User Reviews

Visually, Gravity is unlike what we have seen on a cinema screen before and arguably it has one of the best uses of 3D in a movie. The setting is spectacular and the premise is inventive.

On every other front,the movie falters badly. Once you get over the initial wonderment surrounding the beautiful visuals, the chinks start showing up. Overall the script is very weak. Apparently the Russians bomb their own satellite by mistake and the debris is flying around at bullet speed, smashing everything in its way. Now upon hearing an emergency evacuation request, Kowalski (who has been wasting his precious thrusters all this while, floating around, spouting inane dialogs) orders Ryan (Bullock) to disengage from whatever she is repairing. Apparently Ryan has six months of training (only) and fails to be responsive and then the trouble starts.

We come to know that Ryan has some head issues surrounding the death of her daughter as the writer felt a dire need to give Ryan some sort of existential problem in her head to make her character feel more human. Apart from this minor bit, nothing is presented in terms of character development for any other protagonists. Who is Kowalski? Who are the people who died in their space pods? No idea.

Then the whole manufactured sense of suspense. Every time Ryan gets anywhere near the Air Lock (she does it three times), the debris presents itself like on cue every single time. Then a fire in a space station, then running out of Oxygen, then something then something. It's fine that they used some standard tricks but it all seems so manufactured and mechanical by the numbers suspense.

Also at times I couldn't shrug off the feeling that what they are showing on screen is not actually factual. Do the controls on various international space stations have their national languages on them? Really? Maybe they do but seems hard to believe when 20$ phones are built with custom User interfaces with changeable languages, why have your billion dollar space stations with Russian or Chinese characters on your buttons totally beats me. Oh manufactured suspense owing to the whole can't-understand-this-thing machinery.

The the dialogs when they come are nothing to write home about. Ryan has a hallucinatory moment when she talks to herself following some Mandarin Chatter on the radio which is cringe worthy. I wont even mention the in-your-face allegory about rebirth which is there for to make the movie seem deeper than it is.

So what works for the movie? It's a cross between an IMAX documentary with some suspense elements thrown it which makes it look path breaking.

But it's not. Not a bad watch but nothing to rave about either.

In segments, Gravity has marvelous special effects--truly a remarkable achievement. The weak parts of the movie are the contrivances that link these segments together, along with unbelievably bad dialog. (Maybe someone will be brave enough to register the contrivances formally as "goofs" here on IMDb?)

No way could astronauts from the shuttle ever reach the International Space Station, but Gravity asks us to believe both this could happen and that an astronaut could then go on to reach a Chinese space station, too. These objects just don't orbit anywhere--ANYWHERE!!!!--near close enough to each other to make these events even remotely possible. Not only are their orbits vastly different in altitude and trajectory, it would be highly unlikely for them all to be near each other in the same orbit. Oh, I almost forgot to mention that Gravity also asks us to believe that the orbit of the space debris intersected with that of the shuttle and was synchronized with it.

No way could Ryan Stone figure out how to operate a Soyuz capsule in a few seconds of reading the manuals. No way could Ryan Stone figure out how to operate the Chinese capsule just by poking around.

Of lesser failures: Space debris traveling 20,000 miles an hour relative to an observer is not going to be visible except *possibly* as an indistinct cloud that passes by so fast the "observer" won't know what hit them.

For all of the CGI effort, I had hoped the Earth would look more realistic and (naturally) beautiful.

In closing, the special effects were great but the weak story relied on too many absurd contrivances and the script contained no redeeming dialog (sorry, George). On balance: 7 stars.

This movie is absolutely stunning from the get go. I can't remember ever being pulled into a film so completely and thoroughly, and I don't think I've seen a more beautiful film. Its a pretty intense ninety minutes, with Bullock's character constantly battling one catastrophe after another, and all of it is amazing to see. The plot is pretty straight forward (see it, I won't talk about that), but its the way they pull it off that makes it absolutely worth seeing. Thanks to some incredible CGI, great direction, and solid acting, the movie is an absolute must see. I'm normally not a fan of 3D movies (I hate wearing the stupid glasses), but this movie uses it wonderfully and to great effect. I would strongly recommend seeing it in an IMAX theatre if you get the chance - if there was ever a movie made for 3d IMAX, this is it.

Big science fiction films are all the rage this year (Oblivion, Elysium, Pacific Rim...) and Gravity is finally one worth watching. From the trailers I had no idea what to expect. George Clooney and Sandra Bullock floating around in space for two hours eventually became my best guess. I rushed the film at the Toronto International Film Festival and when someone said they were showing it in 3D, I was half tempted to leave the line. I hate 3D movies, they give me awful headaches and I don't see the point of them. As soon as Gravity started, I changed my mind.

