User Score
8.5

Universal acclaim- based on 598 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 40 out of 598

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Oct 5, 2013
    0
    Dull performances and paper thin characters populate this mercifully brief film. Despite impressive visuals, the film never really comes alive. Bullock sets feminism back 50 years by portraying a hysterical, incapable astronaut while the most basic rules of science and space travel are all but ignored. Those looking for genuine sci-fi should avoid this film at all costs.
  2. Oct 6, 2013
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. What? Was this a joke? Is there some sort of conspiracy to give this amazing reviews?

    Incredible visuals, amazing technology. Otherwise, I am pretty sure the script was written in about 40 minutes, after drinking a case of bud light lime. SPOILER: The plot is just a never ending sequence of barely surviving tragedy. The only thing that could have made it more absurd would have been if a shark attacked her after she escaped from the pod at the end.
    Expand
  3. Oct 5, 2013
    4
    I was very disappointed with this movie. I was expecting much better, but this was by no standards a terrible movie. It just could have been much better. Two things I loved in this movie were the cinematography as a whole and the action sequences. The effects were good and the camera angles/shots were fantastic, and the action sequences were well-produced. However, this does not make up for this movie's mediocre plot. The story was extremely repetitive, very simple, and somewhat boring. Along with the underachieving plot, I thought that Clooney's acting was uninspired and lazy, Bullock over-acted to the point that she got very annoying and unconvincing, there was minimal character development, and I did not feel any sympathy for the characters. While this movie had some of the best cinematography I have seen in a while, the rest of it was poorly done. This movie is not worthy of any oscars other than cinematography, and truly is not worth your time. Expand
  4. Oct 6, 2013
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. There are some beautiful visuals, but like the rest of the movie, they are repeated and repeated ad nauseum. If not for them, though, the movie would have no redeeming features. Too much of it takes place inside spacecraft that isn't functioning properly, and Bullock's hapless, rather unlikable character had me drumming my fingers, wanting to just doze off, and wondering how long we would be subjected to her suffering and fiddling futilely about. Her tedious character is in most scenes; Clooney has more life, but disappears early on, and returns only briefly. Might be worth seeing for the occasional beauty of it, if you don't expect anything in the way of story or character development. Expand
  5. Oct 7, 2013
    0
    WTF...This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen. I am scratching my head thinking what if anything I can see good about this movie. Oh Oh! I found one. I like the main two characters but not in this crap bag of a movie. I would like to ask them why the even accepted being in the movie. I'm not going to say anymore or I will piss people off. Go waste your money. You were warned.
  6. Oct 6, 2013
    1
    I offer you five re-imagined film review synopses of Gravity: An IMAX 3-D Experience:

    In the great farcical tradition of Jacques Tati, this madcap caricature of modern alienation and space age technology playfully follows its heroine through an improbable labyrinth of ineptitudes, follies, and physical gaffes.

    A heart-wrenching portrayal of a mother’s search for human contact after t
    the meaningless death of her daughter.

    This reboot of Méliès’s Voyage dans la lune harkens back to the golden age of silent cinema, when action, set design, and camera tricks took precedence.

    A futuristic spin on the classic road trip movie, Gravity is the story of two people who find themselves helplessly drawn together by a natural force beyond their control—friendship.

    À la Godard and Tarantino, Caurón dishes out his share of cinéphile fodder, with nods and winks to the Cold War Red Scare camp of such classics as Red Dawn.
    Expand
  7. Oct 7, 2013
    1
    It is difficult, if not impossible, to convey how utterly dreadful "Gravity" is without a viewer having at least a small taste of experiencing it yourself. Given the overthrowing praise the film is receiving, countless thousands will waste 90 minutes of their life wading through this oddly lifeless film. The tedious screenplay evokes the worst of James Cameron but adds hundreds of Sandra Bullock "Aaaaahs." Water boarding couldn't be this painful. By the 30 minutes mark you will be begging that a massive asteroid pulverize any survivors on screen; by the 60 minute mark you will beg for the 3D effects to deliver an asteroid to your own skull. They shoot horses, don't they? Expand
  8. Oct 8, 2013
    0
    "Oscar-worthy" BS is put out there by publicists and PR folks; sorry, it was PAINFUL. Unbelievable, far-fetched, and so badly acted. A vanity project to end all vanity projects. Tom Hanks had cast away. This is her BS. Sorry, you're not that interesting. Your character is unbelievable. Your acting stinks.
  9. Oct 8, 2013
    2
    Gravity delivers the weird juxtaposition of the film's creators allowing a fictional character to overcome unforgiving space, but won't trust the audience to think for themselves.

