GRAVITY - Alfonso Cuaron, 2013

[noodles_leone]

I'm a big fan of Cuaron since his Harry Potter Children Of Men and its incredible extended shots (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfBSncUspBk). His next movie, Gravity, starring George 'Espresso' Clooney and Sandra 'Miss Detective' Bullock is very likely to be THE film of the year. So it deserves a real thread and a proper introduction.



Here are a few facts:

- it's a space survival, but it's not science fiction. The story is hapening in 2013, with 2013 technology and Mulder and Scully have not been approched.
- everything is CGI exept the actors' faces
- the opening shot will be a single 17-minute take (note: I'm now earing 38 minutes from Warner France's head of marketing, but I think he's wrong)
- the film will be around two hours and will only contain 156 shots (i.e. average shot: 45 seconds, with many shots that will last 6, 8 and 10 minutes long)
- cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki (The Tree of Life) is on board

Source:

http://thefilmstage.com/news/average-shot-length-in-alfonso-cuarons-2-hour-gravity-revealed-17-minute-opening-take-confirmed/

I know you just thought "Full CGI extended shots? That sounds terrible!", so it's time for you to see how much wrong you are, you old conservative prick with no faith in humanity. Here are the 3 trailers:

Detached: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4pcg7bXgmU
Drifting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZV-UEca2W9U
Official Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vk-UQ5kJWQ

[moviesceleton]

Looks interesting but pretty CGI to me. Could look better in 3D, though. But then again, it's converted to 3D, not native.

[noodles_leone]

Looks interesting but pretty CGI to me. Could look better in 3D, though. But then again, it's converted to 3D, not native.

It's full CGI so it's native 3D at its best... Only the faces are converted, and I'm pretty sure they'll turn out at least ok.

[PowerRR]

Your facts excited me but the trailers did not. Definitely worth a shot when it comes out though.

[noodles_leone]

Your facts excited me but the trailers did not.

Weirdooooooooooo

I absolutely love trailers 1 & 2. Cannot wait to see how they work in a whole movie shot like that.

My main fear is that we might end up watching 2 hours of 2 guys falling in real time, and from time to time, they cross the road of a satellite or something.

[dave jenkins]

- cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki (The Tree of Life) is on board

Uh, if it's all CGI (except for the faces), why is Lubezki necessary? Are his faces gonna be so much better than anyone else's?

I saw one of the trailers in the cinema, and I wasn't all that excited. I've already seen 2001 and Apollo 13--space peril films have had their day.

[noodles_leone]

Uh, if it's all CGI (except for the faces), why is Lubezki necessary? Are his faces gonna be so much better than anyone else's?

Great live-action DP are often called to light CGI scenes and even full CGI movies. Roger Deakins worked on Rango and Wall-E, hence the gorgeous lightening and colors.

[noodles_leone]

First Glowing Reviews of Alfonso Cuarón’s ‘Gravity’ Arrive From Venice & Telluride:

http://thefilmstage.com/news/first-glowing-reviews-of-alfonso-cuarons-gravity-arrive-from-venice/

DJ apparently loved it:

David Jenkins at Little White Lies:

On a superficial level, this is your regular, down-home disaster movie in which we join a trio of plucky, bantering astronauts during a routine space walk which goes very south very quickly. Their trio swiftly becomes a twosome and the remainder of the film comprises a catalogue of micro-second clutches and grabs for a lifeline of any sort. Yet – and some may find this side of the film a mite on-the-nose – Gravity operates as a bold (possibly even eccentric) and majestically rendered parable on the wonders of creation, with a very specific focus on the details of reproduction. Imagery of umbilical chords, foetal positions, wombs and characters triumphantly surfacing from the amniotic river sit surprisingly comfortably against a visual backdrop of decaying space stations and an infinite shroud of nothingness.

http://thefilmstage.com/news/first-glowing-reviews-of-alfonso-cuarons-gravity-arrive-from-venice/

[PowerRR]

Did it meet your expectations? I saw it. I liked it.

[noodles_leone]

Not released yet in France. Still a week or so to wait. I missed an avant-premiere with Cuaron the other day in Paris, which sucks, but I wasn't around.
I'll let you know as soon as I saw it! So far I'm happy with what I have, which means the box-office:
http://collider.com/weekend-box-office-gravity-hits-new-october-opening-record-with-55-5-million/

[noodles_leone]

The sound and mix in Gravity (VIDEO):
http://nofilmschool.com/2013/10/alfonso-cuaron-discusses-approach-to-sound-in-gravity/?utm_campaign=twitter&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitter

[noodles_leone]

I finally saw it!

