Gravity is a
beautiful and poetic movie. It is a technical marvel and one of the tensest 90
minutes of movie viewing I can recall. And it is about one of the little talked
about, but ever present, dangers of space travel and orbiting earth.
There are so many satellites floating around up there and
every now and then something comes apart, leaving space junk out there. This
space junk sometimes travels at mind-boggling speeds. If it comes into contact
with a shuttle or another satellite or an astronaut on a spacewalk, it could
have devastating consequences. The particular event in Gravity, directed and co-written by Alfonso Cuarón, along with his
son Jonás, is the destruction by missile of a Russian satellite. All those
little pieces of debris are orbiting at a speed of 20,000 kilometers per hour.
They rip through the space shuttle where mission commander Matt Kowalski
(George Clooney) and Dr. Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock) are completing work on the
Hubble. The two are left stranded in space, their only remaining hope being the
escape pods on the International Space Station. And at the speed the debris is
traveling, they have about 90 minutes before they’re in for another shit storm.
Space hasn’t been filmed like this since Kubrick
mesmerized audiences with 2001: A Space
Odyssey. The visuals are breathtaking, complex in their ingenuity, and,
according to guys who have actually been up there, uncannily accurate.
Cinematographer and longtime Cuarón collaborator Emmanuel Lubezki gets the
lighting on these characters so right. In space there is no atmosphere to
diffuse sunlight. It is direct and intense. Where it shines, it’s bright and
where it doesn’t is darkness. Everything about the feeling of a zero gravity
environment in this movie seems to put you right there alongside. The camera
moves freely as the astronauts do.
And the sound design – wow! Movies that come out of
Hollywood – all of them – come with incredible sound mixing and overall sound
design, but this is something else entirely. In space, as an opening title
tells us, there is no atmosphere to carry sound (an ominous variation on the
tagline for Alien). Therefore all the
explosions that we hear in other films taking place in space are just for
effect. Cuarón set out to make a realistic and experiential space film. So the
only sounds we hear apart from the dialogue communicated over radio signal and
the eclectic and ominous score crafted from low rumbling effects and
instrumentation are the ‘sounds’ of the instruments being used, which is
presented more as a vibration effect as if the characters are experiencing the
sensation and accompanying low-frequency sounds generated by their own bodies.
Everything else is silence. And it’s deeply effective.
I did see the movie in 3D. I generally limit myself to
about one or two 3D films a year just to see how the technology is improving
and being implemented differently by other directors. My general feeling about
3D is that it’s an unnecessary appendage on a film. It looked great for the
Pandora world scenes in Avatar, which
were essentially animated sequences. Scorsese put it to fairly good use in Hugo, but I found it pointless in
Spielberg’s The Adventures of Tintin.
In Gravity I truly failed to see how
it added anything to the story or the spectrum of visual wonders. I never once
felt so awed by or immersed in the 3D experience. And I believe that the way
some critics have thrown praise at 3D when utilized by so-called “auteurs” and
derision when it’s used for, say, Clash
of the Titans is a little bit of the emperor’s new clothes. Now, I’ve never
seen a truly bad use of 3D because I avoid those movies in general and even if
I do see them I don’t want to pay the surcharge for the extra effect. So maybe
something happens when you’re so accustomed to seeing it shoddily used that
when a truly gifted filmmaker takes time and care to do it right, it comes
across as truly impressive. Not for me. Because I can count on my fingers the
number of 3D films I’ve seen, I continue to regret the decision to pay extra
every time.
Though Gravity
may be a true technical wonder to behold, there’s something lacking in the
story and characterization to draw the audience in. The lazy writing provides
Stone and Kowalski with one Big Character Trait each that entirely defines
their words and actions. In Stone’s case it’s the past loss of a child. This to
me is just a shorthand way of indicating that the character is going to go
through a Major Change. And to be sure, this film is all about rebirth and
starting anew, from the fetal position Stone folds herself into when she enters
the International Space Station to her (MAJOR
SPOILERS) emergence on earth into a water environment followed by crawling
onto dry land, learning to walk, and heading into a green wilderness paradise
like the creatures that preceded her in evolutionary history by several million
years.
The grand look of the film can’t compensate for the lack
of emotional depth in the story. I can’t deny the fact that I didn’t once feel
anything for Dr. Stone. I’m not sure if this was more to do with the paltry
fleshing out of her character or my distaste for Bullock’s wooden acting and
line delivery. I found it nearly impossible to muster the will to care whether
she lived or died. In fact, I was sort of hoping she wouldn’t make it back to
earth and that the whole thing would become a meditation on self-reflection in
the final hours and minutes before your inevitable death. Alas, the Cuaróns had
something else in mind. It’s no less noble, but I found it unconvincing.
Good review Jason. Not the best script in the world, but the visuals and everything else about it were.
ReplyDelete