Wow! ....then "Uh,Oh"

Rating: 5/10 (15 November 2013)

I wanted to like this movie - the subject matter is close to my heart - but it is its own worst enemy.
The CGI and effects are truly stunning, and the loooooooong shots (in time, not distance) left me speechless with the preparation and technology that must have gone into them. Just visualising that opening shot, weaving as it does between parts of the shuttle and Hubble, closing in on the suited astronauts and opening up again to long shot is a tour de force, let alone making the visualisation work in reality.
There were quite a few boo-boos that anyone with more than a passing interest in orbital mechanics would spot, but they come mostly in the category of artistic licence. In particular, the way in which Ryan uses the landing rockets to make an orbital transfer of some 100Km is fundamentally comical. (read any of the original Astronauts' books to begin to understand the sheer complexity of orbital matching and docking). The mistakes generate a little more irritation than they deserve purely *because* of the incredible cinematography and complexity of the spacecraft modelling.
But where the movie is really let down is - like Avatar - in the script. How such accomplished actors as Clooney and Bullock accepted roles that portrayed them as juvenile astronaut (Clooney) and untrained tyro (Bullock) is beyond me.
For the first forty minutes or so the sheer quality of the CGI made me overlook the clichéd script, but then even the pictures could not make it believable. At no stage was I engaged with the fate of the astronauts and by the end I began wondering how much longer it would last. Even the wet T-shirt sequence couldn't excite me.
I might be mistaken, but I do not remember the first half having much in the way of background music. Unfortunately, the second made up for the omission in spades - a dire, completely inappropriate and overbearing score assaulted the ears and added to my detachment from the film. How much better it would have been had there been the deep silence of an airless space except when the camera was inside a helmet or a pressurised vehicle. But, I suppose, that's Hollywood.
In summary, then, a spectacular example of the technique of movie-making in the visuals: eleven out of ten. Downgraded to a five overall because the dialogue rarely comes above the risible. Am I glad I saw it? Yes, definitely. Would I watch it again? Probably. But, just like the first viewing, I would regret the opportunity that was missed in the screenplay.