Gravity

User Score
7.8

Generally favorable reviews- based on 2602 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch On

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. Dec 24, 2013
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Training an astronaut takes a whole lot of time and money. They are trained to deal with all sorts of calamities. How Sandra Bullock even made it through the first day of astronaut school is a mystery. She is in constant panic mode, which really gets utterly annoying after 10 minutes. The movie starts with a botched attempt by the Russians (of course) to shoot down one of their own satellites. Since when is that the way to retire a satellite Every time anybody retires a satellite, it is all over the news. Because it is crashed into the ocean. It is never ever shot down, that is not even technically possible. What is George Clooney doing in this movie Nobody knows, he just...dies, in a pathetic attempt to create heroism. The dialogue is awful all the way. Why is the ISS completely abandoned Why is she sitting there in that pod in her underwear She really is not a looker, she is almost 50, and I swear I could see the cellulitis on her legs. In all, given the utter flatness of her character, who cares if she makes it or not ?
    I simply do not see how this movie can get such a high rating.
    Expand
  2. 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.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
  3. Feb 12, 2014
    2
    Overrated seems to be wrong. Words like "intense, gripping, breathtaking, beautiful" I've read in some reviews serve as perfect antonyms for what my opinion about the film was. Yet another splendid cinematography (it gets a 2 because of that, otherwise it would be a nice round 0) used for all the wrong reasons. I really don't understand why the critics loved it so much, this has flaws inOverrated seems to be wrong. Words like "intense, gripping, breathtaking, beautiful" I've read in some reviews serve as perfect antonyms for what my opinion about the film was. Yet another splendid cinematography (it gets a 2 because of that, otherwise it would be a nice round 0) used for all the wrong reasons. I really don't understand why the critics loved it so much, this has flaws in every direction you look at it.

    My favourite reviews, especially, are the ones that refer to the film as "realistic", which is nonsense and I don't think I should explain why. The acting is horrible, and honestly I was expecting a little more from Clooney, who's been doing a lot of decent stuff recently. Sandra Bullock's gasps will be everything you hear for a good hour, and I take it they had to write them all down in the screenplay to get it to two pages.

    No character development, same trite space story. The struggle for survival and blah blah, while everything I wished was for Sandra Bullock to die already.

    Do not give money to this kind of cinema because you help boasting their income and encourage them to continue on this line, and we've had enough of that.
    Expand
  4. Oct 5, 2013
    3
    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 upI 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
  5. Apr 14, 2014
    1
    Let me just start out by saying that I am completely baffled by the 96/100 critic score that this got. Either the critics were stoned (like the composer for the movie was) when they watched this, or they were paid. Seriously though, for 75% of the film you're ears are stuck listening to the same 5 second loop of a terrible piece of "music"(?) being pounded into your brain while watchingLet me just start out by saying that I am completely baffled by the 96/100 critic score that this got. Either the critics were stoned (like the composer for the movie was) when they watched this, or they were paid. Seriously though, for 75% of the film you're ears are stuck listening to the same 5 second loop of a terrible piece of "music"(?) being pounded into your brain while watching Sandra Bullock being catapulted around space. That's pretty much the entire film for you. There, I saved you the rental money. Expand
  6. Jan 25, 2014
    3
    I am one of the few people who didn't enjoy Gravity. I found Sandra Bullock's character annoying. If this was the real world her character wouldn't have even passed basic training. She lacked knowledge about space that would be extremely important for an astronaut to know. I also didn't like her character's back story. It was just sad to be sad, there was no real reason for it. I wouldI am one of the few people who didn't enjoy Gravity. I found Sandra Bullock's character annoying. If this was the real world her character wouldn't have even passed basic training. She lacked knowledge about space that would be extremely important for an astronaut to know. I also didn't like her character's back story. It was just sad to be sad, there was no real reason for it. I would have prefered a stronger character fighting to live for what they had back home rather than having Bullock's character have really nothing to live for. What I did like about the movie was the special effects. They were amazing to watch. Maybe I would have enjoyed Gravity more if I saw it in IMAX but on a regular screen it was majorly lacking. Expand
  7. 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 toI 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
  8. 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.
  9. Jan 26, 2014
    1
    Yes the film is technological masterpiece , visuals is great, directing is perfect and "Oscar worthy" but Gravity is simply boring and overrated.It's frustrating that no one has the guts to tell they didn't like the move, well I'm telling, i hate it. I watched 3 hours long The Wolf of Wall Street and never get bored and then I watched 90 minutes long Gravity but I was bored to death withYes the film is technological masterpiece , visuals is great, directing is perfect and "Oscar worthy" but Gravity is simply boring and overrated.It's frustrating that no one has the guts to tell they didn't like the move, well I'm telling, i hate it. I watched 3 hours long The Wolf of Wall Street and never get bored and then I watched 90 minutes long Gravity but I was bored to death with Sandra Bullock's exaggerated acting that makes you don't care what is going to happen. Expand
  10. Feb 25, 2014
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. How the hell did this movie get such high marks? It is a true representation of many things wrong with stupid people in America (and elsewhere too I suppose). Nothing is believable in this movie, starting with putting a mentally unstable, traumatized nitwit in space after a mere 6 mos of training....really? I don't want to hear BS about metaphors and symbolism....barf...any good movie has that, but they have to fit the story. You don't hear noises in space (I did in Gravity). She just mashes buttons in Chinese and Russian...OMG stupid....

