A great action thriller, surprisingly

Rating: 9/10 (18 April 2014)

Looking at the previous reviews, this is obviously a polarizing film. In a way I can understand that, because it's so different in some ways from what most American movie watchers seem used to these days. It's a sci-fi film without two opposing sides blowing each other up, without capital ships blasting each other with torpedoes or fighter planes carving up empty space as if they're moving through air, all the while making swooshing sounds you'd never hear in real life.
At the same time, others criticize this film for its *lack* of realism, mainly on the basis that as a film that's *supposed* to be realistic, it's just so improbable. And it is, but then so is every film - that's what makes good films interesting! Nobody's going to watch a film about how Sandra Bullock went to space, fulfilled her mission and then came home without incident. Lots of things happen to her in this film that seem impossible but aren't - they're just implausible when taken together, but that adds up to an exciting film.
The plot is pretty simple - the Russians knock out one of their own satellites (no, not by mistake), which in turn sets off a chain reaction (yes, this was a mistake) among other satellites that creates destructive shrapnel flying around the Earth at 50,000 miles per hour. This is something scientists have actually worried about for years, because so much of what we send up to space goes into basically the same orbit - space is vast, but the altitudes that make sense for orbit are actually pretty limited in number. And there are thousands of objects up there now. The ISS itself - in real life - has had to adjust course due to flying shrapnel in the past, and shuttles themselves have been hit with small debris while in orbit (discovered after landing). So the premise is entirely realistic.
How Dr. Stone (Sandra Bullock) deals with the situation you may or may not find believable, but nothing she does is outside of what's possible, and it wouldn't be much of a movie without the drama of knowing she's always *this close* to dying. The movie entirely revolves around her, so she needs to be in a constant state of conflict. And she is - literally as soon as she solves one problem, another invariably crops up, and it becomes almost a running joke even to her. (She exclaims things like "what now?!", "are you kidding me??" and "I hate space!" at various points.) But this is not much different than real-life emergencies both in space and in the air, where problems can cascade and need to be solved one by one.
It's a cliché to say things like "such and such actor is a revelation!" and it's strange to say it about someone who's been around as long as Sandra Bullock, but I confess I never respected her as an actress before this film. I still thought of her as the bubbly dullard from "Speed" and her other early films, but she drew me in here emotionally in a way that I was not expecting. Yes, she is strong enough now to literally carry an entire film with her acting. A little bit of her former self still comes through at times - for example, it's still cute when she swears, and I'm not sure it's meant to be in this film. But I actually appreciated those breaks in tension.
All that said, this is not, as some others have said, the second coming of "2001: A Space Odyssey". In fact, I can't think of anything that really elevates this film above that of a very well-acted, very well-shot action thriller. There doesn't seem to be a larger statement or message in "Gravity", or any meaning to the story beyond what's literally presented on screen (unless you want to say it's a film that's against space pollution, or something). In this way, it *is* actually similar to other Hollywood movies of the present - what you see is pretty much what you get. There's nothing to really sink your teeth into beyond that.
You'll notice I haven't even mentioned the special effects so far - and that's because while they're impressive, they're not what makes a good film. "2001" was made in 1968 with plastic models and we still hold it up as the top film in the genre. No, what makes this a really good film is the acting, the tension created by the situation Dr. Stone is put in, and the execution of the directing, cinematography, sound and yes, to some extent the visual effects - in that order. I was actually generally just as impressed with the sound (and lack thereof) in this film as I was with the visuals. The realistic sound helped really put me there, although the music was a bit overbearing at times (what else is new in Hollywood?).