“Gravity” = 8 ½
Having heard so much hype about this picture and glowing evaluations across the board, I had expected the most exciting and breathtaking movie of the decade. The problem, was just that: Expectations. And we know how that goes, they are rarely met. So, with that in mind, I tried to be as objective as possible in rating this picture. (It is a short movie, only 91 minutes)
Though Gravity did not meet all those expectations, this was a very good movie which will definitely earn some Oscar nominations, particularly in technical aspects, i.e. cinematography, special effects, etc, along with directing. In fact, the photography/special effects and sense of actually being in the quiet darkeness of space was utterly amazing. Also, it’s likely that Sandra Bullock will earn a best actress nomination. The winning depends a lot on her competition in 2013. Clooney? Good guy, but – in my opinion – miscast for this role.
Many scenes deserve the “breathtaking” adjective, as Bullock’s character, along with her space partner, George Clooney are stranded alone in their mission after being pummeled by space debris leaving them in a deathly vacuum which appears to bode a horrible death. The viewer cannot withhold the gasps and feelings of tension that are the signature emotions of the movie.
The minor problems I had were some inane dialogue between Clooney and Bullock that just didn’t fit the terrifying moments. And, while exciting movies are known for implausible scenes, Gravity has its fair share, so much so that it begs a soft shout-out: “Aw come on”
The ending was not what I expected, leaving the story open for a sequel, now that it is destined to break box office records for the year.
But do see the movie. It’s not your ordinary spaceship fiction flick. Matter of fact, there’s never been any like it since Old Man and the Sea.
Wait a minute, that was about an old man stranded at sea. This is about a young woman stranded in space.
I give it an 8 ½