Topic: GRAVITY
Do I think GRAVITY is the best film of the year because Alfonso Cuarón is my favorite filmmaker working today, or is Cuarón my favorite filmmaker because he makes films like GRAVITY?
Maybe that’s a question for the philosophers — but with the Tomatometer sitting pretty at 97%, and a record-breaking streak at the box office, I don’t think it’s just me.
GRAVITY could also be titled “Murphy’s Law: The Movie,” as anything that can go wrong (and a number of things that, realistically, probably couldn’t) does, in the most catastrophic way possible. In fact, GRAVITY takes the view that catastrophic failure is the only kind when it comes to the vacuum of space.
I first heard about GRAVITY when reports came out that Cuarón — for whom long takes with roving cameras have become a signature — was working with his visual effects team to plan out a 17-minute continuous take for the opening of the film. I’ve seen other directors take their “signature” too far (Shyamalan and the Big Twist, for example), so I was a little leery of this news, but decided to remain cautiously optimistic.
I needn’t have worried. While nothing else in the film approaches the opening shot’s length, there are plenty of long takes and all of them are used for good reason. It places us in space, with the characters, experiencing the wonder and terror — mostly terror — of moving through the great abyss. I have a general disdain for “impossible” long takes — see PANIC ROOM for a good example of what doesn’t work — but somehow, in Cuarón’s hands, they work fine. It’s often said that much of editing is knowing when not to cut — and Cuarón plays in God Mode.
Perhaps its because in his hands the long takes are clearly motivated and not simply showboating, so we can move from out in space to inside Sandra Bullock’s helmet looking through her POV and back out again and hardly be aware that the camera is “doing” something at all. The continuous emotional experience has kept its grip on us.
And the film is an emotional, highly visceral experience, a prime example of the reason we make movies and tell stories — to vicariously go through something we otherwise never would. A huge part of that experience – and I still can’t quite believe I’m saying this – is its use of 3D.
Anyone who knows anything about my opinions on movies knows I hate 3D as a rule. But, as with the impossible shots, in Cuarón’s hands it works. Not just works, in fact — for my money, it’s essential. The infinite, unfathomable depths of space are not just the setting — they’re the antagonist. To see the movie without a sense of depth would be like watching STAR WARS with Darth Vader’s dialogue removed. There’s still a sense of menace, you still get the gist, but man, it would not be the same.
I’ve focused pretty much exclusively on the craft and technique of the film, saying precious little about the actual story, mainly because I don’t want to spoil anything at all. So much of the film is in the discovery and the tension of the unknown. Keeping to broad strokes, then: it’s a simple story — incredibly so, considering the $100 million reported budget — of suspense, isolation, and the human will to survive and endure. Horrifying, exhilarating, exhausting and uplifting all in equal measure, it’s like the zero-g version of 127 HOURS.
I’d like to assure you it ends differently, but that would be telling. I can at least tell you that I’ll be willing — and likely — to watch GRAVITY again… and again…
Sandra Bullock carries the film brilliantly for long stretches without dialogue, in one stroke obliterating any and all my preconceived ideas of what she’s capable of as an actress, supported ably and amiably by George Clooney, who I really ought to be getting tired of by now but I like him more the more I see him. The pacing is tight and never lets up, the visual effects — of which nearly the entire movie is comprised — are groundbreaking, showstopping, and other such superlatives that nonetheless fail to encompass the magnitude of what’s been accomplished here.
Are there quibbles to be had? Sure. Some of the dialogue is clunky and a good chunk of it, especially in the latter half, is also unnecessary and could’ve been carried with a look. And there’s one scene that juuuust about everyone who’s seen the film wishes was handled at least a little differently. Some because the physics are questionable (or at least unclear), myself because it’s a fairly cliche beat in an otherwise fresh and original tale. But these are quibbles, nothing more, and the few things the film could perhaps have done better can’t begin to overwhelm what it knocked clear out of the solar system.
As big a proponent and fan as I am of seeing films in theaters, it’s becoming increasingly rare to find a film that really needs (or even deserves) to be seen on the big screen, rarer still to find a film that can rightfully be referred to as something you experience. GRAVITY is an experience unlike any other, one you will not be able to get by watching it on home video — not even with a 3D TV like the one this film is going to make me tempted to buy.
Run don’t walk to the nearest, soonest showing — and you may as well clear time later in your week for a second viewing, too.
