Gravity
-
I liked it. The effects were outstanding
-
I will note that Gravity got most of its Oscars in the graphics/special effects categories.....except for the Director category.
And in that regard I don't think moviegoers are all that concerned about technical accuracy. There were worse flaws than that, which the common layman would know nothing about.
Like I said, the whole damsel in distress thing, and the whole "Captain, communications are down" thing were bigger flaws to me.
But OK, I will give it that it had great effects. Especially in the 3-D mode.
Hoorta: did you see the 3-D version?
I will note that Gravity got most of its Oscars in the graphics/special effects categories.....except for the Director category.
And in that regard I don't think moviegoers are all that concerned about technical accuracy. There were worse flaws than that, which the common layman would know nothing about.
Like I said, the whole damsel in distress thing, and the whole "Captain, communications are down" thing were bigger flaws to me.
But OK, I will give it that it had great effects. Especially in the 3-D mode.
Hoorta: did you see the 3-D version?
No I didn't. I also sometimes read HiDefForum- and there's a thing about 3-D. 3-D really isn't 3-D- it's 2 simultaneous two dimensional images your brain has to process into a 3-D image. Some folks (including me) either can't do it at all, or do it poorly. I much preferred the 2-D version of Avatar to the 3-D version.
-
I will note that Gravity got most of its Oscars in the graphics/special effects categories.....except for the Director category.
And in that regard I don't think moviegoers are all that concerned about technical accuracy. There were worse flaws than that, which the common layman would know nothing about.
Like I said, the whole damsel in distress thing, and the whole "Captain, communications are down" thing were bigger flaws to me.
But OK, I will give it that it had great effects. Especially in the 3-D mode.
Hoorta: did you see the 3-D version?
No I didn't. I also sometimes read HiDefForum- and there's a thing about 3-D. 3-D really isn't 3-D- it's 2 simultaneous two dimensional images your brain has to process into a 3-D image. Some folks (including me) either can't do it at all, or do it poorly. I much preferred the 2-D version of Avatar to the 3-D version.
No I didn't. I also sometimes read HiDefForum- and there's a thing about 3-D. 3-D really isn't 3-D- it's 2 simultaneous two dimensional images your brain has to process into a 3-D image. Some folks (including me) either can't do it at all, or do it poorly. I much preferred the 2-D version of Avatar to the 3-D version.
OK, well, I guess that is like being color blind. I much preferred the 3-D version of those films, which I didn't think I would.
I just didn't like having to pay an extra 3.50 for the 3-D though.
-
Avatar in 3d was a treat
-
Avatar in 3d was a treat
Avatar in 3d was a treat
But it dragged a little and I was never anxious to see it again.
of course I see a lot of movies and special effects only impress me for a few minutes.
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
The movie wasn't great but the 3d effects were
-
The movie wasn't great but the 3d effects were
The movie wasn't great but the 3d effects were
And ya see, that's where I have trouble. Like the little gizmo of the Tree of Souls floating an inch away from your nose- against a very 2-D background- at least for us 3-D challenged folks. That's what I usually see watching a 3-D movie, three layers of 2-D images stacked on top of one another. Sucks, but until they come up with virtual holographic projection, I'm not inclined to pay the extra $$ to catch a 3-D flick at the movies. I tried again last summer catching Star Trek Into Darkness 3D, and came away disappointed. I try to stay sort of cutting edge in my Man Cave Home Theater, but I have zero interest in adding a 3-D monitor toy.
-
The movie wasn't great but the 3d effects were
And ya see, that's where I have trouble. Like the little gizmo of the Tree of Souls floating an inch away from your nose- against a very 2-D background- at least for us 3-D challenged folks. That's what I usually see watching a 3-D movie, three layers of 2-D images stacked on top of one another. Sucks, but until they come up with virtual holographic projection, I'm not inclined to pay the extra $$ to catch a 3-D flick at the movies. I tried again last summer catching Star Trek Into Darkness 3D, and came away disappointed. I try to stay sort of cutting edge in my Man Cave Home Theater, but I have zero interest in adding a 3-D monitor toy.