The 3D definitely adds something to the film. The opening shot of earth and space is absolutely beautiful. The film starts up fast enough. Sandra Bullock and George Clooney are both out doing repairs on the spaceship when Houston warns them the Russians blew up their own satellite and accidentally destroyed every other satellite there is. Debris is coming their way and they have to get back to earth as soon as possible. Of course, from the trailers we see that debris does his them, and without a spaceship they must find another way home.

George Clooney basically plays George Clooney in a space suit (a funny self-loving character also often played by Robert Downey Jr) and Sandra Bullock plays a doctor who was trained a few months for this mission only. George gets very little screen time but Sandra shines throughout the whole film. Despite her being alone, I would say there is quite a lot of action in the film. She's alone out there and you feel you are too. The film takes you in space and it feels claustrophobic to be there. It keeps you on the edge of your seat the whole time. Throughout the film, you see Sandra's character growing as well. Not only is she trying to get back home, but she's finding the will to do so as well.

The film is a visual masterpiece. Yes there is a lot of CGI of course (basically everything you see on screen is fake) but it never felt like it. For once, the 3D definitely adds something to the experience. You get the depth of field you need to truly experience the movie and feel as through you're right there with Sandra. She gives an absolutely stunning performance, acting to absolutely nothing, yet always being right on the spot.

If you get a chance to see Gravity in theatres, go for it, especially if you see it in 3D (even if you usually hate 3D, believe me, it's worth it.) Alfonso Cuarón has outdone himself with this film, it's definitely a must see for sci-fi lovers.

When I saw the film in IMAX, the reviews on here were 98% positive. Hmmm...

Six things in honor of my six score:

1. I should say from the get-go that I'm a product of the 80's, so I have a different impression of Sandra Bullock and George Clooney than most people. To me, Sandra Bullock is a clumsy and silly lady who can occasionally drive a bus at high speeds. And George Clooney is that guy from "Facts of Life". They can act in other films, but some early work set their images in my mind. Sandra was a medical engineer? I think not. Why not Rachael Weisz or Tilda Swinton? How about Cate Blanchett? And for the guy, how about someone who seems like he can focus for longer than a minute or two?

2. The cinematography is wonderful, and it does get very suspenseful. I found myself holding my breath at times.

3. It goes from dead silence to eardrum-piercing in 2 seconds flat throughout the movie.

4. They spent over four years on this movie, and yet some things seemed incredulous. George was supposed to know so much about motion and gravitational pull, but couldn't be bothered to take of his backpack (or anything) and propel himself backwards towards Sandra even though he was at a dead stop. He didn't even attempt to use the propulsion to show that it was out.

5. The Chinese craft was already heading toward earth...how?

6. They kept banging into things very hard. This never seemed to modulate. Wouldn't somewhat smart people begin to learn to lessen the propulsion? Or did the guy who figured out that special effect go overboard in his demands for scenes? When Sandra would open a door to the crafts, she'd be thrown very hard against the side of the craft, and yet at no time did she let go...couldn't she have attached herself and then get thrown beyond the door and have to pull herself back? It just got repetitive and ridiculous.

But it's still a 6!

Two astronauts floating in space - how could that possibly be a concept for one of the most riveting films I have ever seen, and be deserving of the adjectives mentioned in this review's title? And yet Gravity is without doubt one of the most absorbing, don't-look-away-can't-look-away films I've seen for a long time. There are some films (good, entertaining films) that you just watch. Then there are those rare films which have the power to draw you in and make you forget you are WATCHING. Instead, you are EXPERIENCING. That's Gravity. Apart from the astonishing, beautiful and epic scale of the film, with directorial and photographic moments reminiscent of David Lean and Stanley Kubrick, the original script will keep you guessing all the way to the final frame of film. Both actors give solid, convincing performances, but Sandra Bullock has finally been given a part capable of revealing her real talent. Her character has real depth, and (by some truly brilliant directorial techniques), you become completely empathic with her... and when a space film gets the seal of authenticity from ISS astronauts and NASA, it can't be THAT bad!

