it's primarily focused on abraham zapruder getting his his film developed, jfk and later oswald being operated on, and oswald's brother bob dealing with the fall out of what happened
and none of the stories are all that interesting other than "these people are shocked and sad and they are still going to be shocked and sad at the end of this movie, isn't that something"
oh yeah there's also an FBI agent that had been monitoring oswald and had an opportunity to arrest him a week before the assassination but didn't have any reason to at the time
oh and the guy in charge of the secret service
there's just so many characters and their stories barely ever intersect with one another so there's never any time for anyone to do anything
and i guess they thought it would be neat to use a hand camera and do a lot of zooming in and out and refocusing as though the cameraman were in the scene with them and was trying to set up a good shot
but it just made it look like an episode of the office
I'm not a cynical man - well, sometimes I hella am - but I am finding it super hard to believe this movie is as earth-shattering as everyone claims it is
Also there's a part of this movie that manages to homage both 2001: A Space Odyssey AND Barbarella: Queen of Space (the latter likely unintentionally) in the same sequence.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
+2
Options
Snowbeati need somethingto kick this thing's ass over the lineRegistered Userregular
it's a little bit science fiction in that its setting includes both a large Chinese space station, the ISS, and a Space Shuttle
I'm not a cynical man - well, sometimes I hella am - but I am finding it super hard to believe this movie is as earth-shattering as everyone claims it is
I'm not a cynical man - well, sometimes I hella am - but I am finding it super hard to believe this movie is as earth-shattering as everyone claims it is
Well
Ain't but one way to find out
I read the synopsis on Wikipedia, but based on peoples reactions in here sounds like still a must see
when Ryan first enters the Soyuz and curls up in a fetal position. With the pod door behind her, she resembles a baby in a womb. This was profound symbolism of rebirth, and it felt like an homage to "2001", although that may have been unintentional. When Ryan finally gets back on land, she struggles to find her footing on the beach. She was like a baby figuring out how to walk for the first time. She has been "reborn" as a woman who stops dwelling in the past and focusses on living for the present.
I'm not a cynical man - well, sometimes I hella am - but I am finding it super hard to believe this movie is as earth-shattering as everyone claims it is
Well
Ain't but one way to find out
I read the synopsis on Wikipedia, but based on peoples reactions in here sounds like still a must see
I think that so much of a movie's experience is in the directing and cinematography that reading a synopsis won't really tell you how good it is, but I think that about most media
I still think pretty much everyone should see this movie
Is there anyone in here who actually didn't like it?
I'm not a cynical man - well, sometimes I hella am - but I am finding it super hard to believe this movie is as earth-shattering as everyone claims it is
Well
Ain't but one way to find out
I read the synopsis on Wikipedia, but based on peoples reactions in here sounds like still a must see
I think that so much of a movie's experience is in the directing and cinematography that reading a synopsis won't really tell you how good it is, but I think that about most media
I still think pretty much everyone should see this movie
Is there anyone in here who actually didn't like it?
I just wanted to make sure it didn't take a sudden turn towards Shyamalanland
Well I lied I have to go to Denver to see this in 3d Imax
So it will end up costing me about 2 to 300 for the whole thing
I guess this will be the first movie I see in 3d here then
So, my brother in law (who granted is a bit of a know-it-all) seems to think there's a large plothole in the part where, spoilers obviously
George Cloony's character let's go of Ryan because he's dragging her off the ISS. My inlaw seemed to think as soon as the cables snapped around Ryan's leg it should have yanked her and him back towards the station. Clooney quickly said why he needed to let go, but I couldn't hear it well because the scene went by super fast. I know this film is Astronaut approved, other than the "let's boost a few hundred miles over to the ISS" part. Was it the centrifugal force from the drifting ISS? Or was it just a mistake?
Man, I feel like the only person who didn't enjoy this movie A TON. The visuals were beautiful and the use of sound was amazing, but the characters were so forgettable and the performances felt pretty weak on the whole (Clooney especially felt phoned-in). I just couldn't relate to Bullock's character at all and that hurt the experience for me.
The religious symbolism and the prayer stuff really felt tacked on, too. I think part of that comes down to not having nearly enough character exposition. Everything about the very end, when Bullock's character comes up onto the beach and they have that shot from behind her, I thought that was pretty blah. I realize there's some homage there and the Soyuz scene but it was pretty uninspiring on the whole for me.
0
Options
Olivawgood name, isn't it?the foot of mt fujiRegistered Userregular
Okay, I ain't no wuss
But the way people are talking I feel like I need to get a barometer of what to expect
So for people who've seen both (which might not be a lot but you never know) is this movie more or less chest-wrenching than Buried?
This movie: whoa. Haven't felt that tense in a movie in forever. Wanna hear all of clooney's stories. Also I usually avoid IMAX, but this one was so worth it
I once read an article on the failed Russian orbit attempts during the space race. How recordings exist of test pilots sent up in failed craft that would slowly deteriorate as both male and female death screams were heard. It's the one aspect of space travel that spooks me, hearing a transmission of doomed astronauts dying horrifically.
Seeing this movie about an hour ago kinda got to me.
