In the eye of the beholder

Rating: 9/10 (12 October 2013)

It's funny how a literal change in point of view can beautify the hell out of something. Before I get into the meat of the film, I have to mention it had an unfair advantage over any other film in history. This film exploited the overview effect with the first capable match of technology and affordability (also paired with raw talent) to show the Earth as if it (and it is) ALIVE. The film attempted to contemplate life and it's echo's, and did so in an honorable way. However, any acclaimed intellectual can see that it is not a contextually deep film. It has strong highlights backed by unreal cinematography (if we can still use that term to describe CGI), but isn't a 100% complete film.
George Clooney (10/10) may have been the only capable human being on earth to fulfill, with elegance, such a prototypical role. Sandra Bullock (6/10) did not give enough UMPH. There is no other way to describe it, I just needed MORE. I think Natalie Portman, Charlize Theron, or Hilary Swank should've been casted.
I don't feel like explaining my opinions today, and I'm about to go intoxicate myself beyond any societally acceptable means. May we hope beyond yesterday.