    You know what. F&^k it, I'm not even gonna repeat the stupid premise or nitpick the bold disobeying of basic science in this movie. If you're too stupid to know, then you're gonna love this movie no matter what I say. It just utterly fails to ground itself in any resemblance of reality or physics. Strong marks for cinematography and CGI, but it's wasted on this pointless plot and horrible dialog.

    A truly jarring movie would have been if she died alone in space slowly and helplessly, **** and pissing herself, because that is what would/should have happened. I guess all you need is a fire extinguisher to navigate space. I give this movie a 5, but rating it zero to make up for the overhyped 10s. Please don't let any acting Oscars go to this movie. Special effects or visuals maybe.

    BTW the score was annoying as hell....and 75% of the time there should have been NONE. I was trying to experience the silence of space....luckily Clooney died and shut up eventually (only to come back in a dream...sigh)....just a crap movie. The suspension of disbelief is too much to ask for anyone with half a brain.
    Expand
  11. 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 theThe 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
  12. 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 partGood 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
  13. Dec 21, 2014
    3
    I apologize, but this movie seems to be made for stupid people.
    The only praise anybody ever gives this film is how "visually stunning" it is. It seems as if plenty of intelligent people have mentally devolved after seeing Gravity, because apparently substance no longer matters, and visuals are enough to make a good movie.
    The characters in Gravity don't need to be there. I might as well
    I apologize, but this movie seems to be made for stupid people.
    The only praise anybody ever gives this film is how "visually stunning" it is. It seems as if plenty of intelligent people have mentally devolved after seeing Gravity, because apparently substance no longer matters, and visuals are enough to make a good movie.
    The characters in Gravity don't need to be there. I might as well have watched a movie about pieces of metal floating in space. Oh wait, they have that! It's called "Space Junk"! You know, I heard that was the original working title for this movie, too!
    The story sucks, to put it plainly. Sandra Bullock's story is completely generic and uninteresting, and pretty much occupies the entire film after the rather intense opening. Let me be clear, I don't want to dispute that the movie is breathtaking on a technical level, but without any interesting motives or characters, and absolutely zero valuable ideas or concepts expressed, who cares? Apparently everyone. Go watch Transformers, you mouth breathers.
    Graphics don't make the game good, pretty colors don't make the painting good, and being catchy doesn't make a song good. Visuals don't make a movie good. Sometimes, they make it awful. Gravity is awful.
    Expand
  14. Dec 12, 2013
    0
    This movie is utter BS. Waste of time, money, and poor actors. If you want a cheap lobotomy, watch this movie. If you had basic physics in school, avoid this movie, as it will do your head in! I now know why the name of the film is called gravity, it's because they screw around with it, all the freaking time!!
  15. Nov 8, 2014
    0
    Tame and Lame! You Have Got To Be Kidding Me! Where's the Rest of the Story? When Gravity ended my friend and I looked at each other and said simultaneously: "That's It?" We both thought the movie was far from over! It's the first time in years I had to literally apologize for picking such a lousy movie for a friend to see!

