HOME | DD

Keiichi-K1 In reply to ??? [2014-12-15 20:40:49 +0000 UTC]

I never said anything of the sort.  In fact, I said the opposite, I said that you SHOULD state your opinion, but make sure that it is labelled as "my opinion", rather than the blanket statement "this movie sucks" implying that EVERYONE should hate it too.  In that, it adds the implication that those who do enjoy it are wrong for enjoying it.  THAT is where I have a problem.

Stereotypes .... just like the space program
Flat story .... just like the space program
Everyone knows whats happening before it happens .... just like the space program
Technique was great .... again, just like the space program

The problem is, you are asking for too much from something that doesn't need it.  I mean, what DO you want out of it?  What would you have put in the movie that would have added anything but distraction?  I mean, hell,... the movie was basically chronicling the events of a space mission, just like Apollo 13 and The Right Stuff.  Neither of those movies had any depth of character beyond historical events, and every single one of them you knew what was going to happen before it happened.

So,... you just don't like the space program?  Is that what's going on here?  Because it is certainly within your right to dislike it, but at least SAY that much.  Don't go speaking for other people, as if they should have the same opinion as you.

"Oh common - the movie was full of stereotypes"
TRANSLATION - "this is why YOU should hate it too.  Why don't you hate it?  Are you stupid or something?"

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DeDani In reply to Keiichi-K1 [2014-12-16 07:41:16 +0000 UTC]

Oh boy - you put a lot of things in my words that I never said.
Its totally clear that my comments are my opinion - no need to meantion it seperatly - whats wrong with you?

I dont ask for unneeded things. I ask for thing which are smarter. I dont ask for laser war in space or something like that.
It's poorly made: Of course its the russian who destroy a satellite and dont even calc the possibility of problems... No stereotype? Oh yeah, I forgot thats the same in real space program, of course!

"Too many people try to pick it apart saying the story was crap, or things to that nature.  To them, I say this:....."
TRANSLATION - "This movie was so woderfull to me and I never, never want to read/ hear critics about it. If you criticise the movie your opinion is crap, you must be dumb or something"
Realy? Is that the way you`re going?

Go further and watch the movie without just falling in love the technique. If you take it as it is you will find out - and please calm down.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Keiichi-K1 In reply to DeDani [2014-12-16 14:49:57 +0000 UTC]

I had watched the movie many many times, thank you very much.

With EVERY movie, there is a measure of suspension of disbelief.  The missile strike is merely a catalyst to initiate the Kessler Syndrome, which would normally take far longer to occur.  If it was the more realistic "two satellites happened to collide" scenario, it never would have created the massive debris cloud fast enough to cause all of that damage.  It is not meant to be hyper analyzed.

The technique is the important thing.  Go to any museum, are all the works you see meant to be taken the exact same way?  Do they all need a complex storyline?  No.  Some have story, some convey a meaning, and some are simply meant to be taken in and experienced.  I submit that Gravity is such a film.  It isn't about story, it isn't about stereotypes, it is just about the experience of it.  You are SUPPOSED TO just focus on the technique.

"Really?  Is that the way you're going?"  Well, I'm not the one trying to convince people of how terrible the movie is in a comment on someone's great artwork on the movie in question.  Zeronis has worked very hard to create this beautiful piece of artwork, so here may not be the best place to vent about how much you hate the movie.  There is a measure of respect that must be addressed here.

And for the record, a major motion picture release CANNOT be much smarter, not if you want to reach a broad audience.  If you are making a television or independent release, you can take greater chances because you can appeal to the niche you're reaching for.  But in the film industry, if you are spending the time, effort and money that was spent here, you MUST GUARANTEE box office draw.  If a single corporate studio suit says "I don't get it", your movie won't even be made.  We don't live in an era where mainstream films can be art anymore, so you HAVE TO appeal to the lowest common denominator.  That means you have to spell everything out, you have to slap everyone in the face with it, and you have to make it as simple as possible.  Believe me, I would love for the day when "Marketability" is no longer a concern.... but that is not today.  Having worked in the film and animation industry, I can acknowledge this fact.  If you are going to fight against this, then take the fight to the studios, not a specific movie that was at least trying to be something good.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DeDani In reply to Keiichi-K1 [2014-12-16 17:21:53 +0000 UTC]

I guess you didnt understand me right. I never said "I hate that movie" - I said "Its not that good as you think and you commented here".
Why do you interpret so much things in my words? I think you did this dialog with a lot of people who really hate this movie. In fact: I´m not those guys!

