RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,770
Posts: 5,434,143
Members: 24,840
Currently online: 599
Newest member: Reece101

TrekToday headlines

The Art of John Alvin Book Review
By: T'Bonz on Sep 23

Episode Four of The Red Shirt Diaries
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Star Trek: The Compendium Review
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Orci Drops Rangers Project
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Retro Review: Image in the Sand
By: Michelle on Sep 20

Star Trek: Shadows Of Tyranny Casting Call
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

USS Vengeance And More Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

Trek 3 To Being Shooting Next Year
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

Trek Messenger Bag
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

Star Trek Live In Concert In Australia
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science Fiction & Fantasy

Science Fiction & Fantasy Farscape, Babylon 5, Star Wars, Firefly, vampires, genre books and film.

View Poll Results: Grading
A+ 35 42.68%
A 28 34.15%
A- 10 12.20%
B+ 6 7.32%
B 2 2.44%
B- 0 0%
C+ 1 1.22%
C 0 0%
C- 0 0%
D 0 0%
F 0 0%
Voters: 82. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 14 2013, 09:29 PM   #61
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Gravity - Review and Discussion Thread

Good movie. It went by quickly, too. That said I really dislike watching a film in 3D and I will avoid it whenever possible. It really bothers my eyes.

If there are technical flaws to this film (and I'm sure there are) I didn't spot them. It really conveyed that sense of how messed up you could be in space with no gravity to anchor you. There were moments that really creeped me out. If there was a strain of credibility it was how anything that could go wrong pretty much did but, of course, thats dramatic licence.

I give it an A.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 14 2013, 11:31 PM   #62
publiusr
Commodore
 
Re: Gravity - Review and Discussion Thread

davejames wrote: View Post
Trekker4747 wrote: View Post
The "Clooney lets go" scene still bugs me because it just doesn't make any physical sense. Not only does Clooney letting go cause him to float away but it causes her to float BACK towards ISS! The scene makes no sense. Once they were stopped they were STOPPED!
I get the impression the director was simply slowing the moment down to a crawl for dramatic effect, and that Clooney was actually meant to be pulling away a lot faster than it appeared.

Unfortunately they slowed things down SO much that it effectively looked like his momentum had stopped completely.

Which, yeah, just looked very weird.
I'm going to say that the structure was spinning just a bit, so that centrifugal/centripetal forces were at work--or maybe a small oxygen leak venting him back...
publiusr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 14 2013, 11:33 PM   #63
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Gravity - Review and Discussion Thread

I went ot see this this afternoon and came away with two distinct impressions. The first is that this is a good movie. It plays as contemporary drama (much like Apollo 13), but technically it could be seen as science fiction since it's proposing a "what if" scenario for the characters to deal with. Sandra Bullock rocks (and looks great) as astronaut specialist Ryan Stone. But the real major component of this film is how outer space, even in simple Earth orbit, is a hellishly dangerous place and completely alien to the rest of us who've never known anything but existence rooted to the ground. I'm sure there must be technical and scientific liberties taken in this film (there always are), but I can't really spot them. And it doesn't matter because it wouldn't change a thing in terms of the story being told and how it's told. It's been glimpsed before, but this film nails the idea that outer space and space travel bears little resemblance to how it's usually depicted in science fiction and that's including the better efforts. I came away from this giving it an "A" rating. Now that said, the film wasn't a total win, but what bothered me had nothing to do with the film itself. This afternnon reaffirmed that I really dislike watching a film in 3D because it really bothers my eyes. In addition the 3D picture doesn't actually look that good to me and often enough the colours all look muted to some extent and the overall picture seems a bit darker than usual as if someone turned the brightness down a bit too much. As such I will avoid seeing films in 3D whenever possible because it taints the experience for me. I give the film an "A" and the 3D viewing experience a "C."
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 15 2013, 08:35 PM   #64
Sheep
Vice Admiral
 
Sheep's Avatar
 
Location: Chicago
Re: Gravity - Review and Discussion Thread

Overall I loved this movie even if a few plot points were a bit forced.

Anyone else see this in Dbox? If there was ever a movie that screamed "Dbox", this was it. The sensation of weightlessness along with all the explode-y parts was fantastic, subtle where it needed to be and pretty intense in other spots.