    Yesterday evening I joined my good friends in a showing of the Sci-Fi survival thriller Gravity. I was expecting a documentary with George Clooney narrating, and wasn't quite sure of what to expect when I popp
    ed on my thick-rimmed 3D goggles. I am very interested in astronomy and the remoteness and aloofness of the celestial bodies has always strongly informed how I feel about living on Planet Earth. Their distance and indifference is a majestic mockery of our trivial, and temporary, existence.

    Settling into the first five minutes of Gravity, I quickly realised that of course a work of fiction would make an over-pronounced imposition of human beings into the glorious inertia of space. This realisation that I can now expect people to provide the thrust of the story profoundly disappoints me. The feeble juxtaposition of a towering, placid spacescape with the minute actions of studious astronauts has no more of an impact on me than would watching the same people sit around an office drinking weak, freeze-dried coffee.

    Therefore, precisely what I find refreshing about the film 15 minutes in is that it hasn't (yet) condescended to the audience by loading the flimsy cardboard cutout characters with some morbid modus operandi, thereby making totally unrelateable spacewalking astronauts into amenable accomplices of the viewer. It therefore makes sense to streamline the cynically unlucky protagonist to such a degree that the only necessary instrument at her disposal is the pure and simple instinctual thrust of survival.

    The depiction of the characters in broad strokes continues as the audience is struck forcibly by the information that, believe it or not, spacewalking is either a very mundane experience best accompanied by country music, or that novices are terribly excited by it on their first run. Both contrasts are totally within convention, and this silly space symphony's opening bars have all the reverie of a pastorale.

    At one moment as Bullock careens off into the vast emptiness of space, an apparition of home; a large, indifferent planet Northern Lights added for aesthetics sits serenely behind, sleepily unaware of the plight of our hapless protagonist. It is a moment of genuine beauty, and for a second the film has an actually interesting principal actor the “gentle indifference of the world”.

    But then as Disaster, that catalyst of so many Hollywood movies, arrives, all of a sudden it occurs to me that we are going to have to suffer character development as this thing goes on. We haven't learned enough by Hollywood standards to care enough about Bullock and Clooney yet, but a few stories from good ol' Planet Earth ought to set that right.

    I wouldn't have been totally against this inevitability if it wasn't for the central character spending the remaining 90 minutes undergoing a juvenile transformation from naïve to determined (via seriously mopy). Bullock's performance is languid enough to have made me believe that survival in the face of almost certain death is a bit of a drag.

    Therefore, into the wondrous oblivion of infinite space strolls a character so disengaged from life that I stopped rooting for her from basically the beginning. Marcus Aurelius writes in his Meditations that “Today I escaped from anxiety. Or no, I discarded it, because it was within me, in my own perceptions not outside.”

    The tenets of stoicism don't seem to really have fallen into the scope of Bullock's character, because there is always a sense that what she is facing is injustice it's not fair!!! rather than coming to any acceptance that her predicament was an exceptionally fair one an outgrowth of her being in a totally extraordinary position as remote from human experience as one could possibly get, and therefore, not entitled to expect the same accommodations from the universe.

    What accompanies this extraordinary situation, and what makes the film so oddly cold, is how extraordinarily muted un-human Bullock's character's response is. There is neither a hint of completely justified despair, nor the slightest sense of confusion at the totally mindboggling predicament facing her character.

    This might be an attempt.

    Instead, unfortunately, Hollywood is the exemplar of an industrial process of creativity so eminently capable of mistaking the addition of melodrama for character complexity. It is not enough that survival and hatred of death are ingrained human qualities up to and including the point of irrational denial of fate Gravity also needs us to buy into a crumby story about a deceased child in order to force the operationalisation of instinct.

    It was not enough that a Harvard-graduated space-genius had to get a face full of satellite shrapnel. We had to have our own emotional capacities for empathy inc
    Expand
  10. Oct 7, 2013
    0
    This movie is the JAWS of this generation. Gravity is a silly action movie, where the ignorant audience believes they are watching a real event happening in space. There are so many flaws in the science, I lost my disbelief. Yet, the visuals were stunning. But visuals alone, don't make a good movie. The story of Gravity was also bad, filled with clinches and up to the last minute escapes.