Your´re right: The film-industry just created movies to earn a lot of money. You say Gravity is a peace of art? Yes it is - just because of its technique, not because of its story, not because of its actors...
Please tell me, why it must be "the dumb russian"? Are there no other way to get in this scenerio? And who cares if it's possible to created the massive debris cloud fast enough. Its a flat storyline...

BTW: Oh, poor little Sandra lost her child and she waits to get over it until she reached the space? Really? This fact was just placed to get a heart touched moment - and this is also flat. You say it 20times "...just like spaceprogram" -do you remember? If she are ready to take off into space, she has to solve a lot of psychical tests. Do you think she would passed those tests?

Next thing: Why she get half naked? Ah, I get it! Sandra is about 50 and have to show how great she is still looking. Sorry, but this movie has potential but the creator don't know how to use.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Keiichi-K1 In reply to DeDani [2014-12-16 17:59:07 +0000 UTC]

It is not so much the "dumb Russian" as it is lack of foresight, which has been a common theme for the Russian space program, since its earliest days.  Furthermore, not many people know of any space programs beyond United States and Russia.  China, of course, but they are fairly new to the space scene, and since the future Tiengong is slated to replace the ISS in the 2020's, it is better to keep perceptions soft and sweet toward them for now.  Besides, China has been doing well with their space program up to this point, so a "dumb Chinese" would not make any sense.  so, why "dumb Russia"?  Because its believable.

"its a flat storyline" perhaps, but it is a real-world concern.  Kessler Syndrome has been a major focus of NASA for several decades.  An entire wing of NASA is devoted entirely to monitoring and preventing collisions, as there is no way to stop (or even predict the path of) debris once it is created.  It is as "flat" a storyline as going to the moon.  But somehow I get the feeling if you were to watch "Destination Moon"(1950), you would call that a "flat storyline" too, even though it is a surprisingly accurate portrayal of a Lunar mission, before it was even considered possible.

"Poor little Sandra lost her child" - that is actually something I wish was removed, because it wasn't really needed, except to provide a kind of catalyst for her just giving up.  Otherwise it would make no real sense for her to lose her motivation to survive.  So, until there is a better suggestion of something to fill its place, it boils down to a necessary plot device.

Half naked?  When?  When getting out of the spacesuit?  Because you get into a spacesuit half naked.  Did you SEE that suit?  Do you have any idea how uncomfortable and cumbersome that thing is?  Especially when you are moving through the confined areas of a space station.  The whole "birth" scene is arguably one of the most accurate parts of the whole movie.  1), you don't take spacesuits out out of the airlock, unless you're going outside, and 2), the Human body (when not restrained by gravity) naturally curls up in the fetal position.  This was proven on Apollo 7 when the astronauts tried to sleep, and their bodies curled up (leading to back tension further into the mission).  This is also why wall-mounted sleeping bags are utilized in space stations.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DeDani In reply to Keiichi-K1 [2014-12-17 18:44:01 +0000 UTC]

Hm, I dont know "Destination Moon".
Half naked:  Yes, this was exacly the scene that I´m talking about. Noone cares about how unconfortable the suit is. It just annoys me to see Sandra (feels) 10.000 minutes to take of her suit and hang around. That was really unnecessary.

Maybe you're right by saying Gravity was very realistic, but its not because of the story and still not because of its used ideas. As I said: technique was great, story flat and -sorry- it was boring. I miss to be entertain on this movie -again, I´m not asking for a laser-war. This movie maybe fits to your taste, but really not to mine.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Keiichi-K1 In reply to DeDani [2014-12-17 19:19:22 +0000 UTC]

Perhaps its because you spent way too much time focused on her body, rather than the situation.  "No one cares about how uncomfortable the suit is" oh... so you want to sacrifice reality just for the sake of covering up her body, that wouldn't even BE covered up in the first place?  Seriously... do you get a hardon from seeing an exposed ankle?  Is that what's going on here?