    Sandra Bullock's acting was terrible and unconvincing. And, she
    Tame and Lame! You Have Got To Be Kidding Me! Where's the Rest of the Story? When Gravity ended my friend and I looked at each other and said simultaneously: "That's It?" We both thought the movie was far from over! It's the first time in years I had to literally apologize for picking such a lousy movie for a friend to see!

    Sandra Bullock's acting was terrible and unconvincing. And, she looked like she was constipated most of the time. George Clooney came across just too perfect for such a life and death situation. He was too much like a saint in outer space!

    I also felt mightily deceived by both the film's movie trailer and by the official news media critics that fawned all over this pitiful movie! Gravity is so tame and lame you could take a child to see it without a second thought! It certainly won't offend a soul on planet earth!

    But worst of all, was the ending! After you a watch a film you want to feel like there was a beginning, middle and end. In Gravity your jaw is left hanging because there's was no satisfying ending. My friend and I both felt like we were in the the middle of the story when the film ended! BORING!
    Expand
  16. 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.
  17. Jan 19, 2014
    0
    For a movie that prides it self on accuracy, it seems to have none. Even if you take the whole intro for granted, there was a scene that pissed me off (spoliers) ---->

    When she gets caught in the station and captures the other astronaut there is something pulling them away. Do they not understand the conecpt of zero G, there is nothing pulling anyone, like really come on. You could at
    For a movie that prides it self on accuracy, it seems to have none. Even if you take the whole intro for granted, there was a scene that pissed me off (spoliers) ---->

    When she gets caught in the station and captures the other astronaut there is something pulling them away. Do they not understand the conecpt of zero G, there is nothing pulling anyone, like really come on. You could at least make a plot that didn't have as many holes as this

    end of spoilers TLDR non realistic unnecessarily full of plot holes
    Expand
  18. Mar 1, 2014
    0
    Just when I am wondering why people on here keep giving bad reviews to great movies with complex, emotional screenwriting, here I see one of the lamest movies since Jodi Foster did "Contact", and people think it's cool because they watched it in Imax-- which reminded them that there are stars and a universe and stuff above our heads.

    This movie has no story whatsoever. Literally nothing
    Just when I am wondering why people on here keep giving bad reviews to great movies with complex, emotional screenwriting, here I see one of the lamest movies since Jodi Foster did "Contact", and people think it's cool because they watched it in Imax-- which reminded them that there are stars and a universe and stuff above our heads.

    This movie has no story whatsoever. Literally nothing happens-- whoever called this "intense and gripping" must not have watched a movie since "The Wizard of Oz". Sandra Bullock floats around in space, there is a meteor shower (because wtf else happens in space without alien attacks???), George Clooney is in the film maybe 20 min....probably because he'd rather float off into space and suffocate to death than continue making this movie with Sandra bullock. I mean, at least with Ms. Congeniality we got to see her in a dress.

    P.s. -- how do you have fires burning on the exterior of structures in outer space? Fire requires certain compounds present in the atmosphere... 
    Expand
  19. Sep 20, 2014
    2
    Medical engineer Ryan Stone works feverishly to repair her shuttle hundreds of miles from the Earth’s atmosphere after a catastrophic collision with orbiting debris damages her likelihood of reentry and survival in Gravity.

    Watching this movie you want to use terms like cool and awesome because, technically speaking, this movie is magnificent and awe-inspiring to watch. The purely
    Medical engineer Ryan Stone works feverishly to repair her shuttle hundreds of miles from the Earth’s atmosphere after a catastrophic collision with orbiting debris damages her likelihood of reentry and survival in Gravity.

    Watching this movie you want to use terms like cool and awesome because, technically speaking, this movie is magnificent and awe-inspiring to watch. The purely computer generated images of the vast abyss of space, a cusp of Earth’s surface and a gleaming sun astronomically farther away in the background is spectacularly beautiful. With limited knowledge of space and aeronautics, this is about as real as I can imagine, though I know experts disagree – I’m looking at you Neil deGrasse Tyson. Beyond the aesthetically pleasing set design, I find little else in this picture remarkable.