    The critics got this movie way wrong. A very big disappointment for me, when I thought I was going to see a serious science fiction movie. But all I got was a space circus drama.
    Expand
  11. Oct 8, 2013
    3
    Visually stunning, but preposterous. Within 15 minutes, I said this is ridiculous. Not even superman could have as many lives as Sandra Bullock. The dialogue is also lame. There is some emotion, but you really don;t care. There is no comparison to 2001, except that both movies take place in space.
  12. Oct 7, 2013
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I expected bad, and wow did I find it. I'm all for suspending disbelief, but this.. was so in your face about what an idiot you had to be to enjoy it.
    She checks her watch and has 7 minutes and 30 seconds before another round of space junk, then.. just puts on a space suit.. and still has over 2 minutes left.
    Let's not even go down the "he let her go because" road.
    Or the "wow, it's sure convenient to have all the space stations so close"
    Or finding a drifting Sandra after How Long?
    Or maintaining an impossible radio connection for how long?
    Or the whole "stuff got destroyed" and now it's amazingly fast and going to eat you!
    Or the whole "chain reaction" in the first place?
    AND BIG FREAKING DEAL with the 17 minute opening shot! It's not like it was all filmed in real time, it's just a long CGI scene.
    Space danger was the key, and when it's so horribly unreal I couldn't buy in. Like a supposed Dracula with pink blood running down his fangs.
    Terrible.
    Expand
  13. Oct 9, 2013
    0
    Sure it looks great but thats not what movies should only be about. Not to mention casting two celebrities who pretty much make the film not work because they are too famous. Both are overrated and are only there to make profit. Children of Men was brilliant but this? Give me a break.. Should have hired Sigourney Weaver..Ripley would have pulled herself outta that mess.
  14. Oct 7, 2013
    0
    Gravity is a mess from end to start. Samantha Bullocks is just constantly screaming for 2 hours. That's it, that's the film and Geoard Cloone coughing so loud. My nan even said that this was boring 5 minutes into it, she was sick of reading the messages on screen, me to. I just don't understand the 10s and 9s because this film came out in 2013, that doesn't make snese. Where the hlee was Nasa when you need them, this film struggled to breate after Samantha fails to fledge to the directorion of the captain. The japanase station was racist because of the blatantly obvious ping pong bat. I am tired of films being racist. So please stop. Georde was decent until he was sucked out into a film called Pull. I don't understand this mess. I was just disgusted after seeing this. 0.10 for th eawesome creduts. Expand
  15. Oct 7, 2013
    4
    Gravity is a fun "Ride" ala Star Tours experience, but as far as a "Movie" goes, the story and character development leaves much to be desired. As far as a 3D $18 90 minute Star Tours/Type spectacle, if that is what you are looking for then I am sure you will love the film. The CG and Camera moves were impressive and the film was done very well. Films like Gravity are just not what I am looking for when I go to the Cinema. Now If I was at Disneyland it would be a different story Just my two cents, and obviously I am in the minority since it appears that almost everyone on earth loved this Film and thought it was the greatest film of all time. Which I do find a bit disconcerting because in my opinion it would not even make my top 100 films of all time list. Sadly this is certainly the type of movies film corporations will want to put out more of. 3D up-charge along with a short running time which equals more showings per day and more revenue. Will we ever see a popular motion picture released with a strong script, with strong acting again, or will that just be relegated to art houses and on demand TV viewing? Expand
  16. Oct 9, 2013
    0
    I honestly don't know what to say about this film. Special effects were amazing, the film was an absolute technological marvel on par with Avatar and Lord of the Rings. The action and all aspects of this film were very artistic and beautiful. The acting was hard to judge because of the space helmets, but the voice acting that you could hear through the com was realistic and helped add to the suspense and emotions of the film. The problem with this film is that you don't really care about the characters. They seem like amazing people walking around in space, and you get to know a little bit about their home lives, but it just wasn't enough. Really the story was all premise, which I find rather boring and aggravating in a film. 2 people floating around above the earth trying to get back home. That really is all there is to the story, so it gets pretty boring. Add to that the complete lack of an interesting compelling script, and you get a movie the was pretty pointless. If all you need is good visuals, then you will love this film, if you need something a bit more sophisticated, then you will hate it. I would have rated this film higher for the visuals and technology, but seeing as it is already extremely overrated I will just give it a zero. Expand
  17. Oct 7, 2013
    4
    A big disappointment! The story line was so unbelievable there was no possibility of drama. Direction was weak. George Clooney’s character acted silly for the position he occupied. Sandra Bullock did a good job but she was the wrong person for the part, and her character lacked continuity. The visual effects were good and 3D was a good choice for the movie. The movie wasn’t terrible ble but if that’s the best that can be said it would be better to wait for it to be on TV. Expand
  18. Oct 7, 2013
    4
    What can I say about this highly acclaimed movie? Gorgeous CGI-produced space, fabulous work of Sandra Bullock's plastic surgeon (for 49 she looks incredible).
    What else? H-m-m-m... Oh yeh! Sandra's hair style is perfect, especially considering that she is in weightlessness.
    I was bored mostly all the time. It reminded me a TNT ad "We know drama" where all action happens at the very poss