And ya see, that's where I have trouble. Like the little gizmo of the Tree of Souls floating an inch away from your nose- against a very 2-D background- at least for us 3-D challenged folks. That's what I usually see watching a 3-D movie, three layers of 2-D images stacked on top of one another. Sucks, but until they come up with virtual holographic projection, I'm not inclined to pay the extra $$ to catch a 3-D flick at the movies. I tried again last summer catching Star Trek Into Darkness 3D, and came away disappointed. I try to stay sort of cutting edge in my Man Cave Home Theater, but I have zero interest in adding a 3-D monitor toy.
Do you guys have IMAX in the states? We have it here, it works as a sort of 3D experience, without the glasses, on a curved screen. You don't quite get the stuff flying at you like in Avatar (the only film I've seen in 3D so far) but it's pretty good.
-
And ya see, that's where I have trouble. Like the little gizmo of the Tree of Souls floating an inch away from your nose- against a very 2-D background- at least for us 3-D challenged folks. That's what I usually see watching a 3-D movie, three layers of 2-D images stacked on top of one another. Sucks, but until they come up with virtual holographic projection, I'm not inclined to pay the extra $$ to catch a 3-D flick at the movies. I tried again last summer catching Star Trek Into Darkness 3D, and came away disappointed. I try to stay sort of cutting edge in my Man Cave Home Theater, but I have zero interest in adding a 3-D monitor toy.
Do you guys have IMAX in the states? We have it here, it works as a sort of 3D experience, without the glasses, on a curved screen. You don't quite get the stuff flying at you like in Avatar (the only film I've seen in 3D so far) but it's pretty good.
-
gravity is a vignette featuring Hollywood superstars with a prime message of.........never give up. I think we all are bettered a bit by these feel good flicks and, as mentioned, the special effects were trippy
Thank Christ it was only an hour and twenty minutes long.
-
Just rented it, we watched it.
1. The special effects were awesome, how the heck did they do that? Mostly computer generated...
but still..
2. The dialog was dumb. Interesting though, that Clooney ...got back into the spaceship later, and then...
you know. But
How can you continually say "I can't breathe" ...but you just keep right on breathing? eh....
and, when the rope is tangled around her foot, and he lets go?
It's outer space. He wouldn't have been a big drag on her. It's ....outer.....space. He was no draft.
3. But the visuals were amazing. How did they do that weightlessness?
4. Yes, she was undertrained. 6 months? I think not. Chinese and Russian language/flight expert...?
ha. Not buyin it.
5. I wonder what an astronaut would have been thinking while watching it, though.
6. Honestly, Clooney's dumb banter started to remind me of his role in "Oh, brother, where art thou".
7. There IS an awful lot of space garbage up there.... makes ya wonder...
Was worth watching with nothin better to do. But I'm glad we didn't pay to see it at the theater.
The beginning was boring, the dialog was dumb, and the director was surely stoned. But she
did look good in black shorts.
-
gravity is a vignette featuring Hollywood superstars with a prime message of.........never give up. I think we all are bettered a bit by these feel good flicks and, as mentioned, the special effects were trippy
Thank Christ it was only an hour and twenty minutes long.
gravity is a vignette featuring Hollywood superstars with a prime message of.........never give up. I think we all are bettered a bit by these feel good flicks and, as mentioned, the special effects were trippy
Thank Christ it was only an hour and twenty minutes long.
This^
Saw it tonight. Really put off seeing it, but it entertained more than I thought it would.
Z
-
Avatar in 3d was a treat
But it dragged a little and I was never anxious to see it again.
of course I see a lot of movies and special effects only impress me for a few minutes.
WSS
But it dragged a little and I was never anxious to see it again.
of course I see a lot of movies and special effects only impress me for a few minutes.
WSS
Best description I've heard of Avatar was that it's a roller coaster. You know exactly what you're going to get, and it's a fun, albeit shallow, ride. I'd put Gravity in the same category. Had to suspend disbelief when Bullock and Clooney made it to the next satellite and he was hanging on by a rope that was slipping. Outside of that, solid film.
-
I gave it a D+ and have no idea why it got so much traction. Mayy Sandra Bullock is popular among the Academy.
WSS
I gave it a D+ and have no idea why it got so much traction. Mayy Sandra Bullock is popular among the Academy.
WSS
if her space suit got ripped off and she showed her tits i'd give it a D.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login