    While beautiful, its artistry in scenery makes the film detached and voyeuristic. Gravity starts almost immediately with the collision and has very minimal character development initially. These factors led me to be unable to suspend disbelief and truly immerse myself in the story nor become invested in the main character’s survival. Further, the plot is tired and worn out. Several movies of a similar plot precede Gravity - which is basically a disaster survival story in space (most notably 2001: A Space Odyssey and Apollo 13, among others).

    I can’t help but imagine the executives at Warner Bros. and how this film came to be:

    We need a hit film, a huge money maker, but something new, fresh!

    CGI, its all about that CGI, that’s what sells movies…we’ve just got to take it to the next level!

    Yeah, but we’ve done just about everything on earth…

    That’s the problem! On Earth…space! Brilliant, and we will make it in Imax, get even more money for the tickets.

    Yeah, but we have to get actors that get a huge draw in the box office.

    Who is hot right now?

    Robert Downey Jr.? Angelina Jolie?

    Nah, Jolie has something scheduled already. Downey probably won’t want to do it, he’s too improvisational, won’t be his style.

    We could get Clooney? Everybody loves George.

    But what about the girl? Who won best actress last year? Jennifer Lawrence? Too young. Meryl Streep? Too old. Natalie Portman? Not likeable enough. How ’bout Sandra Bullock? Sandy will probably do it.

    But who is going to take the risk of making this movie? It could tank. Well, he will have to be a relative unknown, but made a hit before, international, so hungry to break into mainstream Hollywood. Alfonso Cuarón? I think he wanted to be an astronaut when he grew up. Isn’t he shopping a script set in space?

    And the rest is history…

    In all seriousness, the movie never connected with me, while visually brilliant, it is lacking in all other regards. If you are into special effects and the sheer technical breadth of the undertaking of that crew, whom I commend, then I suggest this movie.

    More reviews of recent releases can be found at our website.
    Expand
  20. Mar 5, 2014
    0
    There's a better "g"-word to describe this movie--Garbage. I rented this last night and was incredibly disappointed. This is oscar-worthy? Dallas Buyers Club, absolutely. Her, definitely. But Sandra Bullock fumbling around in space for 90 minutes with a George Clooney voiceover? It doesn't work. It's not interesting, it's not gripping, and it doesn't translate to anyone who hasn'tThere's a better "g"-word to describe this movie--Garbage. I rented this last night and was incredibly disappointed. This is oscar-worthy? Dallas Buyers Club, absolutely. Her, definitely. But Sandra Bullock fumbling around in space for 90 minutes with a George Clooney voiceover? It doesn't work. It's not interesting, it's not gripping, and it doesn't translate to anyone who hasn't been in space, which is probably about 99.99% of the human population. Apollo 13 did it MUCH better, so if you're dying to see a good **** happens, even in space" flick, go for that instead.

    And lemme tell ya. With all that open space out there around Earth, the Hubble Space Telescope, ISS, & Chinese station sure seem very close together….If you can float from one to the other using a can of hairspray as your propellant and NOT run out of air…I'm calling BS. A big can of BS.

    In summary, the acting is trash. The script is pompous. And the story is a yawner. Read some of the other negative reviews so at least you're informed if you choose to watch it.
    Expand
  21. Dec 26, 2013
    0
    This movie is a joke. It had amazing visuals that took some 7 years to do (they had to wait for the technology to be created). It had a script that was written in 30 minutes, while the writer was drunk and high. It had acting that was great at first, but got repetitive and annoying. Worst of all, there's no arc, there's no story; it's just the same 5-minute loop over and over again. IfThis movie is a joke. It had amazing visuals that took some 7 years to do (they had to wait for the technology to be created). It had a script that was written in 30 minutes, while the writer was drunk and high. It had acting that was great at first, but got repetitive and annoying. Worst of all, there's no arc, there's no story; it's just the same 5-minute loop over and over again. If you've seen the trailer, you've seen the whole movie. Expand
  22. Dec 23, 2013
    2
    For me it went beyond suspense and straight into frustration and a lot of growling at Bullock.Yes, it's a movie, but you can't help but wonder how the hell someone as clueless as the protagonist even made it out of the atmosphere. Beautiful visuals and lovely execution of zero-gravity, but quite frankly I hated the protagonist so much it distracted me from just about everything else.
  23. Mar 1, 2014
    1
    My god this was a horrible flick.

