Focus On A Message, Not Visuals.

Rating: 3/10 (7 May 2014)

All of the hype about this movie was a problem for me because when I saw Gravity, I ended up being extremely disappointed. even its rating on IMDb was (and is still) high and I was truly expecting it to be good, but alas, it was not. Because of this fact you might want to prepare for some angry rants because of how much it annoyed me. With this out of the way, lets get to some facts about the movie.
The film I am reviewing is Gravity, directed by Alfonso Cuarón in 2013 for approximately $100,000,000 (holy crap). It was written by Alfonso Cuarón, Jonás Cuarón, and George Cloony. It was nominated for 113 awards and won 74 of them (impressive), including the Oscars for Best Achievement in Cinematography, Best Achievement in Directing, and Best Achievement in Film Editing. For my viewing of this film, it was my first time and I watched it with my parents. I chose this film because It annoyed me and I've wanted to rant about it ever since I watched it, I figured this was a good way to do it. This films impact on me, where to start; oh yeah, it did nothing for me. All it really shows is how people don't go to the movies anymore for a good story and interesting, relatable characters, but just for a pretty moving picture (another PERFECT example is Avatar). In my opinion, this movie was not a good role for Sandra Bullock. Well, not from a viewers perspective, it was probably amazing for her, but her acting style is not dramatic enough for this film. She can't display the proper emotions for what she was required to do, even George Cloony would have been better for the role than her. To be fair, the only movie I've liked with Bullock is The Blind Side, but I have yet to see Crash, so I can't be sure if that fact will remain true. To continue with the fact that this film had no emotional impact on me, it bugs me how I felt like before I saw it a lot of people told me how realistic it was. Yes, it is a complete visual piece (Like Avatar), it looks absolutely amazing and if it weren't so bad, I would love to see it on an Imax screen. The only problem is that I thought people meant all of the physics in it would be realistic, but again, the hype has failed, miserably. As a prerequisite to my next statement, I am in physics, with that out of the way what the heck Alfonso? I have a direct quote from Alfonso Cuarón saying: "We were trying to honor reality and scientific accuracy as much as we could". The only example I need to give is one of the biggest moments in the movie: When Bullock has to hang on the the space station while Cloony is dangling off, if that were realistic, as soon as the tether was fully taut he would immediately slingshot back at Bullock, boom, he saves her, movies over, roll credits. All the inaccuracy before annoyed me but that was the killer. Now to stop bashing and give this poor film some love. The technical aspects of this film, the processes, were absolutely stunning, that fact is undeniable. That is why it won pretty much all the technical awards out there, and with how much CGI and animation, it could've been in the animated category and won some more. The cinematics, the visuals, the effects, everything was spot on for what it was. I can't say anything bad at all about any of the technical aspects of this film. Overall, I did not like this film for anything other than what it was, a showpiece. The physics were inaccurate, the acting wasn't what it should have been and it was way over-hyped (I can't blame Alfonso for that one). It may have been stunning, but if I wanted stunning visuals of our Solar System, I would watch the show Cosmos: A Space-Time Odyssey. When I watch a movie, I watch it because people said was good, or because I've been looking forward to it. This film taught me a lesson though: Opinions can be (very) wrong. In all seriousness though this type of showpiece film is the reason Hollywood has gone down the toilet (for the most part).