There was a 3D Dbox showing that didn't have good show times for us, but I'm fairly certain I would've lost my dinner if I had attended a showing with both gimmicks in place. I might try to catch a 3D showing since it looked to me like the 3D would be fantastic here.
__________________
Hating the anti-intellectual movement since before it was actually a movement.
Sheep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 15 2013, 08:41 PM   #65
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Gravity - Review and Discussion Thread

Seeing things being wrecked and blown apart in total silence was creepy as hell and really added to the sense of danger. You wouldn't even have that perverse sensory feedback of hearing stuff coming at you like when you're in the midst of a catastrophe on Earth.

The one technical aspect that strikes me as odd now is being pretty certain satelittes are in much higher orbits than the ISS or space shuttle missions. If that's so then that flying debris should never have posed a real threat to the astronauts. But, of course, this is overly dramatized storytelling so creative licence is invoked.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 15 2013, 08:51 PM   #66
CaptainCanada
Admiral
 
CaptainCanada's Avatar
 
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Re: Gravity - Review and Discussion Thread

Warped9 wrote: View Post
The one technical aspect that strikes me as odd now is being pretty certain satelittes are in much higher orbits than the ISS or space shuttle missions. If that's so then that flying debris should never have posed a real threat to the astronauts. But, of course, this is overly dramatized storytelling so creative licence is invoked.
They greatly simplified the locations of the satellites/space stations for dramatic effect (from one of Cuaron's interviews, an earlier version of the script accounted for some of this, but they found that it was too much exposition and was just weighing the story down).
__________________
"I'm a white male, age 18 to 49. Everyone listens to me, no matter how dumb my suggestions are!"

- Homer Simpson
CaptainCanada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 15 2013, 09:27 PM   #67
DarthTom
Fleet Admiral
 
DarthTom's Avatar
 
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Re: Gravity - Review and Discussion Thread

^^^

You have to wonder why Neil DeGrasse Tyson had such a hard on for this movie to identify so many nitpicks? As compared to say Trek which is riddled with them.
DarthTom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 01:00 AM   #68
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Gravity - Review and Discussion Thread

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Is the film also in HFR? That would be awesome.
I'm happy to say I don't think Cuaron is interested in HFR; it also goes against his preference to always originate on film (he only shot this digitally because he thought there would be a grain issue if he originated on film and converted. The only stuff shot on film is at the end of the movie, and it WAS done on 65mm stock.) While HFR was originally a film-based process called Showscan by Doug Trumbull, I don't think anybody has used that for anything other than some short films in the 80s and some special venue stuff.

Back on GRAVITY: the issue of data management for HFR would have made this thing implode. As much as he and his DP wanted to finish at 4K, they just couldn't due to time and cost constraints. HFR would have effectively been as big or bigger a time and money hit than finishing at 4K.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 17 2013, 07:23 PM   #69
Gaith
Rear Admiral
 
Gaith's Avatar
 
Location: Washington, DC
Re: Gravity - Review and Discussion Thread

Myasishchev wrote: View Post
Until Kowalski mentioned the possibility of satellite removal (and after the movie, when I remembered until 2007 there were still dumbasses testing ASATs on actual orbital targets, which is like testing a nuke over a city), I thought Russia was at war with PRChina (or maybe us), which gave my first viewing a real Abyss-like quality that I appreciated.
Yeah, I wondered that too, if the Russian issue wasn't a secret satellite gone wrong, and if Ryan would finally find a safe pod to get back to Earth on... only to see all major North American cities light up with nukes. Stealth Terminator interquel alert!

A fantastic and utterly unique movie-going experience, though all the crying over her dead daughter was a bit awkward to sit through right next to my rather more sensitive mother. And it was fun to see her duck in her seat during one of the debris collisions, both sequences of which were maybe the most terrifying things I've ever seen in a theater.

I was expecting Clooney to make one final contribution via radio, so I admit I fell for his "return". The whole melodrama aspect was a tad overcooked, and I could've done without the "no one ever taught me how to pray" bit (uh... I've never tried it myself, but I don't think there's anything to it, really), but I still have to go with an A- overall. It'll definitely stick with me far longer than STID already has.
Gaith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 17 2013, 07:36 PM   #70
CaptainCanada
Admiral
 
CaptainCanada's Avatar
 
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Re: Gravity - Review and Discussion Thread

DarthTom wrote: View Post
^^^

You have to wonder why Neil DeGrasse Tyson had such a hard on for this movie to identify so many nitpicks? As compared to say Trek which is riddled with them.
I imagine because the movie feels much closer to reality than Star Trek, which is obviously an outright fantasy, so any diversions from reality become more obvious.
__________________
"I'm a white male, age 18 to 49. Everyone listens to me, no matter how dumb my suggestions are!"

