Lara Means

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/new...-sandra-657919

Solid Snake

Neat little short. Wasn't there conversation longer in the film though? Maybe it just felt longer in the film.

bluetoast

Yeah there was an article on it over at THR.

Solid Snake

I'll have to take a peek at that.

bluetoast

Here it is:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/new...y-china-658099

As for the convo in the short, it should be the same length, I read that they used the audio from this short and put that in the final mix of the actual movie (I'm assuming they mean his side of the convo).

TomOpus

It would be a cool feature on the upcoming BR if you could watch both her scene and the short side-by-side.

Burnt Thru

Just saw this last night on Imax3D - wonderful visual film with some of the background destruction genuinely terrifying.

One question though..

Michael Corvin

Hollywood moment. That scene has been analyzed to death.

Lara Means

No surprise here. After receiving 10 Oscar Nominations, it was announced that Gravity would be rereleased to Digital IMAX 3D theaters starting on Jan 31.

http://www.imax.com/community/blog/a...arting-jan-31/

musick

very cool ... I missed it in IMAX 3D first time and only saw in Real 3D
don't know if I'll fork out the coin to see it in IMAX with the home release coming out the following month but would definitely recommend to anyone who has not seen it in the theater

Lara Means

Real 3D nor home theater can match the experience of seeing this movie in The IMAX 3D presentation. No official release date has been set for the blu ray.

musick

don't doubt that but having seen it in Real 3D which was great I will have a difficult time justifying spending almost $20 to see it again and then buying it for the home

and while maybe not officially announced by the studio, the solicitation 1 sheet has a 2/25 street date noted

hanshotfirst1138

I saw it in digital IMAX 3-D, it gave me a headache, unfortunately, I don't know if it was the dual projectors or what, but the slightest tilting of my head seemed to change my focus.

Why So Blu?

Just watched it this morning and it was beyond epic! Man, my nuts turned into raisins due to how intense and riveting the film was. Shit, this deserves all the praise it is being given and I'm sure it'll clean up at the Oscars. Well done, Alfonso!

Solid Snake

Nuts... Turned into raisins intensity. Jesus, man.

EddieMoney

Raisinuts.


When I get that excited watching a movie, I usually just piss and shit my adult diapers.

Why So Blu?

In retrospect I'm pissed I missed it in theaters then again if I had seen it in theaters I would have pulled an Eddie Money. No doubt.

covenant

Go see a doctor now!

Why So Blu?

Just watched this again and it was still exhilarating. Fuck, I almost forgot to mention the 15-20 minute opening shot of the film. Single shot, biatch!

RichC2

Yeah, my buddy runs a store and received a 3D Blu-ray of this early, this lost very little on the small screen.

And by small screen, I mean 110", and the 3D is still amazing. This is one of the best strictly "survival" movies I've seen.

maxfisher

Finally saw this last night and it's a tough one to rate. As a sheer spectacle, it's 5/5 just for the tremendous visuals. They were truly amazing and, just from that perspective, I felt like I was watching something on par with 2001 for the current generation. Because of that, I enjoyed it a lot. That said, there were four scenes that were so terrible that they really hampered my enjoyment as I was watching it.

1) Ryan would've been as good as dead right off the bat. When she disconnected from the spinning arm and was shot off into space, that was it. Having Matt find her and save her was akin to having someone on the ground sprint and catch someone who fell from an airplane.

2) Then they mock credulity in the opposite direction and introduce some kind of phantom space wind that makes it impossible for the chute rope to hold both of their weights, which was just nonsense.

3) The space junk wouldn't recur. First, it's extremely small odds that they'd encounter it once, but fine, it's a great plot device to get things going. After that initial encounter, they're not seeing it again. Whatever orbit it's in, it's supposedly traveling 50,000 mph in that orbit, while they're traveling something like 10,000 mph in another. Those aren't crossing again any time soon.

4) Ryan getting to the Chinese space station. They state it's about 100 km (60 miles) away. She blasts the landing jets to accelerate to a velocity that gets her there in a couple minutes. It was very short in the movie, but even if it took ten minutes, she's going at least 360 mph. Then she times her ejection to be right as she's passing it, which means she would've flown right by and that would have been that. And even if she'd timed her ejection more appropriately, there's no way the fire extinguisher is slowing her down from that speed.

The more I think about these, the more they bother me, as all of them could have been fixed without doing anything to lessen the dramatic tension or overall narrative. Despite that, the movie does succeed wildly as a visual spectacle and I'll probably enjoy it more on subsequent viewings, as I'll be prepared for the nonsense. After seeing it, I'm not surprised by the best picture nod, but I'll be disappointed if it wins.

TomOpus

Possible $70 million payday for Sandra

Deal was signed in 2010 after Angelina Jolie backed out. $20 million up front then 15% of box office.

Why So Blu?

She deserves every penny.

Mr. Flix

Not to say that Angelina Jolie needs the money, but when an actor backs out of a movie as financially and critically successful as Gravity was, I can't help but wonder how long their "oh, crap-in-a-hat!" moment lasts. Like, does she binge on Ben & Jerry's for a day?

Why So Blu?

Jolie? Nope. She's got so much fuck you money that Gravity would have been a drop in the bucket - and I don't think she would have had Bullock's deal. That and Jolie is a film director now, so she's doing her own thing now.