0
Options
chiasaur11Never doubt a raccoon.Do you think it's trademarked?Registered Userregular
I'm not a cynical man - well, sometimes I hella am - but I am finding it super hard to believe this movie is as earth-shattering as everyone claims it is
Just saw.
I'd say it isn't earth shattering pants shitting good, but it is a damn solid bit of craftsmanship.
Bullock does carry the bulk of the movie pretty well on her own, which is impressive. The cinematography is amazing, the tension is constant without being overbearing, and most of my issues were purely matters of personal aesthetics rather than objective flaws. And Clooney is charming as fuck for his part, but that's kinda a gimmee.
Think, ignoring the science talk, my only solid complaint is that sometimes the film made it a little too obvious that things were going wrong at the exact perfect level to barely miss killing Dr. Stone, but even that's not too bad.
Well worth seeing for more or less anyone who likes movies.
So I have a question that's not really related to the movie as much as it's related to space.
In fact I haven't seen the movie yet (will next weekend, probably).
In the trailer Sandra Bullock is seen tumbling around in space. My question is, does she feel it? Does the vestibular system work in space?
If she was tumbling around with her eyes closed, would it feel to her like she's standing still? And if she opened her eyes would that cause nausea since what her eyes are seeing (tumbling) and what her vestibular system is telling her (no tumbling?) don't match up?
So I have a question that's not really related to the movie as much as it's related to space.
In fact I haven't seen the movie yet (will next weekend, probably).
In the trailer Sandra Bullock is seen tumbling around in space. My question is, does she feel it? Does the vestibular system work in space?
If she was tumbling around with her eyes closed, would it feel to her like she's standing still? And if she opened her eyes would that cause nausea since what her eyes are seeing (tumbling) and what her vestibular system is telling her (no tumbling?) don't match up?
The best answer I can personally give is that the forces of circular motion would still act on the semicircular canals in the ear (the organ which detects rotary movements). The sensation of rotary movement is created when the fluid inside each canal moves, due to inertia, at a different velocity than the canal itself. I'm sure there's sites out there which can provide better, more specific answers.
Posts
Origin ID: Discgolfer27
Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
http://www.audioentropy.com/
so did Oswald do it
oswald is barely in the movie
it's primarily focused on abraham zapruder getting his his film developed, jfk and later oswald being operated on, and oswald's brother bob dealing with the fall out of what happened
and none of the stories are all that interesting other than "these people are shocked and sad and they are still going to be shocked and sad at the end of this movie, isn't that something"
http://www.audioentropy.com/
oh and the guy in charge of the secret service
there's just so many characters and their stories barely ever intersect with one another so there's never any time for anyone to do anything
http://www.audioentropy.com/
but it just made it look like an episode of the office
http://www.audioentropy.com/
really really wish we had gone to see gravity instead
http://www.audioentropy.com/
I had no idea it was out
I have seen zero advertisements for it
it's only gotten a limited release, we had to go to the next town over to find a theater that was playing it
http://www.audioentropy.com/
http://www.audioentropy.com/
But it is not only a gorgeous visual spectacle but a supremely visceral experience. I found Bullock's performance pretty moving as well.
I mean, yeah it takes place in space, but presumably only uses technology that's already available? (I haven't seen it yet.)
but otherwise, nothing out of the ordinary
Well
Ain't but one way to find out
I read the synopsis on Wikipedia, but based on peoples reactions in here sounds like still a must see
I think that so much of a movie's experience is in the directing and cinematography that reading a synopsis won't really tell you how good it is, but I think that about most media
I still think pretty much everyone should see this movie
Is there anyone in here who actually didn't like it?
It's $65 here but then I am seriously debating about seeing it in Imax for that price
I just wanted to make sure it didn't take a sudden turn towards Shyamalanland
So it will end up costing me about 2 to 300 for the whole thing
I guess this will be the first movie I see in 3d here then
But the way people are talking I feel like I need to get a barometer of what to expect
So for people who've seen both (which might not be a lot but you never know) is this movie more or less chest-wrenching than Buried?
PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | STEAM ID | NEVER FORGET
Seeing this movie about an hour ago kinda got to me.
Just saw.
I'd say it isn't earth shattering pants shitting good, but it is a damn solid bit of craftsmanship.
Think, ignoring the science talk, my only solid complaint is that sometimes the film made it a little too obvious that things were going wrong at the exact perfect level to barely miss killing Dr. Stone, but even that's not too bad.
Well worth seeing for more or less anyone who likes movies.
Why I fear the ocean.
In fact I haven't seen the movie yet (will next weekend, probably).
In the trailer Sandra Bullock is seen tumbling around in space. My question is, does she feel it? Does the vestibular system work in space?
If she was tumbling around with her eyes closed, would it feel to her like she's standing still? And if she opened her eyes would that cause nausea since what her eyes are seeing (tumbling) and what her vestibular system is telling her (no tumbling?) don't match up?
BF3 Battlelog | Twitter | World of Warships | World of Tanks | Wishlist
I anticipate nausea at best and insanity at worst
The best answer I can personally give is that the forces of circular motion would still act on the semicircular canals in the ear (the organ which detects rotary movements). The sensation of rotary movement is created when the fluid inside each canal moves, due to inertia, at a different velocity than the canal itself. I'm sure there's sites out there which can provide better, more specific answers.