out if it's actually good.

I admit, I find Bullock and Clooney annoying. That doesn't help.

*---------------------------------------*
The French Revolution would have never happened if Marie Antoinette had just given every peasant an iPhone.

---