- Homer Simpson
CaptainCanada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 17 2013, 07:51 PM   #71
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Gravity - Review and Discussion Thread

Clooney's return fooled me for only a short bit until he opened the pod door while Ryan didn't have her helmet on. Right there I knew she had to be hallucinating.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 17 2013, 11:24 PM   #72
Bisz
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Gravity - Review and Discussion Thread

A

Highly recommended to see in IMAX 3D.
__________________
"In general, living kills you..."
Bisz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 18 2013, 05:01 PM   #73
Argus Skyhawk
Commodore
 
Argus Skyhawk's Avatar
 
Location: Argus Skyhawk
Re: Gravity - Review and Discussion Thread

So, do you suppose this super-feminist review of the film is real or just a parody (or perhaps a practical joke)? I can't tell. Here is a small portion, but the whole thing reads like this:


Stars as powerful as Ms. Bullock and Mr. Clooney deserve much of the blame for these kinds of shameful representations in a tentpole blockbuster produced by the studio with the most masculine-sounding name, Warner Brothers. But we must not neglect the film’s author, Alfonso Cuaron. GRAVITY simply marks yet another deceptively misogynistic entry in his filmography. Cuaron’s films are bursting with themes appropriated from the filmmaker’s inherently paternalistic and Catholic Mexican background.... Also consider the wanton, teen-boys-in-puberty wand-wielding in HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN or that a male is the deliverer of humanity’s future in the aptly titled CHILDREN OF MEN. And let’s only mention in passing his grotesque, mannered and cloying adaptations of A LITTLE PRINCESS and GREAT EXPECTATIONS.

However, Mr. Cuaron’s greatest cinematic crime against women is surely GRAVITY. It’s a revenge film, of sorts. He made the film coming off of a bitter divorce, and the final product is dependent on juxtaposing powerful male symbols against the ineffectual Dr. Stone. It’s littered with reminders of male dominance over the feminine, from the phallic spacecraft and equipment to its ham-fisted emphasis on masculine religious symbols such as St. Christopher and Buddha. Mr. Cuaron stoops to even include Marvin the Martian–with his absurdly large gun–as a holy talisman of sorts. You can practically hear Mr. Cuaron cackle as it becomes obvious there is no escape for Dr. Stone.
__________________
I thought I had found everlasting joy and happiness, but when I clicked the link, it just took me to a Rick Astley video.
Argus Skyhawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 18 2013, 05:50 PM   #74
Harvey
Admiral
 
Harvey's Avatar
 
Re: Gravity - Review and Discussion Thread

That article is garbage, beginning with the opening line, which has a strong air of the madness of theorists like Luce Irigaray to it:

Forget Neil deGrasse Tyson’s paternalistic “Man of Science” condescension.
Or even more incendiary (and hyperbolic):

the most feminist event in Hollywood history came when John Landis decapitated Vic Morrow — thus accidentally emasculating the white male stereotype he was clumsily lampooning and exploiting in the tawdry TWILIGHT ZONE: THE MOVIE.
Or her insane conclusion:

GRAVITY is often compared with 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, but at least Stanley Kubrick’s film, with its cavalcade of jutting phallic structures and nearly all-male cast, is upfront and honest about its masculino-fascist viewpoint. When the astronaut Dave returns to Earth, it’s as a massive superman in his infancy. The implications are clear: The masculine forces of the universe have ordained a male to govern over Earth and the immediate cosmos. In Mr. Cuaron’s film, our heroine is harried into accepting domesticity.
"Masculino-fascist?" I have no idea if this article was intended as parody or not, but it's hard for me to read it any other way.
__________________
"This begs explanation." - de Forest Research on Star Trek

My blog: Star Trek Fact Check.
Harvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 18 2013, 05:57 PM   #75
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Gravity - Review and Discussion Thread

^^ Just reading those snippets of that article and it screams of a seriously fucked up individual.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:46 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.