← Back to Reviews
in
Gravity
As part of this forum's 'Movie Chain' I was challenged to watch the 2013 sci-fi thriller Gravity, directed by legendary Harry Potter director Alfonso Cuaron. The film received glowering reviews from the critics and was the winner of numerous awards, including seven Oscars and a Golden Globe for Best Director. It is generally considered the Avatar of 2013; a film that combined effective 3D with strong storytelling. The version I watched was in 2D; a free copy I received through Google Play. Whilst I don't think it's as good as its reputation suggests, I still found it a hugely enjoyable movie - especially in comparison to many terrible modern movies such as Alvin & The Chipmunks and Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.
Gravity sees biomedical engineer Doctor Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock) and her commander Matt Kowalski (George Clooney) performing a routine spacewalk to service the Hubble Space Telescope. Houston Mission Control warn them that a Russian missile strike on an abandoned satellite has created a chain reaction that has created a cloud of debri. They are advised to abandon the mission and return to Earth. The debri hits their space shuttle The Explorer and the Hubble Space Telescope, sending the pair tumbling into space. Will they survive? And most importantly, will they manage to return home?
One thing that I found surprising about this film was the horror element to the plot. There are two jump scares in the film involving dead astronauts, neither of which I ever expected. The make-up department have done a great job with the astronaut with a hole through his head; it looks extremely realistic - so realistic, in fact, that it is a wonder that the film managed to achieve a 12a rating instead of a 15.
Gravity is a film that many times reminded me of The Blair Witch Project; it may seem like an odd comparison to make - one's a found-footage horror, the other a thriller set in space - but to me the similarities are obvious. Both focus on the fear and paranoia of their respective female leads - in Gravity Ryan's terror of being lost in space, in The Blair Witch Project Helen's fear of finding herself lost in the woods - and are more about playing with that emotion than utilising a central antagonist as with most movies. In fact, in both films it can be argued the antagonist is the environment. It's the environment our protagonists have to conquer - that's their key to success.
Gravity is at its best when it uses sound to convey the horror and loneliness of space. Random cuts between music inside a space shuttle (for example) and the lack of sound outside (bar radio communications) help to create a convincing atmosphere that sells just how traumatic the experience of being trapped in space would be. This means when Ryan is later able to contact an Eskimo, we feel her joy at finally being able to hear something different. As with any film the music also plays a big part in telling us how to feel but often with Gravity it's the lack of sound followed by sudden music or new voices that convey a bigger sense of emotion.
The use of sound is nothing compared to the stunning cinematography however. Gravity is one of those movies that probably needs to be seen on a cinema screen to be fully appreciated; its CGI shots in space are absolutely breath-taking, creating an expansive vista that helps compliment some stunning cinematography by Emmanuel Lubezki.
In my opinion this is the best cinematography in any film I have ever seen and I am baffled that the university lecturers aren't showing it as part of the Advanced Cinematography module. It seems exactly like the kind of film the lecturers would not only admire for the storytelling techniques but also have a deep appreciation for for the sheer beauty of the shots that it is composed of. Alfred Hitchcock's Vertigo (a film that is being screened as part of the module) has great cinematography but nothing that can rival Gravity.
Many films would spend ages of exposition before they get to the jaw-dropping scenes in space - but no, not this movie. Gravity throws you straight in at the deep end, with the crew already in space. There's no messing about here. Gravity is the kind of film that gets straight to the point, allowing for a strong pace that eliminates many of the unnecessary padding some films can be the victim of. In no time at all, Ryan and Matt are at the Russian Space Station - in any other movie it would have probably taken them forty-five minutes to get there. It helps that this film is kept to a wise running time of an hour and a half, as opposed to the two hour standard of most recent movies. Sometimes ninety minutes is all that's needed to tell a good cinematic story - this is certainly the case with Gravity.
As with any film, it is helped largely by its cast. Both Sandra Bullock and George Clooney are amazing in their roles; it's worth noting that this movie is largely a one hander with Sandra Bullock, although like Peter Capaldi in Heaven Sent she is so good that you barely notice that she doesn't interact with anybody else on-screen for 90% of the movie. She has a certain amount of screen presence that an actor in a one-hander needs in order for it to work. Peter Capaldi and Sandra Bullock both have that presence - in fact, wouldn't it be great to see them in a film together? Whilst I would have liked to have seen more George Clooney, this is really Sandra Bullock's movie - her chance to shine.
So how come I don't think it's as good as the critics made out?
Well, for two reasons.