Did those who've written glowing reviews of Gravity see the same movie I did? Look, I wanted to like this flick, I really did. And I don't want to rag on it, but if you're going to make a dramatic science thriller, you had better get it right or expect to catch it from the smart people. Despite the cosmic setting, the only star I can give Gravity is for the computer generated graphics.That said, this is not a movie for intellectuals and those of a scientific bent will be sorely disappointed. What made Ron Howard's Apollo 13 so gripping was its dramatic realism and superb acting. Unfortunately, none of those adjectives applies to Gravity, with the possible exception of some drama. However, for thinkers, effective drama requires an intellectual investment in the credibility of the story, the characters and the interaction between them. Intelligent humans need to believe that what is being depicted could actually happen. Unfortunately, the events depicted in Gravity are likely to alienate anyone with an above average IQ. Once one has acknowledged the impressive graphics, any anticipation of emotional investment is quickly dashed to smithereens by the unbelievably vapid and inane dialog. It is painfully obvious that someone with a double-digit scientific IQ appears to have awoken one morning and haphazardly decided to write a "space movie". The physics are off, the events highly improbable. The entire story demands a suspension of belief in reality. Worst of all, the dialog and interaction between the characters is so juvenile that anyone with a brain gets the immediate impression that the project is the product of sophomoric show-biz types who think that the way to move the product is to recycle hackneyed clichés, shiny objects and big explosions. Bullock's character, Dr. Ryan Stone, is so unprepared and emotionally disabled by adversity that it is impossible to believe that she would have been selected as a mission specialist. Yet, she manages to flit from one space wreck to another and yet another. She consults operation manuals in Russian and, later, Chinese, yet she is heard muttering "eeny meeny miney mo" while haphazardly pushing control buttons like some clueless chimpanzee. The space vehicle's communication equipment fails to pick up "Houston Control", yet, miraculously, is able to receive a bizarre Chinese comedy and howling dogs, which Bullock's character feels compelled to imitate. Clooney's character, Matt Kowalski, is such a clichéd hero that he is depicted as nonchalantly jesting with the hysterical Dr. Stone while he himself is drifting into a desperately life-ending situation. We are expected to believe that, despite having trained intimately together for this mission, these characters address each other by their formal titles and make clichéd announcements back to a non-responsive mission control. Kowalksi has waited until he's drifting to his death to ask where Dr. Stone is from and if she has any kids. Finally, director Cuaron makes a supremely lame attempt at cinematic iconography depicting Bullock floating in a fetal position, a la Kubrick's Space Odessey. And after having had such a bad day and having plunged to Earth in a flaming meteor-like reentry, Stone emerges, unscathed and barefoot mind you, from the ocean onto an idyllic, uninhabited beach like some primal human emerging from the sea. Now, I feel bad about feeling bad about this movie. And I respect Ms. Bullock and Mr. Clooney as actors. However, it is my humble opinion that actors must assume some responsibility for the roles they accept. This movie was so cringe-worthy that the only reason I sat through it was to see how ridiculous it would get. Alas, other than the black hole into whose abyss was irretrievably sucked away any hope I once had for discovering intelligent life in this movie, "Gravity" lacked gravitas.

There is a sensational and overwhelming power that Alfonso Cuarón's space thriller "Gravity" possesses and manages to sustain in its 90 minute run time. I think I left my jaw on the theater floor. There are four things in particular to credit for this occurrence. The first of which being co-writer and director Cuarón, who has constructed one of his finest outings. "Gravity" breathes in a way I haven't seen before and is probably one of the best technical marvels that cinema has offered in the past twenty years. Cuarón handles the film with absolute certainty, restraining himself from committing any science fiction bourgeois, and reinventing the genre in a miraculous execution.

I've never looked at the world of Cinematography with so much respect and adoration until I saw the works of Roger Deakins and now, firmly sitting next to him at the table as the most innovative and brilliant DP working today, Emmanuel Lubezki. We've all seen what he's accomplished in his Oscar-nominated works in "Children of Men," in which he was teamed up with Cuarón, and Terrence Malick's "The Tree of Life," both of which resulted in unimaginable losses. A 13-minute opening shot shows his abilities to capture the essence of the now, the feelings that life offers. Real life doesn't cut, Cuarón and Lubezki understand this. The liberties where he chooses to take us, even when we step inside from the cold, lonely edge of space, manages to turn this very simple tale into a full-fledged meditation session with the sooth sounds of composer Steven Price. Visual effects have never been put to better use than what you will witness in "Gravity." One of the few films I urge everyone to see on the biggest screen possible. The post-conversion in 3D, although cool at times, was a bit unneeded. It doesn't add to the depth and scope of Cuarón's dramatic endeavor, it actually undersells it as a cheap, blockbuster space movie. An IMAX screen, the largest you can find, with a sound system able to make your eardrums bleed, those are the basic requirements. I haven't been in this much awe of a film's quality and optics this since I saw "Terminator 2: Judgment Day" when I was six years old. "Avatar" and "Life of Pi" are great spectacles, but this will be revisited in years to come as the bench mark for modern day science fiction. It's this generation's "2001: A Space Odyssey."

