Gravity (2013)
- Thread starter Fedor
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
My theory is she died at the start of the film, and the whole movie is just her moving on to whatever lies beyond death.
For her it was forgiving herself for her daughter.
I don't give a shit what the filmakers wanted it to be, thats what i'm going with.
I like prisoners allot, but this is my favorite movie of the year.
For her it was forgiving herself for her daughter.
I don't give a shit what the filmakers wanted it to be, thats what i'm going with.
I like prisoners allot, but this is my favorite movie of the year.
Szlia
Member
- 6,634
- 1,376
As far as I am concerned there was too much story. I don't think you need to make that much corny dialogue driven back-story to show someone facing hardships being tempted by giving up and ultimately deciding to fight. Still an extremely impressive movie.
Space realism question: after all these efforts and all this stress, wouldn't an astronaut be drenched in sweat inside they space suit? Or does temperature/humidity control prevents that?
Space realism question: after all these efforts and all this stress, wouldn't an astronaut be drenched in sweat inside they space suit? Or does temperature/humidity control prevents that?
Jysin
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 6,492
- 4,506
People watching the screener rips of this have completely missed the point of the movie in my experience. This one was all about immersion and needed the 3D IMAX experience. I cant at all imagine this would have had the impact on a first viewing sat at home or even worse on a desktop / laptop. While I enjoyed it in theater, this is not a rewatchable film at home at all. You guys missed the boat.
Eomer
Trakanon Raider
- 5,472
- 272
I would imagine that space suits have some sort of humidity control system, otherwise condensation would be a big issue.
That's elitist horseshit, a good movie stands on its own in any format.
You sound like one of those videophile nerds that misses the point of all movies.
you're right, a good movie does stand on its own. too bad this wasn't a good movie.
Did someone just knock you out recently, or were you born retarded?
Watching a live performance, and comparing that to watching a movie on a Imax screen should get you smacked in the head for being a dumb ass...
Do you think they rocket you into space, and you are watching the actors perform it live?? WTF's wrong with you, someone delete this child before he can reproduce.
Watching a movie on your home theater vs watching on a Imax screen isn't even the same ball park as watching a movie of a live music performance vs going to see the live music performance.
That comparison is asinine.
If you missed the movie on Imax you are not missing much imho... 3D fucking sucks anyway.
That comparison is asinine.
If you missed the movie on Imax you are not missing much imho... 3D fucking sucks anyway.
Chukzombi
Millie's Staff Member
- 73,111
- 214,401
i have been to many live concerts, mostly metal bands with eardum shattering PA systems and mosh pits that extend to every section of the venue. you simply cannot duplicate that experience with a movie. that being said, as an old fart, if i want to see a band and only want to see a band for their music and not get into a 2.5 hour mock fistfight with 5,000 people and walk around for the next 2 days with nothing but a loud ringing in my ears, im quite happy watching it on a screen from the comfort of my home.
Your over the top, completely out of proportion response to someone not wanting to watch this shitty movie, which sucked in every way except visuals, on anything other than the medium in which visuals can be appreciated, is noted.
Kill yourself
Joeboo
Molten Core Raider
- 8,157
- 140
This movie is basically a 90-minute visual effects show. Watching it on your TV at home compared to the IMAX 3D experience is about the same difference as if you watched something on your phone compared to your big screen TV with surround sound. It's a massive, massive step in quality of experience. Honestly, the script and story is mediocre, its the visuals that are 90% of the entertainment value, and much of that is lost as you downgrade to TV sized, non-3d viewing. I generally hate 3D and think it's a gimmick, I didn't even enjoy it in Avatar, but this was the first movie that I felt was actually better because of the 3D.
Massive? you kid yourself. I watched it at the Houston Marquis which houses one of the biggest Imaxs in the country, and I've watched it in my living room on a screener.
The movie is solid no matter what format. The performance by Bullock, the direction by Alfonso Cuar?n, and the Cinematography by Emmanuel Lubezki is what made this movie not some CG green screened bullshit.
If by Visuals you are identifying the talent behind the film,and not the tech behind it then all art films are highly visual. This is not some Demo for 3D..
And this is a much better film then City of Men, which they also did an amazing job visualizing for an audience.
It's the definition of an art film, and is 100% a character piece playing out like a dream with highly symbolic compositions that make no sense in reality, but are accepted in art.
Also 3d is total ass, not only does it darken everything destroying it's contrast, and original colors, but the motion is absolutely horrible.
The movie is solid no matter what format. The performance by Bullock, the direction by Alfonso Cuar?n, and the Cinematography by Emmanuel Lubezki is what made this movie not some CG green screened bullshit.
If by Visuals you are identifying the talent behind the film,and not the tech behind it then all art films are highly visual. This is not some Demo for 3D..
And this is a much better film then City of Men, which they also did an amazing job visualizing for an audience.
It's the definition of an art film, and is 100% a character piece playing out like a dream with highly symbolic compositions that make no sense in reality, but are accepted in art.
Also 3d is total ass, not only does it darken everything destroying it's contrast, and original colors, but the motion is absolutely horrible.
Szlia
Member
- 6,634
- 1,376
This is not a problem with 3D per se, but, as the polarizing filter will remove some of the luminosity, it's important to have a good screen (on the gives back the biggest possible portion of the light it receives) and a powerful projector (as in brighter than a regular projector). Not all theaters are equal on that front, so you can have very dark 3D projections, because of poor screens and weak projectors and you can have top notch experiences with great screens and, in some cases, dual projectors.
It should be noted that modern projectors have a regular and a 3D intensity level that can be switched depending on the movie being screened, but, sometimes, you have 2D films that are projected through the polarizing filter with regular intensity.Thatis a nightmare, but the theater is to blame.