The first is that the film feels too much like it was made to be viewed in 3D rather than a movie in its own right. Many of the shots come across as though they were made with the 3D effects made in mind and it hinders the viewing for anyone such as myself watching in 2D. One shot sees Ryan swinging around on the detached arm of The Explorer: a shot that would have looked amazing in 3D with Ryan coming out of the screen but in 2D comes across as gimmicky without the gimmick being present.
From watching it in 2D, it seems as though I'm missing something - as though I'm watching a theme park ride without actually being on the ride. It's a shame because this movie would have the potential to be a five-star film had it been made so it could be experienced the same watching it in 2D as the impact would have been with the 3D visuals.
Another issue I have with the film is that the characterisation of Ryan appears somewhat sexist in its portrayal of a female astronaut. I get that she's supposed to be inexperienced and getting lost in space would be a terrifying ordeal but half of the time Ryan comes across as useless - especially when the other character is male and is a space veteran, thereby making the more experienced of the pair. Why couldn't Ryan have been the veteran and Matt the inexperienced one (although the casting would have to have been different)? Or why couldn't they have both been the same gender? In fact, there's a much simpler solution to this: have Ryan do something other than panic and flap her arms about in Matt's presence. The only time Ryan does anything remotely intelligent is towards the end of the film when she's trying to return home and uses a fire extinguisher to propel her to the Chinese Space Station.
Overall, Gravity is a wonderful film with great use of sound and possibly the best cinematography I have ever seen. It is impressive how the screenplay by Jonas Cuaron rather than opting for exposition to introduce the characters dives straight into the space setting. I also like how the plot takes inspiration from The Blair Witch Project in the way that it explores the fear and paranoia of being lost in space and utilises the setting as the central antagonist rather than introducing a moustache-twirling villain. The film is mainly a one-hander with Sandra Bullock, who has a great amount of screen presence meaning that you forget that she's the only character in 90% of the film. Unfortunately the film suffers from many of the shots being geared too much towards creating a compelling 3D experience, meaning many of the shots lose their intended impact in 2D. I'm a big fan of 3D so watching a film that was clearly made for it in 2D is frustrating when you can tell the shots were made with the medium in mind. The characterisation of Ryan also suffers, coming across like a callback to the sexism of the 60s rather than a modern female character. Overall, I would definitely recommend Gravity, even if certain factors let it down.
As part of this forum's 'Movie Chain' I was challenged to watch the 2013 sci-fi thriller Gravity, directed by legendary Harry Potter director Alfonso Cuaron. The film received glowering reviews from the critics and was the winner of numerous awards, including seven Oscars and a Golden Globe for Best Director. It is generally considered the Avatar of 2013; a film that combined effective 3D with strong storytelling. The version I watched was in 2D; a free copy I received through Google Play. Whilst I don't think it's as good as its reputation suggests, I still found it a hugely enjoyable movie - especially in comparison to many terrible modern movies such as Alvin & The Chipmunks and Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.
Gravity sees biomedical engineer Doctor Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock) and her commander Matt Kowalski (George Clooney) performing a routine spacewalk to service the Hubble Space Telescope. Houston Mission Control warn them that a Russian missile strike on an abandoned satellite has created a chain reaction that has created a cloud of debri. They are advised to abandon the mission and return to Earth. The debri hits their space shuttle The Explorer and the Hubble Space Telescope, sending the pair tumbling into space. Will they survive? And most importantly, will they manage to return home?
One thing that I found surprising about this film was the horror element to the plot. There are two jump scares in the film involving dead astronauts, neither of which I ever expected. The make-up department have done a great job with the astronaut with a hole through his head; it looks extremely realistic - so realistic, in fact, that it is a wonder that the film managed to achieve a 12a rating instead of a 15.
Gravity is a film that many times reminded me of The Blair Witch Project; it may seem like an odd comparison to make - one's a found-footage horror, the other a thriller set in space - but to me the similarities are obvious. Both focus on the fear and paranoia of their respective female leads - in Gravity Ryan's terror of being lost in space, in The Blair Witch Project Helen's fear of finding herself lost in the woods - and are more about playing with that emotion than utilising a central antagonist as with most movies. In fact, in both films it can be argued the antagonist is the environment. It's the environment our protagonists have to conquer - that's their key to success.
Gravity is at its best when it uses sound to convey the horror and loneliness of space. Random cuts between music inside a space shuttle (for example) and the lack of sound outside (bar radio communications) help to create a convincing atmosphere that sells just how traumatic the experience of being trapped in space would be. This means when Ryan is later able to contact an Eskimo, we feel her joy at finally being able to hear something different. As with any film the music also plays a big part in telling us how to feel but often with Gravity it's the lack of sound followed by sudden music or new voices that convey a bigger sense of emotion.
