Gravity sounds promising - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 23 Old 09-25-2013, 02:42 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
johnsmith808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,830
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 32
I was pleasantly surprised about the critics positive reviews on this movie. Though it wasn't shot it 3d, the director wanted to, but realized that it wasn't possible due to some shots, nor necessary being that most of the movie is cgi. He also consulted James Cameron. Can't wait to get this one.
SFMike likes this.
johnsmith808 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 23 Old 09-26-2013, 02:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cakefoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 32
I smelled success for this movie miles away, but reviews are far exceeding my expectations. 96/100 on Metacritic, and if it can maintain that score it might have great legs in sales, and will be a rare positive PR boost for 3D.

My Videos

A movie with good 3D does not necessarily equal a good 3D movie!

cakefoo is offline  
post #3 of 23 Old 10-01-2013, 02:51 PM
Newbie
 
Mr- Anderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I think Gravity will be all about Bullock and Clooney carrying the film on one spectacular set piece with some flash back fill ins. We have probably all already seen the extent of the gnarly space footage in that movie.

Clooney and Bullock no doubt pull 35-40 million of budget. Going to guess the rest got spent on what is being marketed in commercials. Was not even shot in 3D? Meh
Mr- Anderson is offline  
post #4 of 23 Old 10-01-2013, 03:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cakefoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr- Anderson View Post

I think Gravity will be all about Bullock and Clooney carrying the film on one spectacular set piece with some flash back fill ins. We have probably all already seen the extent of the gnarly space footage in that movie.

Clooney and Bullock no doubt pull 35-40 million of budget. Going to guess the rest got spent on what is being marketed in commercials. Was not even shot in 3D? Meh
With a little Googling you could have prevented that post. There are in fact no flashbacks. It was shot in 2D due to the extremely complicated rigs used. Cuaron and his cinematographer are phenomenal, and talked up the 3D for many months. And the reviews are all positive for the film and the 3D.

As far as "gnarly space footage" goes, I personally don't know how much action there will be, but I personally don't need intense action and explosions to draw me into a movie.

My Videos

A movie with good 3D does not necessarily equal a good 3D movie!

cakefoo is offline  
post #5 of 23 Old 10-02-2013, 03:23 AM
Senior Member
 
AVTrauma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Vancouver, Wa
Posts: 387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Word has it that Sandra Bullock has taken this role to a new level in her career as an actress... not a typical cute role she accels at, and way beyond anything dramatic she has done before... the word "Oscar" has even been used. I can't wait to see it!
AVTrauma is offline  
post #6 of 23 Old 10-03-2013, 05:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TonyDP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,887
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Here's a little blurb that is sure to upset all the "3D must die" naysayers and more proof that if you make a film that actually uses the technology and is designed with 3D in mind, people will go to watch it.

http://www.imdb.com/news/ni56258793/?ref_=hm_nw_tp_t2


The movie has also score a perfect 35/35 on Cinemablend's "To 3D or Not 3D" blog.

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/3D-Or-3D-Buy-Right-Gravity-Ticket-39663.html
TonyDP is online now  
post #7 of 23 Old 10-03-2013, 07:34 PM
Senior Member
 
johnny905's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 18
I listened to Opie & Anthony on the way home from work tonight and all they could talk about was how amazing the movie and the visuals were. And how the 3D was beyond incredible.
johnny905 is offline  
post #8 of 23 Old 10-04-2013, 04:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mr. wally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: land of the pumas
Posts: 3,815
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 48
my thoughts on the 3d in this



Just saw Thursday eve opening

Stunning, epic, awesome cinematic achievement
Cuaron has just changed the technical side of movies

IMHO the best use of 3d ever (seen in IMAX). It's not used as a gimmic, a toy or tool you twiddle to give some passing dimensionality or visual surprise,

Here it is essential to the world in which the characters reside. The 3d is totally organic and wholly and seamlessly constitutes their environment.

Dramatic and suspenseful. Both clooney and bullock are just fine in their roles (they only contribute and don't detract). The movie is really not about those characters.
There are some flaws in the film, and I'm sure many others will find issues of inconsistency, non-science, and plot contortions of which to pick and fault.

I still need time to take this all in and assess, but this movie brings back the edgy, dangerous place space was that we haven't seen done well since 2001 or alien(s).

Don't wait, go see for yourselves in 3d of course

neflixis our nemesis
mr. wally is offline  
post #9 of 23 Old 10-05-2013, 12:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TonyDP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,887
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Liked: 58
My brother and I saw it in Imax 3D today and both enjoyed it a lot. Its nice to see a film where the 3D aspect of the production was clearly considered in the planning and photography of the film. Having recently seen Space Junk 3D on BluRay, this film could serve as almost a spiritual sequel given the events in the movie that cause the plot's central crisis.