    It mainly consisted of beautiful filming, heavy breathing, and a dumb as a sponge character. Dr Stone keeps on blithering “I am running out of oxygen” but she just babbles, fidgets and keeps babbling instead of just relaxing and breathing slowly as an astronaut would be trained to do This character was a joke. She could not get out of a public
    My god this was a horrible flick.

    It mainly consisted of beautiful filming, heavy breathing, and
    a dumb as a sponge character.

    Dr Stone keeps on blithering “I am running out of oxygen” but she just babbles, fidgets and keeps babbling instead of just relaxing and breathing slowly as an astronaut would be trained to do

    This character was a joke. She could not get out of a public toilet cubicle if she locked herself in it.

    The only redeeming character was Matt Kowalski but then there were
    really only two characters in the movie.

    I should have just watched Vanishing Point again
    Expand
  24. 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.
  25. Jul 21, 2014
    0
    Hollywood's two most benign actors (Clooney, Bullock) carry no weight and from the outset I so wished the main characters would be sucked into the vacuum of space and obliterated by the black hole that so richly represents their talent.

    The infinite depths of space as a back drop to the limited range of the actors and the simpleton script makes for great irony ....Television's 'Lost In
    Hollywood's two most benign actors (Clooney, Bullock) carry no weight and from the outset I so wished the main characters would be sucked into the vacuum of space and obliterated by the black hole that so richly represents their talent.

    The infinite depths of space as a back drop to the limited range of the actors and the simpleton script makes for great irony ....Television's 'Lost In Space' opening credit sequence had more to say.
    Expand
  26. Nov 22, 2013
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. So I walked into this movie thinking this might actually be better than the trailer actually showed but it turns out that the movie was the trailer, but it had more. You are first introduced to one of the loudest noises I have ever heard in a movie. I swear it was so loud everyone in the theater had to cover their ears to save their eardrums from being blown out. This happens throughtout the whole movie it goes from quiet air into an uneccesarily loud sound and then back to silence and then repeats. Enough of the sound though let's talk about the movie. You first see a random extra astronaut and then you are introduced to sandra bullock's character dr. Ryan stone who in the past has lost a daughter at the age of 4 which is a sad story to me, but that isn't the point we are watching gravity. Basically the explorer gets hit and then the rest of the movie is sandra bullock breathing and crying for the last 50 minutes or so. Did I mention the excellent cameo of George Clooney? Well might as well consider it a cameo and call sandra bullock and the voice on earth the cast; a whopping cast of two people for a film. There was no great plot just bullock floating in space trying to get down to earth. There was zero character development meaning I could have cared less whether bullock survived or not. The movie was also one of the dullest if not the dullest movie I have ever seen it was so dull that me and my friend kept poking jokes at it and laughing our mouths off. Although I do give the film a thumbs up on George Clooney's cameo and good message about survival, it is still one of the worst movies I have ever seen absolutely horrendous. Overall 3/10 Expand
  27. Jun 3, 2014
    3
    This main girl character must be the dumbest and most stupidest human ever sent to space. If this is the best and brightest what NASA can muster then we are all doomed.
    Should i say that she is irritating as ****
  28. Nov 25, 2013
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I had purposely not gone to too much trouble to find what this film was about. Its obviously a space drama/disaster flick, that was enough to interest me and pay my admission fee.

    I had hoped this film was going to be the closest experience to being in space itself. I was very let down. The film never gripped me, made me feel any empathy with the characters, never made me feel any sense of threat, dread, or consequence of what would happen to them.

    This film looks (even in 3D) like actors playing people in space, not the immersive moviegoing experience i was hoping for. The whole thing was a miscast for me even before i sat down, that said, i still retained an open mind about the cast. The acting was about as wooden as it comes (for the record i think clooney is a great actor in the right part, Bullock, sorry ive yet to see her in anything remotely good) and the script is at times cringeworthy. For example Bullocks eenie, meenie, minie, moe button pressing when her life is at stake was pathetic.

    The visuals could not save this heap of rubbish, although the destruction of the ISS was the only positive i could find in the film viewing wise.

    In a nutshell, overhyped tat with no real purpose, meaning or substance.