The use of sound is nothing compared to the stunning cinematography however. Gravity is one of those movies that probably needs to be seen on a cinema screen to be fully appreciated; its CGI shots in space are absolutely breath-taking, creating an expansive vista that helps compliment some stunning cinematography by Emmanuel Lubezki.
In my opinion this is the best cinematography in any film I have ever seen and I am baffled that the university lecturers aren't showing it as part of the Advanced Cinematography module. It seems exactly like the kind of film the lecturers would not only admire for the storytelling techniques but also have a deep appreciation for for the sheer beauty of the shots that it is composed of. Alfred Hitchcock's Vertigo (a film that is being screened as part of the module) has great cinematography but nothing that can rival Gravity.
Many films would spend ages of exposition before they get to the jaw-dropping scenes in space - but no, not this movie. Gravity throws you straight in at the deep end, with the crew already in space. There's no messing about here. Gravity is the kind of film that gets straight to the point, allowing for a strong pace that eliminates many of the unnecessary padding some films can be the victim of. In no time at all, Ryan and Matt are at the Russian Space Station - in any other movie it would have probably taken them forty-five minutes to get there. It helps that this film is kept to a wise running time of an hour and a half, as opposed to the two hour standard of most recent movies. Sometimes ninety minutes is all that's needed to tell a good cinematic story - this is certainly the case with Gravity.
As with any film, it is helped largely by its cast. Both Sandra Bullock and George Clooney are amazing in their roles; it's worth noting that this movie is largely a one hander with Sandra Bullock, although like Peter Capaldi in Heaven Sent she is so good that you barely notice that she doesn't interact with anybody else on-screen for 90% of the movie. She has a certain amount of screen presence that an actor in a one-hander needs in order for it to work. Peter Capaldi and Sandra Bullock both have that presence - in fact, wouldn't it be great to see them in a film together? Whilst I would have liked to have seen more George Clooney, this is really Sandra Bullock's movie - her chance to shine.
So how come I don't think it's as good as the critics made out?
Well, for two reasons.
The first is that the film feels too much like it was made to be viewed in 3D rather than a movie in its own right. Many of the shots come across as though they were made with the 3D effects made in mind and it hinders the viewing for anyone such as myself watching in 2D. One shot sees Ryan swinging around on the detached arm of The Explorer: a shot that would have looked amazing in 3D with Ryan coming out of the screen but in 2D comes across as gimmicky without the gimmick being present.
From watching it in 2D, it seems as though I'm missing something - as though I'm watching a theme park ride without actually being on the ride. It's a shame because this movie would have the potential to be a five-star film had it been made so it could be experienced the same watching it in 2D as the impact would have been with the 3D visuals.
Another issue I have with the film is that the characterisation of Ryan appears somewhat sexist in its portrayal of a female astronaut. I get that she's supposed to be inexperienced and getting lost in space would be a terrifying ordeal but half of the time Ryan comes across as useless - especially when the other character is male and is a space veteran, thereby making the more experienced of the pair. Why couldn't Ryan have been the veteran and Matt the inexperienced one (although the casting would have to have been different)? Or why couldn't they have both been the same gender? In fact, there's a much simpler solution to this: have Ryan do something other than panic and flap her arms about in Matt's presence. The only time Ryan does anything remotely intelligent is towards the end of the film when she's trying to return home and uses a fire extinguisher to propel her to the Chinese Space Station.
Overall, Gravity is a wonderful film with great use of sound and possibly the best cinematography I have ever seen. It is impressive how the screenplay by Jonas Cuaron rather than opting for exposition to introduce the characters dives straight into the space setting. I also like how the plot takes inspiration from The Blair Witch Project in the way that it explores the fear and paranoia of being lost in space and utilises the setting as the central antagonist rather than introducing a moustache-twirling villain. The film is mainly a one-hander with Sandra Bullock, who has a great amount of screen presence meaning that you forget that she's the only character in 90% of the film. Unfortunately the film suffers from many of the shots being geared too much towards creating a compelling 3D experience, meaning many of the shots lose their intended impact in 2D. I'm a big fan of 3D so watching a film that was clearly made for it in 2D is frustrating when you can tell the shots were made with the medium in mind. The characterisation of Ryan also suffers, coming across like a callback to the sexism of the 60s rather than a modern female character. Overall, I would definitely recommend Gravity, even if certain factors let it down.