It was released yesterday in France. Until 4 days ago, it wasn't supposed to be shown in IMAX: we only have 5 IMAX theaters in France and thy were all booked by Jean-Pierre Jeunet's latest film (released last week) for 2 weeks, then they'll be for Thor. It all changed during the weekend when it became evident that Jeunet was suffering a hge box office flop (he's one of the most liked filmmakers of the country but they did absolutely 0 promotion for his movie so no one even knows he was working on something). So after all we have one week of Gravity in IMAX, which is the greatest news ever.

Anyway.

It was exactly what I expected: a roller coaster for grown ups.
It's minimalist. You can tell everything that happens in the movie in under 10 sentences.
It's incredbly immersive. I can now say I've spent 90minutes in space fighting for my life.
It's one of the most controled experience you've ever seen on a theater, on par with OUATITW, the triello from GBU, the ending of 3 colors: blue, the lobby scene from The Matrix and the pirates flash-back sequences from Tintin. I'm not saying it's as good as OUATITW (and I'm especially not saying that Tintin is as good as OUATITW), I'm saying that every single pixel on the screen and every audio wave is doing exactly the job Cuaron asked it to do in order to tell exactly the story Cuaron wanted to tell exactly the way he wanted to tell it. 2 minutes of such an experience is enough for me to spend an evening and 10 bucks. 90 minutes of it is an amazing landmark in the history of cinema.
It's for grown ups. It's not Star Tour. There are real characters. They are moving (most of the time). You feel something. Of course it's not the strong point of the film. It just works and does the job.

There are a couple flaws. The ending isn't the most satisfying scene. The script tends to use the "JUST IN TIME!!!!!!" gimmick (for good and bad things) a bit too much: with such a thin story you can ask for a little creativity here. Nobody said it was a masterpiece. People who compare it with 2001 didn't get the project. It's trying to be the future of entertainment for adults, not The Tree Of Life with Miss Detective.

I give it 9/10. It won't change the way I thought about cinema like a couple other films did during the last decade (There Will Be Blood, The Social Network and The Tree Of Life), but my next projects will be technically improved by what I saw. Also, I don't remember being in this "WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAOWWWW" state ever in a movie theater. There has been lots of talk about an "immersive" movie experience, and for the first time, here it is. Now, it may not age well, but it paves the way for future movies, and is probably creating many vocations (astronautes and filmmakers) all around the world. It's more or less universally respected by all the directors and wanabe directors I know, so it's already making history by having a direct impact on thousands of features and short movies.


On a separate note, this film is another point hinting toward what Spielberg and Lucas professed (future of theaters = 50/ to 100 bucks a ticket for an amusement park experience // VOD for the rest of the movies).

[T.H.]

Gravity:

Pretty good, but it was way too gimmicky for my taste - I don't even know whether to classify it as a film. It's more like a made-for-imax experience, which was enjoyable but it's not going to age well. it's sort of a "time and place" experience, you had to watch it in 2013 to feel its full effect. By the last act, it begins to wear out its welcome and becomes way too sentimental and inspirational, which doesn't fit the tone of the movie. The deus ex machina Clooney dream scene sucked too, as did all the unnecessary conflicts after the ship heads back towards earth.

Overall, I enjoyed it for what it was, good, but not 20 bucks good. 7.5/10, the first half was really entertaining.

[noodles_leone]

SPOILERS FROM NOW ON

The deus ex machina Clooney scene sucked too, as did all the unnecessary conflicts after the ship heads back towards earth.

The Clooney scene is one of the most effective scenes I've ever seen. I've never been that happy to see a character enter a scene. And I've rarely been that sad to see him leave it. However, I'm completely with you about the drowing part. It's more than unnecessary: it drives you out of the movie. You spend 90 minutes with her trying to get back on earth, and then when she finally arrives here, she escapes death like 3 times in 3 minutes. Having to fear for her life at this point was too "humour noir", which means you step back from the character. Which means you're not "experiencing Gravity" anymore.

Not so sure about the "not aging well" part since the effects are far from flashy. Furthermore, it's a landmark. Landmarks always age better than the average movie, because when we'll watch it in 50 years, it will still be "the best we could do in 2013".

[T.H.]

I liked the Clooney character and all, but I never find scenes where a dead character returns to be effective - especially when the point of it is to give the character information. It's amateur writing in my opinion.