    Oh, one last thing, how convenient that when Bullock lands back on earth she is mere metres away from the nearest beach.
    Expand
  29. Jun 13, 2014
    1
    Worst Movie of the Decade. Why was it nominated for Oscars in the first place? In understand why they won best visual effects in a motion picture. But Really who enjoys this stuff?
  30. 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.
  31. Dec 10, 2013
    3
    The movie was alright, but the events are totally unbelievable. It had lots of intensity at first, then it got tedious. Cliche after cliche, unbelievable scene one after another, and a complete lack of a plot with substance. I can't grow attached to Sandra Bullock or George Clooney pretending to be astronauts, that's beyond my ability to suspend disbelief for movie viewing pleasure. IThe movie was alright, but the events are totally unbelievable. It had lots of intensity at first, then it got tedious. Cliche after cliche, unbelievable scene one after another, and a complete lack of a plot with substance. I can't grow attached to Sandra Bullock or George Clooney pretending to be astronauts, that's beyond my ability to suspend disbelief for movie viewing pleasure. I won't spoil the movie, because there's nothing to spoil, the trailer sums up the entire 90 minutes of your life that you just wasted watching it. Nice special effects, but I play video games if that's all I'm looking for. I wanted a movie, and I was disappointed when I left the theatre. Expand
  32. Mar 9, 2014
    3
    Hype hype hype hype hype hype - let it die down a bit then I'll watch it - I thought. Idiot. Forgot the Oscars would dredge it all up again.
    Bit the bullet and sat and watched it. I am finding it hard to compliment this film, or rather which bit was the best of the worst. OK, the effects were OK - the over the top necessity to nudge and re nudge inane objects such as spanners or pipes,
    Hype hype hype hype hype hype - let it die down a bit then I'll watch it - I thought. Idiot. Forgot the Oscars would dredge it all up again.
    Bit the bullet and sat and watched it. I am finding it hard to compliment this film, or rather which bit was the best of the worst. OK, the effects were OK - the over the top necessity to nudge and re nudge inane objects such as spanners or pipes, while in space, just so the effects guys can work on the inertia and movement to make it look, "natural", as if you wouldn't bat an eye but thought it so smooth it had to be real. OTT. Stop it, get on with making the film you idiots, but when you do can you stop making the 3D bits so bloody obvious. If I want to be blown away with 3D, I'll put my shoes on and go look at the real world, maybe actually interact with things, like you know, touching and smelling? However, when watching films, I do not wish to see a floating screw come spinning towards the camera, blurring out the rest of the frame - only for it to mean NOTHING and not even be in 3D (some of us people at the foot of the entertainment equipment ladder just cant afford, nor would like a 3D television thank you) so why waste my time and place 3D film sections in a 2D film. Lets face it, 99.999% of people who watch this film at home will be doing so on a normal TV!
    Emotionless acting, over the top effects for effects sake, absolutely ridiculous physics and other goofs (I read on IMDB after watching), finalised my views that this film did not deserve at least 2 of the 7 Oscars it won....
    Visual Effects, a couple of scenes where the Earth was reflected on the visor of Bullock, the image did not respond as it should when she rotated her head. Just stuck there when it should have twisted. Poor.
    Cinematography, With great power comes great responsibility. With great budgets comes over the top cinematic, long drawn out panorama's of small things progressively getting bigger as they smoothly glide towards the camera in a never ending slush of emotion and "beauty". YAWN. BOOOOORRRING! I could do better with a disposable stills camera.
    Expand
  33. 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
  34. Jan 30, 2015
    0
    Quite frankly, yes, it was an alright movie. It was a great thrill ride, but nothing else. I didn't feel any emotion, care about any characters, nothing, it was just a thrill ride, and that's fine, but the amount of praise the movie gets for it is just absolutely **** insane! That's the reason I'm giving it a zero, which is unfair, yes, but god dammit, why would a movie like this recieveQuite frankly, yes, it was an alright movie. It was a great thrill ride, but nothing else. I didn't feel any emotion, care about any characters, nothing, it was just a thrill ride, and that's fine, but the amount of praise the movie gets for it is just absolutely **** insane! That's the reason I'm giving it a zero, which is unfair, yes, but god dammit, why would a movie like this recieve so much praise? Great visuals? Cool, but that doesn't equal a good movie. Creepy soundtrack that sets the mood? Fair enough, great, but that doesn't equal a good movie. Great cinematography? Yes! I love that, but none of any of that matters in the end if I feel no care or affection for anything about or in the movie. Another well made thrill ride that deserves max a like, 6 or 7/10. Expand
  35. Mar 4, 2014
    0
    I can't believe this won Oscars. I have seen the same kind of graphics in video games, so I was not impressed. The acting is so boring. Boring dialog. I was glad when George Cloony's character floated into space, so that I didn't have to listen to that stupid country music and his boring conversations. I feel asleep and don't know if I can bring myself to finish this sleeper of a movie.I can't believe this won Oscars. I have seen the same kind of graphics in video games, so I was not impressed. The acting is so boring. Boring dialog. I was glad when George Cloony's character floated into space, so that I didn't have to listen to that stupid country music and his boring conversations. I feel asleep and don't know if I can bring myself to finish this sleeper of a movie. Thank goodness I didn't pay to see this in the theater. Save your money and your time by skipping this movie. Expand
  36. Mar 18, 2014
    1
    Dreadful! The characters are Hollywood stock - the wise-cracking alpha male hero, the shrieking frightened woman, the dispensable minority etc etc. The attempts to develop the characters are so pitiful they make things worse (the dead daughter? What was that about?). And the dialogue is so cheesy you'd think it was made in the 1980s. The film does do a good job of conveying zero gravity,Dreadful! The characters are Hollywood stock - the wise-cracking alpha male hero, the shrieking frightened woman, the dispensable minority etc etc. The attempts to develop the characters are so pitiful they make things worse (the dead daughter? What was that about?). And the dialogue is so cheesy you'd think it was made in the 1980s. The film does do a good job of conveying zero gravity, and it's quite amusing when SB strips to her underwear for absolutely no apparent reason but those are the only good things about it apart from the fact it's nice and short (shorter still if you fast-forward the unnecessary escape-pod scenes).

