Alfonso Cuarón's "Gravity"

[mr. tegu]

Originally Posted by scott free

How in Gods name could anyone not like Sandra?

Beautiful, talented and easily one of the most down to earth women in Hollywood, she has that "highly approachable" vibe.

I don't really find her to be very attractive for one and find that aspect of her to be very overrated. But beyond that, I don't see her as being very funny in her comedic roles or very believable as the characters she plays in her other roles.

[Fire Me Boy!]

Originally Posted by scott free

How in Gods name could anyone not like Sandra?

Beautiful, talented and easily one of the most down to earth women in Hollywood, she has that "highly approachable" vibe.

I think she's cute and all, but mostly I find her waaaaay overrated in both the looks department and the talent department. She's adequate in most roles, but that's about it. There are 1,000 other actresses that could perform most of her roles equally or better.

[Kingsburg#12]

Seems like Open Water in space. Cooney is a douchebag, Robert Downey Jr would've been way better. Never ever ever seen a 3d effect that made me want to wear stupid dirty glasses for 2 hours err 90 minutes. IMAX is the biggest joke. Want an IMAX experience on the cheap? Sit closer to the screen. That way you have to pan and scan the screen just like IMAX. Apollo 13 is what I think of when I think of great space films. Based on the glowing reviews here, I think I will definitely have to get it when it comes to the Redbox.

[JD10367]

Bullock is not only attractive but, according to Jesse James, a freak in the sack. What more can a guy ask for?

[Easy 6]

Originally Posted by JD10367

Bullock is not only attractive but, according to Jesse James, a freak in the sack. What more can a guy ask for?

Indeed, i'll grant Mr. tegu and FMB that women are like art, its all in the eye of the beholder... but jeeez, I find her to be talented and QUITE attractive.

[Fire Me Boy!]

Originally Posted by scott free

Indeed, i'll grant Mr. tegu and FMB that women are like art, its all in the eye of the beholder... but jeeez, I find her to be talented and QUITE attractive.

To be clear on the attractive part - Mr. tegu is the one that doesn't find her attractive. I think she's attractive but overrated.

[mr. tegu]

Originally Posted by Fire Me Boy!

To be clear on the attractive part - Mr. tegu is the one that doesn't find her attractive. I think she's attractive but overrated.

Well I guess I should clarify. I don't find her to be ugly or anything and she is cute and all, but I definitely wouldn't call her beautiful or stunning or anything like that. I guess just based on the perception I have that she is looked at as an amazing and gorgeous actress, I find her overrated.

[Deberg_1990]

Originally Posted by Fire Me Boy!

To be clear on the attractive part - Mr. tegu is the one that doesn't find her attractive. I think she's attractive but overrated.

I would have to agree with this. She's a decent actress, but not an especially great one. She does seem to be very likeable and popular in Hollywood circles.

[Bowser]

Originally Posted by JD10367

Bullock is not only attractive but, according to Jesse James, a freak in the sack. What more can a guy ask for?

In his case, apparently a lot.

[Silock]

I found it to be pretty unrealistic, but it was still visually stunning and I loved the minimal cuts in the action.

Spoiler!

She lands 10 feet from shore? After she should have burned up on re-entry?

[mr. tegu]

Originally Posted by Silock

I found it to be pretty unrealistic, but it was still visually stunning and I loved the minimal cuts in the action.

Spoiler!

She lands 10 feet from shore? After she should have burned up on re-entry?

Spoiler!

Why should she have burned up upon re-entry? It seems she was in the pod designed for re-entry. As far as where she landed, I guess she just got lucky. There is nothing inherently unrealistic about that.

They could have had her land in the middle of the ocean and have to use her inflatable rafts and such but that wouldn't allow for the scenes of her setting foot on land.

I really liked the movie. I didn't find it to be boring at all and I enjoyed all the suspense.

[Silock]

Originally Posted by mr. tegu

Spoiler!

Why should she have burned up upon re-entry? It seems she was in the pod designed for re-entry. As far as where she landed, I guess she just got lucky. There is nothing inherently unrealistic about that.

They could have had her land in the middle of the ocean and have to use her inflatable rafts and such but that wouldn't allow for the scenes of her setting foot on land.

I really liked the movie. I didn't find it to be boring at all and I enjoyed all the suspense.

Spoiler!

Because the whole thing was on fire. Columbia shuttle disaster was a similar thing. Not to mention, she would have died from the fire on the way down to Earth. Landing that close to shore isn't impossible, just another in a series of incredibly improbable events in the movie.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by Silock

Spoiler!

Because the whole thing was on fire. Columbia shuttle disaster was a similar thing. Not to mention, she would have died from the fire on the way down to Earth. Landing that close to shore isn't impossible, just another in a series of incredibly improbable events in the movie.

Spoiler!

To be fair, the Chinese station had a modular design. None of the modules besides the escape craft were designed for re-entry that's why they burned up while the capsule did not. Columbia was not a modular design, so a little chink in its armor caused it to burn up.

Overall, though, I agree... there were many things you could nitpick when it came to realism. Still, the movie was a fun ****ing ride, I don't care who you are.

[Silock]

Originally Posted by Pants

Spoiler!

To be fair, the Chinese station had a modular design. None of the modules besides the escape craft were designed for re-entry that's why they burned up while the capsule did not. Columbia was not a modular design, so a little chink in its armor caused it to burn up.

Overall, though, I agree... there were many things you could nitpick when it came to realism. Still, the movie was a fun ****ing ride, I don't care who you are.

Spoiler!

I'm just talking about the other parts of the craft that weren't protected by the heatshielding that were on fire as it was spinning around before righting itself.

[Mr. Flopnuts]

I don't go to the movie theatres very often. A movie has to really grab my attention, AND look like an amazing 3-D experience for me to go. Otherwise I'll wait and watch it at home. I hadn't read the reviews, and am not a movie nerd by any means, but I'm almost always easily pleased by a film.

I loved the 3-D, and I loved the suspense. I just found the plot to be boring as hell. Someone said it was almost like they took the last 20 minutes of a movie and stretched it into a full length feature and I couldn't agree more. Someone else made a Super Mario reference, and that was the EXACT analogy I gave to my wife as we were walking out of the theater.

I wasn't upset I spent the money, nor was I upset I went to see the movie. It provided me the entertainment that I was expecting when I decided to see it, I just wasn't impressed with the movie itself. The visuals were stunning, the intensity was overwhelming at times, particularly at the end. I sat up in my seat and took deep breaths a few times during it. I LOVED that. The characters and plot could not suck me in on any level though. And if it wasn't supposed too, well, mission accomplished. I'm just sayin...

Overall though, what I wanted from it delivered. Enough that I'm considering seeing it again while I can in 3-D. And I haven't seen the same movie in a theater in over 20 years. Maybe I am a movie snob though. I got up and walked out in the middle of Jurassic Park and never did see the rest of it. I was 11 at the time.