    ible moment. Kinda cheap. But again, the visuals and special effects were astounding. Expand
  19. Oct 7, 2013
    2
    This movie has been so hyped that people are afriad to say they don't like it. I didn't like it. I was bored, Bullock didn't act she just hyperventilated through the movie. Clooney was only comic relief. Explosion scenes were unrealistic. In a "gripping" movie, when the hero lives, the audience applauds. NO applause here. Only comments of disappointment were heard on the way out. I wanted to like this movie as I did Apollo 13. I would not recommend this movie to anyone, even on Redbox! Expand
  20. Oct 9, 2013
    1
    Its Diablo 3 and the latest Sim City only this time on the big screen. Ie looks great but quickly gets boring and leaves you feeling like youve been had.
  21. Oct 12, 2013
    3
    This movie's title was terribly, terribly misleading. Virtually the whole film was set in space, where as I'm sure you'll be well aware, there is NO GRAVITY! It was only in the last five minutes or so where any of the characters had to deal with the effects of this force. Even talented performers like Sandra Bullock and George Clooney would be hard-pressed to show any significant character development from dealing with gravity in such a short amount of time. Most good Science Fiction movies, such as "Alien", feature their main subject (i.e. the title of the movie) for at least a good two thirds of their duration. I haven't been so misled since the preserve-less 1996 film "Space Jam". Expand
  22. Oct 12, 2013
    4
    GiantMidget, you have hit the nail right on the head. I entered the movie expecting to be amazed by the effects of gravity, but I was sadly disappointed until the final 5 minutes. I may as well have just watched all the previews and left, as they contained more gravity than the entire movie itself. Not impressed.
  23. Oct 12, 2013
    1
    It was Bullock's Cast Away. 90 minutes of ho-hum, I'm floating in space from one station to another, until I finally parachute down to a remote lake. We saw it in 3-D, but each of us fell asleep several times. When we woke up, more of the same...Sandra frantically pushing buttons in Russian and then Mandarin, hoping that she pushed the right one. When she was floating in space, she desperately reached for parts of the three space stations, and fortunately was able to grab something at the last minute. Big surprise.
    There was about 10 minutes of interaction with Clooney, but the rest of it was her mumbling to herself. Waaayyyy overrated.
    Expand
  24. Oct 16, 2013
    1
    What did PT Barnum once say? A sucker is born every minute. The bought and paid for professional critics would have you believe with their perfect 100 scores that this is the second coming of Gone With The Wind. Gone with your Hard Earned Money is more like it. I saw this movie in front of a packed theater opening night. The good points were the CGI and 3D special effects were breathtaking. But to be perfectly truthful the story was very boring and monotonous. There is absolutely no character development whatsoever. You basically meet two characters in space and within minutes disaster strikes and each scene is repeated ad nauseam for 90 minutes. George Clooney is only in the movie for about 20 minutes. So you get a miscast Sandra Bullock in mass hysteria drifting around in space. There is no suspense because A} we don't care about her as there was no character development; B} she's pushing buttons at random having no idea what they do; and C} 15 minutes into the movie we all know how it's going to end. We never learn a single thing about the two characters themselves. Even George Clooney's astronaut portrayal is a laughing joke in that he can't be taken seriously. All this movie represents is the time tested desire of man in "the will to survive". Somewhat similar to Tom Hanks in Cast Away, with his volleyball friend Wilson for 2 1/2 hours, in Gravity you now get Sandra. Believe me, Gone With The Wind it isn't. Even the sci fi movie Independence Day that had a story and characters we cared about, was infinitely better. If for nothing else, you should see Gravity for the special effects and beautiful cinematography. But, if you're looking for a story or caring about the characters you'll be sadly disappointed. I couldn't sit through this again even on FREE TV. You've been warned. Don't drink the Kool Aid Hollywood is selling! Expand
  25. Oct 14, 2013
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Repetitive.
    The reason why this movie has and 8 for the score is for two reasons: George Cloony, and the special effects.
    Why the movie is repetitive:
    FIrst 30 min: George Cloony gives a great performance, and then gives a cheesy goodbye speech to Sandra bullock, who is a very mediocre actor.
    Middle 30 min: Everything goes to sh*t and there is a loop of the same scene 3 times. It goes like this: Everything is going fine, then something goes wrong, and then the debris comes, and Sandra Bullock saves herself at the last second. This happens at least 3 times in the movie.
    Last 30 min: Sandra Bullock says woof woof to a chinese guy for 10 minutes, and then has a cliche' dream of George Cloony, which allows her to get out of her hopeless situation. Then the movie ends with the typical i-will-push-to-the-end ending, and she arrives on earth as the "only survivor'.
    So typical.
    Pros:
    George Cloony
    Special Effects
    Nice 3D
    Good Directing
    The chinese guy
    Cons:
    Repetitive
    Terrible writing
    Sandra Bullock
    Loops
    The whole movie is filler, this movie could have been half an hour. Its all stretched out.
    Sandra Bullock didnt die.
    A chinese guy that had 10 minutes of audio time gave a better performance than anyone on screen
    There are only two actors.
    Slow
    Pointless
    Spinning
    Heavy Breathing
    George Cloony gave a performance for maybe 20 minutes.
    The whole budget was spent on SFX, and they spent very little for the acting.
    A hollywood sellout movie. Very average and typical
    Expand
  26. Oct 12, 2013
    2