    I'd say if you thought Avatar was a great film and/or you've recently had part of your brain removed you will enjoy this. Nobody else should bother.
    Expand
  37. Dec 3, 2013
    0
    What a load of rubbish! This movie, which is seriously just two people floating around in space, is being hailed as "revolutionary" and "ground breaking" and "like nothing you've ever seen before." What!? We've all seen Apollo 13, haven't we? Only that had an interesting story, and characters who didn't just scream and act embarrassing the whole time. The special effects weren't even thatWhat a load of rubbish! This movie, which is seriously just two people floating around in space, is being hailed as "revolutionary" and "ground breaking" and "like nothing you've ever seen before." What!? We've all seen Apollo 13, haven't we? Only that had an interesting story, and characters who didn't just scream and act embarrassing the whole time. The special effects weren't even that impressive. And yet no doubt it will win best visual effects at the Oscars, as well as about twelve thousand other awards because delusional critics have brainwashed themselves into thinking this is a "masterpiece." Expand
  38. Mar 2, 2014
    0
    Meteor hit every station as soon as Bullock reach it, and of course there are russian and chinese stations floating around and you can reach those with fire extinguisher.
    The story is totally cheap and even stupid and dumb. This is NOT a Sci-Fi but someone's not really good imagination.
  39. Ndi
    Nov 29, 2013
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. What a turd. TUUUUURD.

    Stupid physics, plenty mistakes, personal drama that was completely unnecessary, long, drawn out, awkward pauses where they had to fill with monologues,

    How does this movie even rated anything with critics? Has nobody any integrity left? I understand I get to look at Sandra Bullok's ass, but seriously, she's 49. Work out or not, 49. And for that cash, SFX was wavy at best, they had not one physicist on site (feels like he quit midway through) that could tell them that people aren't dolls and if you bow out a hatch while holding it and it thows you off, it also breaks your arm, rips the suit, and damages the airlock. Hence they cycle thing.

    While she is "feeling better" about having air, the poor bastard outside was suffocating. I know they couldn't afford Clooney but come on.

    Every time she gets undressed, she throws away clothes like she's in her bathroom. Keep the f*** suit, idiot, you're in space and it has AIR. You never know when you need air.

