The movie "Gravity" with GEORGE CLOONEY !

SPOILER ALERT, thank you destiny1 .Im frankly sick of hearing Jorje Klooneys name every 5 minutes on the tube ,on the net,, I stuck it in the title on purpose just to be annoying The movie had some cool special fx , all basically were different varieties of the parts of the ships spinning around ,breaking apart and hitting each other .It bothered me that Clowney was flying around the craft in a suit untethered. The first half of the movie was practically one scene and it moved oh so slow. Clooney disappeared about 30 minutes into it which I could have cared less but it was just kind of weird.. Oh, the music was terrible as well, unless you like the hick country genre. After watching it, I was a little angry that they wrote the movie that way, I don't believe I have seen such a straight forward movie in a while, absent of plot character and frankly generic, Id have to give it 1 1/2 stars, the 1 for the fx. The best part to me was the last 5 minutes when Sandra Bullock fell to earth in the capsule and landed in in a lake, the view of the lake was the best scene. I was shocked that a movie with a great actress like Sandra Bullock was soo bad. Maybe it deserved a 2 but only for the fx .

a reply to: lotusfoot

Wow.

It took you a long time after the movie was released to finally review it.

Anyway, Clooney or not he was not the star anyway, and I thought Bullock did a pretty good job IMO.

a reply to: lotusfoot they could have made the movie real fun if the actors worn fire/heat proof space suits equipted with fire proof parachutes and nav. systems to steer them to someplace patriotic like the statue of liberty or to Daytona Beach during spring break.

I like Clooney ALOT (not a lot, ALOT)

a reply to: lotusfoot

I enjoyed the movie and music, when I watched it.

You really should put SPOILER ALERT in the beginning of your OP for those who haven't seen the movie yet.

JMOHO...

Des

a reply to: grubblesnert
Yeah he is cool, I remember back when he made his first tv appearance on "Roseanne " along with Bil Maher. He is lucky his father was in the business.

I think it kinda SUCKED!

Afterall, it was a story in a vacuum ?

Tbh I enjoyed it and though what is such a poor actor such as Sandra bullock doing staring in a good film

The plot was predictable of course but I though the journey was gripping and tbh not a lot of movies grip me these days, FX was great cloney was boring and samey same but yeah i deffo enjoyed it and have watched twice again sines

Just going to drop this, but... After years of not liking the tv trailers and YouTube trailers I though the hunger games looked terrible, i have to say I really enjoyed both of them back to back the other night looking forward to the 3rd

It sucked so bad. It was primarily all CGI. Only good part about it was that Bullock sounded like she was getting it during the whole movie she was moaning so much.

It takes more than cool CGI to make a good movie. It takes a story! Not some star gasping, grunting, groaning, and breathing heavily.

It also help to have characters you care about.

I thought it was pretty good, but some major mistakes. SPOILER ALERT, READ NO FURTHER, ANYBODY

The biggest of all was when our heroine, Sandra "Sandy Bull" Bullock, was holding onto a line attached to George Clooney, who talked her into letting him go and saving herself. They played it as if he was being whipped by a huge wind, and was hanging on for dear life and Sandra was having the hardest time in the world trying to pull him in. In reality, the slightest tug, the slightest pull, on her part would have brought Clooney sailing towards her.

Good effects though. I read a review where an astronaut said that now his family would know what it was like "up there", and felt it was a very realistic look at circling the earth.

I have to say when I saw the trailer the first time (before it opened) I thought , "Now this is a movie I want to watch!". Then the opening came and went so I rented it and then I was thinking "Well the star of this show is the effects. Bummer, no story(meaning no steak...nothing that I could sink my teeth into)", and "Glad I didn't waste the price of a ticket to it in the theater." Geeezzz....will anyone make a good (settling for less than great now) movie again?

a reply to: lotusfoot

Uh, I remember Clooney way before Roseanne, he was on Facts of Life in the 80's.

a reply to: lotusfoot

I liked the movie, as for the opening scene, it was supposed to be one scene. The 3D was great, and the movie should have been seen in a theater in 3D, and not on a TV. There are very few movies that need to be seen in a theater, let alone in 3D, but this is one of them. I just watched it again last weekend on a 65 inch 3D TV and although it still looked great, it was not as immersive as in the theater.

I didn't like the movie at all.

First off .... I had to take off the 3D glasses. The spinning in space was making me ill. And then there was Sanda Bullock's character having a melt down. Astronauts are professionals and they wouldn't be so flakey. So that was out of character.

a reply to: FlyersFan
If you recall Sandra's character was not indeed an astronaut and only had 6 months of training for her trip in space she was sent to make repairs. She makes many comments about feeling sick being in space. So her "melt down" was justified. Perhaps you did not pay attention to the dialogue the first 10 min where this is all discussed.