    if i dont like a movie i usually give it around a 6 but this... this i give a 2, I HATED IT
    predictable
    boring
    poor acting
    this is 1 of the most over rated movies of all time
  27. Oct 8, 2013
    2
    This movie sucked. Badly. The first 20minutes are cool and have a great cinematic feel. (Saw it in IMAX 3D) The film quickly goes away from these cinematic views to unravel the story which is pathetic and told by terrible acting. Very, very poor film. After 30 minutes you've had enough of this weak woman to want to leave the theater. It is aggravating to watch. Giving it a 2 for the first 20minutes of cinematics. Expand
  28. Oct 9, 2013
    1
    Mala por donde se la mira, George Clooney hace un papel de payaso insoportable, es una película que no te deja nada, ademas de las carencias por parte de los analistas y asesores con respecto al comportamiento de las "cosas" en el espacio, la película carece de dialogo, se trata de inventarles un perfil a los personajes pero no se logra. Se abusa del retoque digital en Sandra Bullock teteniendo mejor cuerpo que una mujer de 20 años. Quien le dio tan buena critica? Expand
  29. Oct 13, 2013
    3
    Good cinematography aside (which you might eventually just stop noticing sadly enough) everythign else is shallow and token. The characters, the plot, the acting, the action, the theme, nothing stands out. The movie relies on it's setting to thrill and at times it does but much like everything else in the movie it groes tiresome fairly quickly. Let's see what else to say? There's a part where Sandra Bullock barks like it dog (no it only somewhat makes sense in context) and that was the moment where i realized the 10.50 i paid for the screening was 10.50 too much. The minority character dies almost instantly (and in a super gruesome manner) because hey, every other hollywood movie treates minorities poorly, why not an Oscar hopeful one too? The 3D was actually pretty token and desperate. Want good 3D, go see Avatar or Dredd or Oz, certainly not Gravity. Expand
  30. Oct 16, 2013
    1
    The summer of bummers. Yes, it's fall now, but this will be the year that had an astonishing amount of clunker movies that were highly anticipated and overhyped, with the good ones passing through with little attention. "Despicable Me 2" was an exception, as Gru and the Minions were once again delighting audiences with the funniest animated movie of the year, and given the minions' popularity, we'll see more of those little yellow guys.
    "Gravity" is a movie of polar opposites. 3-D mavens are all over this space tale, and the effects and Earth shots are indeed spectacular, although I would imagine Sandra Bullock's 3-D underwear has as many admirers. For those of us expecting more real suspense besides one crisis and idiotic break after another, "Gravity" is a loser.
    Gone is any earthbound activity, making the movie almost a Bullock solo act, ala Castaway. Not that she's not a good actress, far from it. But what we get are giant dialogue cliches piled high and deep, two very conveniently located space stations that just happen to be right by in the same orbit, and a soundtrack meant to inspire that instead overdoes it to the point of hurling. For all the work that went into the premise, to allow the plot and dialogue to resemble other "heroic" movies long on visuals and pathetic on plot, like "Independence Day", is baffling.
    Space is a very mysterious unknown, and there should be a free reign of imagination that knows no limits. While we may tire of aliens, there's enough real stuff out there radioactivity, gama rays, etc. that should provide plenty of fodder for a much more believable situation.
    What a galactic cliche.
    Expand
  31. Oct 14, 2013
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Incredible visuals, disappointing story, and here it is: almost every attempt to get back to earth falls apart, with a dozen narrow escapes in between. To me, the moment when Oscar™ winning actress Sandra Bullock crawls ashore is when the story got really interesting and was when a good story might have begun. But then the movie ends a minute later. The filmmakers forgot to research some things that might have made the relationships more plausible between Oscar™ winning actor George Clooney and Oscar™ winning actress Sandra Bullock. Tragedy strikes in space, and to kill time and use up precious oxygen while floating around, Oscar™ winning actor George Clooney engages Oscar™ winning actress Sandra Bullock in a cheeky get-to-know-you conversation. Wouldn't they know some basic bio facts about each other after training together for a few years? I didn't hear much dialogue that would have seemed believable on land, let alone in space, where there are a few more protocols to follow. Oscar™ winning actress Sandra Bullock and Oscar™ winning actor George Clooney were cast pretty pointlessly here- neither Oscar™ winning actor was really suited to the roles, and Clooney's chatty charm seems out of place in space. There is so little character development and so little spark beween the two ONLY characters in the movie, that I could never snap out of the realization that I was watching Oscar™ winning actor George Clooney and Oscar™ winning actress Sandra Bullock. In the end, the movie was just like its setting, just a lot of empty space. But pretty. Expand
  32. Oct 15, 2013
    3
    The newspaper critics listed here on metacritic must have been shown a different film to the one I just watched. How can it be that this film with no substantial story/script/science and thoroughly patronising depiction of a female astronaut is being hailed as a masterpiece on par with Kubrick's 2001? Utter nonsense. If you thought Prometheus was visually stunning but utter nonsense with regard to the character development and story/script, then avoid this movie at all costs. I am giving this film 3 marks out of 10 for the stunning visuals alone. Expand
  33. Oct 15, 2013
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Let me start by saying there were elements of Gravity that I enjoyed, but I felt it was lacking in some regards. Here are my thoughts. May contain spoilers!