Finally, I've had a childhood crush on Sandra Bullock since I feasted my eyes on those pretty browns driving a bus in "Speed" during the early 90's. This manifested into looking at her abilities as an actor with a skewed vision. She's hinted at this greatness I've felt she could achieve in films like "A Time to Kill," "Crash," and her Oscar-winning role in "The Blind Side." Sandra Bullock has finally realized her potential as a leading lady and taps into the very essence of the human spirit as Dr. Ryan Stone; a work that stands as her greatest endeavor and her gift to the silver screen. Natural, poised, and fully engulfed, Bullock is absolutely magnificent and in many ways, my favorite performance of the year so far. She rallies an emotional connection from the audience and demands things of herself that she hasn't done before. An Oscar-worthy work that should land her as a Best Actress nominee...and perhaps a winner.

George Clooney as Matt Kowalsky is exactly what you'd come to expect from the Oscar-winning producer and actor. He utilizes his wit and charm to be a lighter force of our dark tale, and is a perfect balance to Bullock's frantic demeanor. As aforementioned, Steven Price's musical work is tenderly utilized and precisely executed, building up lots of affectionate tones that may leave some audience members in tears. The script by Alfonso Cuarón and son Jonas Cuarón inhabit a rich texture of dialogue that aren't thrown in for the sake of breaking the silence. They aren't afraid to let the scenery speak for itself or to let the actors portray their emotions in mannerisms, but when they step away from that, everything connects beautifully.

"Gravity" is a rare breed. Simplistic but so refreshingly new. Visually, it will be studied for years to come, and thematically, will be revisited by the genre's most ardent enthusiasts. One of the best films of the year. I'll say, if you haven't watched the trailers and clips, continue to do so. Too much information.

While this is a visually beautiful film I didn't feel Sandra Bullock was successful in carrying the movie essentially alone. I didn't really root for her at all. The lost child back-story was cliché and the monologue towards the end when Sandra's character was telling Clooney's character to give the child a message wasn't even a little believable. The little interactions between George and Sandra were laughable, and not in the good way writers were intending. Maybe I was expecting too much. This film could easily qualify sir some sort of visual, sound or editing awards the performances do not even come close to capturing best picture or best actress awards, or nominations.

When I first opened my email to see a Klout Perk inviting me to an advance screening of Gravity, starring George Clooney and Sandra Bullock, I'll admit my first thought was... 'what is Gravity?' At this point, it was still early enough that the huge marketing blitz for the film was just starting, and since I don't watch a lot of live TV, I had not seen any trailers for it. Since I never like to turn down a free movie however, I immediately signed up. I'm very glad that I did.

Security was pretty intensive for a screening only a month or so before a new release, forcing us to check in (my name was on 'the list') with 3 separate people, as well as having to leave our cell phones out in the car and be screened though a metal detector wand to ensure we weren't bringing ANY electronic devices in the theater.

Thankfully, the drama wasn't limited to the process of getting in, the movie provided plenty as well! From the opening scene to the closing credits, there are many dramatic moments, underscored brilliantly by the AMAZING Steven Price score. The music and sound in this film really stand out, both in the places where it is used, and even more dramatically in places where it is not. Movies very rarely seem to know where silence is the right choice, but they do a fantastic job here.

The screening was in 3D, of which I normally am not a huge fan. Typically, the glasses are uncomfortable, or don't fit over (or under) my glasses, which forces me to wear them alone and watch the movie with my crappy blurred vision. The glasses provided for this film, however were easy to slip on over my own glasses without feeling like I was wearing safety goggles. The 3D effects were well done, and accented the movie nicely without feeling obtrusive or 'gag-like'. I probably would have enjoyed the movie just as much in 2D, but I will recommend seeing it in 3D if that's your thing.

