1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Welcome to the new DBSTalk community platform. We have recently migrated to a community platform called Xenfono and hope you will find this change to your liking. There are some differences, but for the most part, if you just post and read, that will all be the same. If you have questions, please post them in the Forum Support area. Thanks!

Gravity

Discussion in 'The Movies' started by dpeters11, Oct 6, 2013.

  1. Oct 6, 2013 #1 of 10
    dpeters11

    dpeters11 Hall Of Fame

    16,184
    483
    May 30, 2007
    Cincinnati
    Has anyone here seen this yet? I haven't, but originally wasn't interested. After seeing some of the reviews, I'm changing my mind. Even Phil Plaitt, the Bad Astronomer says that while they took liberties with orbital mechanics and such, a lot was right in the science.
     
  2. Oct 7, 2013 #2 of 10
    juniormaj

    juniormaj Legend

    721
    20
    Feb 9, 2009
    Newbury...
    I was skeptical, but it's well done.
    I saw it with D-Box seating in a Dolby Atmos theater in 3D.
    All of those factors added in quite well.
     
  3. Oct 7, 2013 #3 of 10
    dpeters11

    dpeters11 Hall Of Fame

    16,184
    483
    May 30, 2007
    Cincinnati
    Normally I won't see a 3D movie that was done in post production, but this one is one of the exceptions I think. Considering the environment that it takes place in, it makes sense.

    Neil DeGrasse Tyson was more critical on the science, but there comes a point where they get too nit picky. I once was called out as wrong for saying a DirecTV satellite was at 103, because I didn't specify West. :)

    http://gawker.com/neil-degrasse-tyson-thinks-gravity-is-scientifically-i-1441842497
     
  4. Oct 7, 2013 #4 of 10
    juniormaj

    juniormaj Legend

    721
    20
    Feb 9, 2009
    Newbury...
    Yes, there were a few "inaccuracies", but as entertainment it works.

    As for the 3D, there are some depth of field shots that are quite nice.
     
  5. dpeters11

    dpeters11 Hall Of Fame

    16,184
    483
    May 30, 2007
    Cincinnati
    We just saw this today, fantastic film. I didn't really care about the inaccuracies, it was so well done that it didn't matter. Plus they got so much right that is so often wrong, the sound etc (if assuming you're hearing what Ryan is hearing in the suit.)

    Works very well on IMAX, stunning visuals and the weightless effects were exceptional.
     
  6. Holydoc

    Holydoc Legend

    245
    4
    Feb 17, 2008
    Panhandle, FL
    I expected more. I was a bit disappointed especially with all the great reviews.
     
    1 person likes this.
  7. dpeters11

    dpeters11 Hall Of Fame

    16,184
    483
    May 30, 2007
    Cincinnati
  8. juniormaj

    juniormaj Legend

    721
    20
    Feb 9, 2009
    Newbury...
  9. Rich

    Rich DBSTalk Club DBSTalk Club

    25,663
    436
    Feb 22, 2007
    Piscataway, NJ
    Me too. I was very disappointed. I think (this means that I'm expressing a personal opinion) that it's the worst movie I've ever seen Sandra Bullock in. George Clooney certainly didn't add much to it. As far as the science goes, hopping from one entry system to another country's entry system to another country's entry system is a bit of a stretch. Well, I'm glad some of you liked it, my wife and I both like SF movies and we almost turned it off in the middle of the flick.

    Rich
     
  10. sigma1914

    sigma1914 DIRECTV A-Team DBSTalk Club

    14,573
    369
    Sep 5, 2006
    Allen, TX
    The 3d was pretty amazing and made it worth it.
     

Share This Page