It was a scene meant to portray a kind of symbolism of rebirth, and it was not 10 minutes long.  The entire segment, from the moment she removes the helmet to the scene change lasts a grand total of 1 minute 30 seconds.  In reality, removing an EVA-rated spacesuit should take roughly 15 minutes.  So, this scene was, in actuality, way too short.  And since the whole movie is meant to convey the feeling of weightlessness, it is damned sure necessary.

When creating a realistic movie, story and ideas are what are unnecessary.  What "ideas" were conveyed in Apollo 13?  What story was there, beyond the events themselves?  when your entire argument is "idea and story", it shows how you have completely forgotten that film is an art form, and must not be affected by whether or not it fits in mainstream popularity.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

KristineUlanowsky In reply to ??? [2014-02-02 11:24:41 +0000 UTC]

you captured emotions so well and its really beautifully done

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

DrewMiler In reply to ??? [2014-01-14 01:29:37 +0000 UTC]

Her expression is incredible.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Pansy4Life99 In reply to ??? [2014-01-10 22:05:27 +0000 UTC]

your work is absolutely stunning

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Rettosukero In reply to ??? [2014-01-10 00:15:09 +0000 UTC]

;u; I am glad that somebody love this movie as much as i do. This movie is brilliant it has art style and passion and send message (for me i don't know if for any other) I am sad that i haven't seen it in IMAX or other super big cinema it perfect be perfect. F*** Avatar, this is movie for cinemas like this. Anyway I am sad that his movie is not that appreciated as it should, it's awesome. And I am glad that main character was played by Sandra Bullock not Angelina Jolie. Mostly I don't like happy endings and characters that stand everything bad in movies but here I think that character really deserves this happy ending. It make me apprieciete that I can live on Earth walk where I want I can breathe as deep as I want. But in other way... see Mother Earth from there... it is worth it.

I know I wrote a lot but i will say more ; p For me best OST piece was "Shenzou" from culmination point. Scene was cool, goal so close but yet so far, the last big effort.

And your picture, what can I say : ) even as quick sketch looks great, I like reflections on glass the most : )

Sorry for long comment but I am still excited with this movie ^^"

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

88Rising In reply to ??? [2013-12-12 17:33:42 +0000 UTC]

dont you think George Clooney's character was way too calm? the movie was awesome 

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Captainjjb84 In reply to 88Rising [2014-01-02 22:36:45 +0000 UTC]

A little bit, but he the really experienced Astronaut, it is not until they get near the Space Station he begins to show worry and fear.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

LocoDA107 In reply to DeadPegasus [2013-11-26 01:25:13 +0000 UTC]

MY REACTION:

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Captainjjb84 In reply to LocoDA107 [2013-12-30 02:16:59 +0000 UTC]

As was mine

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

LocoDA107 In reply to givemestrength [2013-11-24 00:20:58 +0000 UTC]

:yuno:
Y U NO LIKE THE MOVIE?!?!?!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

givemestrength In reply to LocoDA107 [2013-11-24 00:46:47 +0000 UTC]

I got really annoyed with Sandra Bullock's character. I just didn't find her interesting. Clooney's was good until he floated off into space, sadly.... I understand that this is based on a true story, but I didn't at all feel like this could be in any way and I had to keep reminding myself that it was actually based on a true story as not to criticize the lagging plot that never seemed to get better, in my opinion.

All of it just seemed very...anticlimatic.

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

Skofnung In reply to givemestrength [2013-11-24 06:49:08 +0000 UTC]

Based on a true story?  Since when?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

givemestrength In reply to Skofnung [2013-11-24 19:30:12 +0000 UTC]

Sorry, I just checked and I guess it wasn't. I was told by several people before I watched it that it actually was based on a true story. I was kind of pushed into going with me only knowing about an hour before I actually saw it. After seeing it I didn't bother to go check.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

LocoDA107 In reply to givemestrength [2013-11-24 01:29:23 +0000 UTC]

You should have seen it in IMAX 3D, then.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1