The visuals in Gravity are absolutely stunning! The views of the earth from space and the way the graphics are completed really give you a small sense of what it would be like to be in space. Even without getting into the script or acting, the visuals, combined with the previously mentioned sound design excellence, create a truly immersive experience well worth going to a theater to experience on the big screen. Of course, we have to talk about the acting... Both Clooney and Bullock put on a great show in Gravity. With Sandra Bullock actually putting on an acting clinic at times that I, for one, never gave her credit for in the past. Without spoiling the movie for anyone, I will tell you that these two are the only people you see on screen, with the rest of the very short cast list appearing in voice form only. It can be incredibly hard for a one or two man show to keep people's attention, but much like Tom Hanks in Cast Away, they pull it off with the 1-2 punch of great acting and solid writing.

It also doesn't hurt that the run time on the film is only 90 minutes. I'm sure they could have easily forced another 20 to 30 minutes in to get the time up, but they made the right choice I believe in making it short and to the point. The overall effect is that when you leave the theater you know that the whole story was told (and beautifully told at that), and that none of your time was wasted on superfluous or gratuitous film stock.

In short, Gravity is a very well put together film. Stunning visuals combine with brilliant scoring to play backup to some great acting and very solid writing. I gave it a 9/10 and I highly recommend giving it a watch, preferable in the theater... your choice on the 3D or 2D version.

From the first trailer for the film I thought it looked intriguing, though the trailers never provided much information. You could guess at the concept and most guesses would be accurate. Its a survival/disaster story set in space with astronauts and no hint of science fiction whatsoever. I was a little surprised that suddenly the film exploded with huge ratings and huge box office returns. So because of that my expectations were high and I was prepared to potentially see a 10/10 film. I didn't hate this movie...do not get me wrong. It was entertaining and had some really nail biting moments. Visually it was good. But couldn't anyone make a visually stunning film with the backdrop of space looking down on earth. My biggest issue with the film is how unrealistic it felt. I am not a scientist and I know nothing about space travel but do I need to in order to know that NASA would not be sending up someone who is emotionally and physically unprepared and watching Bullock's character is sometimes laughable and that is unfortunate. I know I'm not the only one because other reviewers on IMDb have pointed out the exact things that bothered me. She makes poor decisions, completely unrealistic moves and generally is unbelievable in the role.

I don't blame Sandra Bullock as an actress because she is a great actress. In fact what I say doesn't matter because this film is raking in money and likely to get Oscar nominations (a travesty and a joke in my opinion.) Bullock's character is empty and depressing. The addition of her talking about losing her daughter is pointless and forced on you to try and get an emotional reaction and it doesn't work at all. She shows her emotions well when she is in danger but the character is weakly written and you never truly get attached to her in any way. George Clooney is mostly there as another star-power name. He does alright but once again his character does not fit the film. His sarcasm, and humour stands out and is ridiculous at times. The chemistry between him and Bullock could be great but the script does nothing to give them that opportunity. Neither one are riveting and worst of all neither of them are even remotely believable as astronauts. Clooney is supposed to be the seasoned veteran and he's training Bullock out in space...I am almost certain that she would never even remotely leave earth without being 1000% trained. As other reviewers pointed out...Bullock consults training manuals in various languages and then resorts to playing eenie meenie miney moe on a spacecraft trying to get it to fly. Are you serious? How can anyone stomach that and accept it.

Alfonso Cuarón has apparently built a very solid fan base. Children of Men was almost brilliant and Harry Potter and the Order of The Phoenix was phenomenal. However, I feel like he is one of those film makers that lets stories slide in order to impress us visually or artistically. Children of Men and Gravity are shining examples of this. Cuarón turns Gravity completely bizarre by forcing in absolutely ridiculous art-house scenes (Bullock's ridiculous fetal floating scene, and the end scene of her standing and being shot as though she is about to scream "I AM WOMAN.") What is he trying to do with this? Its irritating because this could have been a terrific disaster, survival flick and he tried to do more with it than it deserved. One of the things I loved about the film was the lack of sound in space. While it certainly reduces the impact of the shattering space stations it is more realistic and really disturbing to see all that debris and destruction but to hear nothing. As many of you who read my reviews may know, I am NOT a 3D fan. It doesn't bother me but it does nothing to increase the value of a film. I thought Gravity might be the exception to that and it wasn't. There was nothing in this film made more impressive by 3D and that's just a real shame. It sounds like I've really trashed on this movie and I have but I was just so blown away by how much everyone loves this movie and how it mostly let me down. It wasn't terrible and it was reasonably entertaining but I would never go out of my way to watch it again. It was a sub-par and rushed project that Cuarón unapologetically ignores a tight script or research. You will watch this regardless and chances are you will love it because its the mass opinion right now but I have to say how I feel and this one for me was a pass. 6/10