    Gravity (Ailurus fulgens), also called lesser velocity and red quantum physics is a small feature film native to the eastern space and southwestern  space that has been classified as Vulnerable by IUCN as its wild population is estimated at less than 10,000 mature individuals. The population continues to decline and is threatened by habitat loss and fragmentation, poaching, and inbreeding depression, although red gravity are protected by national laws in their range countries. The red velocity is slightly larger than a George Clooney. It has reddish-brown Oscars, a long, shaggy budget, and a waddling Sandra Bullock due to its shorter front legs. It feeds mainly on outer space, but its galaxy eggs, birds, insects, and small mammals. It is a mainly solitary film from dusk to dawn, and is largely sedentary during the day.

    The red velocity is the only living species of the genus Ailurus and the family Ailuridae. It has been previously placed in the science fiction and horror  families, but results of phylogenetic research indicate strong support for its taxonomic classification in its own family Ailuridae, which along with the Clooney family is part of the superfamily Musteloidea. Two subspecies are recognized. It is not closely related to the giant velocity.

    Still not as good as Left 4 Love.
    Expand
Metascore
96

Universal acclaim - based on 48 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 48 out of 48
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 48
  3. Negative: 0 out of 48
  1. Reviewed by: David Denby
    Oct 6, 2013
    90
    Gravity is not a film of ideas, like Kubrick's techno-mystical "2001," but it's an overwhelming physical experience -- a challenge to the senses that engages every kind of dread. [7 Oct. 2013, p.88]
  2. Reviewed by: Dana Stevens
    Oct 4, 2013
    80
    This is not to say that Gravity is a masterpiece: Unlike Cuarón’s extraordinary "Children of Men", it doesn’t quite pull off its ambitious effort to combine formal inventiveness, heart-pounding action, and intimate human storytelling. But it succeeds thrillingly at the first two of those categories, and only misses the mark on the last because it tries a little too hard — which is certainly a welcome respite from the countless sci-fi thrillers that privilege the human story not at all.
  3. Reviewed by: Andrew O'Hehir
    Oct 4, 2013
    90
    While the tension never lets up for a second, how you respond to the boundary-fudging and wildly improbable ending of Gravity – meaning both how it makes you feel and how you interpret it – will determine whether you think the movie is a genuine pop masterpiece or a canny artifice. Maybe there’s no difference.