In terms of plot, I actually found some of the attempted character moments a bit heavy-handed. To my way of thinking, the grandeur of space and the precariousness of the situation the astronauts find themselves in would preclude bringing everything to a full stop to touch on their respective regrets and fears but that is a minor quibble and easily understandable in the filmmakers' quest to make this accessible to as wide an audience as possible.

Visually, the movie is just stunning with a scene about halfway thru being the standout (fans of stuff coming out of the screen - like me - will love this sequence and you'll clearly know it when you get to it) in my opinion. Cuaron smartly keeps the camera movements slow and deliberate so the action is always easy to follow and the eyes have enough time to focus on the imagery and process the 3D visuals. Also, in response to one of the above posts, there is a lot more "gnarly space footage" space footage than what has been shown in the trailers.

Gravity really demands to be seen in 3D and joins the painfully small list of films that really push the medium forward. It also really makes me pine for a high end post-conversion of 2001: A Space Odyssey.
TonyDP is online now  
post #10 of 23 Old 10-05-2013, 08:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
tory40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 749
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Wow, 91% positive on Rotten Tomatoes, thats pretty rare in my experience. An "anti-3D'er" pleaded with people to make sure to see it in 3D on one review i saw.
tory40 is offline  
post #11 of 23 Old 10-06-2013, 02:55 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
johnsmith808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,830
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 32
I hope this movie makes a good amount of money so that Hollywood can see what people want when it comes to 3d. Also that the consumer knows the difference between a quality 3d effort and an after thought conversion.
cakefoo and old corps like this.
johnsmith808 is offline  
post #12 of 23 Old 10-06-2013, 08:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
TonyDP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,887
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnsmith808 View Post

I hope this movie makes a good amount of money so that Hollywood can see what people want when it comes to 3d. Also that the consumer knows the difference between a quality 3d effort and an after thought conversion.

WB is projecting that it will make $55.5 million in the USA over the weekend with about 80% of that coming from 3D screenings. While hardly the largest opening ever, it is the biggest debut for a film released in October. It has also already taken in another $27.5 million overseas. Hopefully it will have legs and stick around for a while. I hope to check it out again next week, something I rarely do with theatrical films these days.
TonyDP is online now  
post #13 of 23 Old 10-06-2013, 11:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
cakefoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Not just a lesson for Hollywood, but also for consumers who think it's nothing more than a gimmick. Gravity is a lock for best cinematography, marking the 4th 3D film in 5 years to win it. People will eventually GET IT.

My Videos

A movie with good 3D does not necessarily equal a good 3D movie!

cakefoo is offline  
post #14 of 23 Old 10-06-2013, 02:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mr. wally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: land of the pumas
Posts: 3,815
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Interesting to compare gravity to the hobbit trailer I saw before the movie

The former's 3d is seamless and elegantly enriches the viewing experience, while the latter still seems to make heavy handed use of 3D pop ups and layers of dimensionality
that almost seem cartoonish to me.

Hopefully filmmakers will evolve to this more refined implementation

neflixis our nemesis
mr. wally is offline  
post #15 of 23 Old 10-14-2013, 12:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Deja Vu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: great white north
Posts: 4,501
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 166 Post(s)
Liked: 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. wally View Post

Interesting to compare gravity to the hobbit trailer I saw before the movie

The former's 3d is seamless and elegantly enriches the viewing experience, while the latter still seems to make heavy handed use of 3D pop ups and layers of dimensionality
that almost seem cartoonish to me.

Hopefully filmmakers will evolve to this more refined implementation

I couldn't stand the Hobbit; however, the trailer for the second one shown before Gravity has me interested.
Deja Vu is offline  
post #16 of 23 Old 10-14-2013, 05:08 PM
Member
 
Cla55clown's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Durham, North Carolina
Posts: 179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Saw Gravity at my local IMAX and I must say the movie is living up to all the hype. 3D is amazing and done in a way as not to detract from the movie. I agree with others that the story is a little unbelievable and there are a few plot holes but all in all a good flick. On a side note, I just can't say enough how horrible those 3D glasses are that they give you at the theater. I started feeling uncomfortable pressure on the bridge of my nose after about 3 minutes. Why do they have to be so bad?!! mad.gif So my question is: Can I bring my Sony passive 3D glasses from home and use them instead for the imax movies?
Cla55clown is offline  
post #17 of 23 Old 10-15-2013, 10:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
cakefoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cla55clown View Post

