Alfonso Cuarůn's new science fiction film with George Clooney and Sandra Bullock(I would have prefered Marion Cotillard who was up for the role at one point) playing the leads, though apparently it's Sandra Bullock on screen for most of the film. After the wonderful Children of Men and one of the darker better Harry Potter films, it's one I'm looking forwards to.

Set on a remote space station, the story begins as a team of astronauts are on an expedition outside the station, but only the team leader (Clooney) and his female colleague (Bullock) are left alive after an exploding satellite kills the other members of the crew, setting off a desperate race home for the latter to get to her child.

The film contains only 156 shots, one of the longest is a 17 minute take for the opening of the film(he played with this in Children of Men also but not as long). Will be released in 3D also.

Alfonso had an idea that he wanted the shots to be incredibly long, and I said, ĎHow long?í And he said he wanted the first shot to be really long. And I said, ĎYou mean, 40 seconds?í ĎNo, 17 minutes.í So it ends up the film only has 156 shots in the entire two-hour movie, many of them six, eight, 10 minutes long.

Sit Ubu Sit.... Good Dog
I was just looking at an article on this movie, sounds interesting. I am a big fan of Children of Men, but I am just wondering how Sandra Bullock and George Clooney are going to pull it off, can't picture them playing those parts.

George Clooney I have no problem seeing, have you seen this remake called Solaris:

It's Sandra Bullock who is the surprise casting for me, especially going by the type of film it is. Part of it sounds like Moonsque isolation going by interviews with her on the film.

This has been one of my most anticipated must-watch films for at least a year, maybe longer. I cannot wait for this to come out. I've been a fan of Cuaron since A Little Princess and I eagerly await everything he makes.

This week in Pasadena, Gravity had its first test screening, and while the cut was apparently very rough, audiences saw enough to form some strong opinions about it. From here, it sounds like it could be this yearís Tree of Life ó gorgeous, innovative, worthy of acclaim, and perhaps a little divisive.
Some of the reactions:

VERY unfinished but heard itís visually ambitious, interesting but not world-changing.

Despite rough FX, hear good things about last nightís Gravity screening. ďMasterpiece, phenomenal, visually amazing.Ē Weíll see in 200 days.

Went to a test-screening for ďGravityĒ last nightÖit was far from being done, but it will be a visual feast when it isÖand nothing more.

Gravity is Cuarůnís masterpiece. Itís gonna be divided. Half will think itís a self-indulgent borefest and half will think itís amazingly brilliant. The movie is 80% just Sandra Bullock!

He went on to say that he thinks its her best work, particular in the final fifteen minutes (from which he assumes theyíll draw an Oscar clip should that time come) but that the film is Cuarůnís. He called likely nominations for Visual Effects, Picture, Director, Editing (ďbreathlessĒ action), and Cinematography which he calls ďamazingĒ. Regarding the latter, though, did anyone expect less from eternal Oscar bridesmaid Emmanuel Lubezki (The Tree of Life, Children of Men) and Michael Seresin (Midnight Express)?

This is not just next level ****, this is several levels ahead of next level ****, & quite possibly the highest level **** you could possibly make. This is like if Avatar had been released in 1927 a week after The Jazz Singer. People wonít know how to comprehend what they are seeing. In short, Gravity genuinely makes you feel like you have been to space. It really, really does. And guess what? Itís beautiful, and awe-inspiring, and profound (and a little scary too), everything you thought it would be since you first thought about going to space when you were a kid. The movie exploits dreams it knows every sentient being has had, using the best special effects I have personally ever seen. I honestly donít know how you could enhance a cinematic experience more.

But by the way the film is shot, you feel hopeless. It has some of the best uses of first person POV shots Iíve ever seen, making you feel like you too are hovering right over the Earth, so close yet so far away. Other than Enter the Void, I donít think Iíve ever felt more physically embodied as an onscreen character. Itís not POV the whole time though, Cauron breaks it up & often utilizes his signature Ďroaming-cameraman-who-never-cutsí technique, which is very effective when thereís no gravity & for the Ďrace-against-the-clockinessí of the story. However, some people might end up saying that Gravity ends up being too light on story & is just an expensive space roller coaster ride, ĎSpace Mountain: The Movieí if you will. But those people would be wrong, stupid & ungrateful. Gravity is an important & subtle character study wrapped up in the guise of the most technologically advanced film of the new millennium. To me the film is about apathy and isolation. Itís about people today not knowing why they should be excited about living but only knowing they donít want to die. Itís about looking at your own insignificance in the universe (or on Earth, or at your job, or at your school, etc.) & becoming empowered by it instead of defeated. And most of all, itís about seeing what it would be like to float through space like an astronaut (spoiler: itís fun)

I still canít believe what a great movie this. Wow!!! I donít think anyone will doubt Sandra again after seing this. what a performance!

Sandra was amazing and I think this will be an easy nomination for her. [...] As great as the directing and music was throughout, there is no way the movie could have worked so well if she wasnít up for the task. I donít think she has ever been more pyshical or vulnerable on screen and she did very well in the quiet, dialogue free moments. Itís a great vehicle for her.

Overall I thought it was a very suspenseful and engaging movie. Even with the extremely long takes it never dragged or became boring in my opinion.

Alright, brace for impact...

I like Sandra Bullock. She's the only reason I ever watch anything that could be called a romantic comedy. I think she's charming as hell.

Given how much I love Cuaron as a director, I can't imagine her being any kind of down side for this film.

There. I said it.

This is obviously an attempt at being the modern-day 2001: A Space Odyssey, so I'm curious to see how it compares to that.

I'm pretty hopeful. I remember seeing Children of Men the night it came out way back when - one of my favorites.

I never could get the hang of Thursdays.
To think, it could have been Marion Cotillard in 80% of the film!
I would have watched the hell out of that.

Finished here. It's been fun.
This film will fail because of Sandra Bullock. She is not a strong actress, she's not. I know she won an undeserved oscar for that crappy The Blindside, but she can not carry a film like this. Because of her this film will be a 6.5-7.0 at best. Clooney is a fine actor, she is not. Sorry folks, it's true.

\m/ Fade To Black \m/
Just watched the trailers earlier today and it looks like its going to be epic.
~In the event of a Zombie Uprising, remember to sever the head or destroy the brain!~

~When im listening to Metallica, Nothing else matters~

N3wt's Movie Reviews New DVD Thread Top-100