Saw Gravity at my local IMAX and I must say the movie is living up to all the hype. 3D is amazing and done in a way as not to detract from the movie. I agree with others that the story is a little unbelievable and there are a few plot holes but all in all a good flick. On a side note, I just can't say enough how horrible those 3D glasses are that they give you at the theater. I started feeling uncomfortable pressure on the bridge of my nose after about 3 minutes. Why do they have to be so bad?!! mad.gif So my question is: Can I bring my Sony passive 3D glasses from home and use them instead for the imax movies?
For IMAX, no. Your TV's glasses use circular polarized lenses. They're compatible with RealD screens, but not IMAX screens, which require linear polarized glasses.

Might want to try buying some linear polarized imax glasses online somewhere.
Cla55clown likes this.

My Videos

A movie with good 3D does not necessarily equal a good 3D movie!

cakefoo is offline  
post #18 of 23 Old 10-21-2013, 12:15 PM
Senior Member
 
wonka702's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 282
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
This wasn't a movie, it was an experience. This one might win Best Picture.
wonka702 is offline  
post #19 of 23 Old 10-21-2013, 12:25 PM
Advanced Member
 
d james's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 848
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
I found this movie very enjoyable, and would recommend any 3D die hard fan to go out and see it as the big screen plus 3D really added to its experience. It gives the sense like you're right there with them. My only minor complaint that some may disagree with is, I was hoping to see some floating objects pop out of the screen, such as in the space station scenes, I felt like that would've drawn me in more, but that's me, I love pop out. That being said I think the 3D was pretty damn amazing and I really feel bad for anybody who will see this on a low resolution cable station on a 32 inch screen without 3D. The experience will not come close to the same.
d james is offline  
post #20 of 23 Old 10-21-2013, 01:57 PM
Senior Member
 
cash70's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 321
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by wonka702 View Post

This wasn't a movie, it was an experience. This one might win Best Picture.

I totally agree. Simply amazing. I might find myself going to watch it again.
cash70 is offline  
post #21 of 23 Old 10-21-2013, 06:18 PM
Advanced Member
 
ferl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Illinois
Posts: 688
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by d james View Post

I found this movie very enjoyable, and would recommend any 3D die hard fan to go out and see it as the big screen plus 3D really added to its experience. It gives the sense like you're right there with them. My only minor complaint that some may disagree with is, I was hoping to see some floating objects pop out of the screen, such as in the space station scenes, I felt like that would've drawn me in more, but that's me, I love pop out. That being said I think the 3D was pretty damn amazing and I really feel bad for anybody who will see this on a low resolution cable station on a 32 inch screen without 3D. The experience will not come close to the same.


I agree with most of your points. The movie was interesting. While not believable, it was leaps and bounds ahead the nonsense garbage 3D movie recently released on BluRay.
Great 3D. It just looked natural. Not that I know what natural looks like in that environment, but I felt like I could enjoy the format without having the 3D exaggerated and distorted. I'm in the base that dislikes crap poking at you. They did include 2 gratuitous scenes for the "POP/floaty things" fans. Other scenes with things floating seemed appropriate for the environment and didn't come across as gimmicks from a by gone era. This is what 3D should be.

ferl is offline  
post #22 of 23 Old 10-25-2013, 02:42 PM
 
TVSTAR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 65
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Saw Gravity today on a small "i"max screen. Very funny trailer lead-in, though. There was noisy fanfare, and an announcer said the following trailers were NOT the Imax experience. Okay, they were all in 2.35:1 widescreen. Oh boy, I thought, Gravity is going to be in full Imax screen. Then more fanfare, and an announcer came in again and said, what you are about to see is thrilling Imax in all it's glory. Then up pops another 2.35:1 screen with intro to Gravity. I thought I was going to lose it, right there. It was not imax, instead it was simply another upscaled 2.35:1 movie. It just wasn't sharp as Imax is supposed to be. That said, it felt like they squeezed 45 minutes of action into a 2 hour movie. I must admit, the 3D does make this movie, but wow are there a lot of plot holes and technical misses. But who can deny Sandra Bullock in mini-shorts and tight shirt?
TVSTAR is offline  
post #23 of 23 Old 10-25-2013, 05:44 PM
Member
 
Isnoreatmovies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 48
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
I'm waiting for the sequel... Bullock will get captured by the apes and they'll try to breed her to Mark Wahlberg.
Isnoreatmovies is offline  
Reply 3D Content

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off