    The ISS catches fire, she ignores it (while splashing water inside because what the hell, it's not like they need EVERY panel), then she fails to put out the fire because she doesn't understand reaction, then the ISS blows up and she says "I hate space". B*tch, at the time the movie happens the ISS is the single greatest achievement of the human race and you are supposed to be a scientist and you, YOU f*cked it up. YOU missed the fire, YOU couldn't operate an extinguisher, YOU killed the ISS. At this point, I'm hoping she makes it, I want her hanged.

    Anyone with 6 months training can operate a NASA vehicle, fix Hubble, fly ISS's Soyuz, execute procedures in Russian, launch escape pods in Chinese because all you need is a bit of mashing of buttons I don't know why they keep that long training thing. Any half-stupid, is-sick-in-space, suicidal-tendencies 50 year old female can operate any and all space stuff, because space stuff is the same.

    Station blows up, there is a billion pieces of shrapnel, 50 hit the camera, 20 hit my eyes in 3D, 140 shred the pods, NONE touch Soyuz, her, or any other important stuff.

    She has been attacked by debris twice, fire once, lack of air once, tethered by chute once, and threatened several times, she never hurries. NEVER. To keep that zero-G feel, no button is ever pressed fast, no screw done soon, even when she sees the cloud of stuff coming at her, she steps out of the pod and the camera does a lazy 360. Sure, 90 seconds to impact, take the view.

    I could go on for ages, this is a stupid, stupid movie, with a stupid premise, bad re-entry angles, and bad writing.

    BAD WRITING.

    What was that c*ap about her dead daughter? Did that pan out? No. Just another detail to make me feel sorry for her. Well it didn't work. By the time she touched down, I was hoping she drowned, and so did half the theater. She almost drowned in a space suit. Do you know how hard that is?

    I hate critics. Pounding action? No pounding action. Total of 5 minutes of action. Have you forgotten 15 minutes of pulling Ryan through space? Tell me about yourself, Ryan, we don't have budget for more than this. Intimate human storytelling? My daughter is dead, my dog died, I'm depressed. Boo hoo, such a deep human connection we have now. It's not like it's artificially planted, like the faceless guy with picture of family. Or the scattered pictures of families on every single dead guy in the Horizon. And personal toys.

    There is such a thing as pulling every string of my heart and it is sad.

    How can you give this dump a good score?
    Expand
  40. Jan 25, 2014
    0
    This movie is bad and equally as overrated as uncharted 3 even the secret life of Walter Mitty was better than this steaming pile of **** **** this movie to hell it doesn't deserve all of this praise the story is the combination of uncharted 3 and ratchet size matters and sonic heroes that's a pretty bad sign since the new Mario games suck.
  41. Jan 8, 2014
    1
    A movie that is not about science fiction should stay true to science that governs our universe. Being an engineer myself i cringed every second i saw b-s physics just to advance the non-existent plot. Not a movie for educated people who actually likes a plot and presentation to go along with it. More of a movie for the brainless people who thinks woofing in a spacepod is emotional andA movie that is not about science fiction should stay true to science that governs our universe. Being an engineer myself i cringed every second i saw b-s physics just to advance the non-existent plot. Not a movie for educated people who actually likes a plot and presentation to go along with it. More of a movie for the brainless people who thinks woofing in a spacepod is emotional and opening the airlock of it is actually a cool idea for the reunion cliche.

    This movie is a litmus paper to stupidity and the ratings show the average brain power of people who watched this movie.
    Expand
  42. Dec 14, 2013
    0
    as de sjors was blijvn levn haddekik viele mier puntn heheven. T es deure metakritik da mine moat deine kutfilm wou gn zien. Echt gnen aanrader. Tenzij ge ne nolifer bent
  43. 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
  44. Feb 19, 2014
    1
    I think is the time I've been more disappointed with a films. I only go to the cinema about once per year, because of the price and the poor quality of the films, having seen the reveiws of Gravity I decided to spend about 22 pounds to see with my wife a 3D version of this films...well, I fell asleep after 25 minutes, the films is SO TEDIOUS, I couldn't stand it! the visuals are Ok, but toI think is the time I've been more disappointed with a films. I only go to the cinema about once per year, because of the price and the poor quality of the films, having seen the reveiws of Gravity I decided to spend about 22 pounds to see with my wife a 3D version of this films...well, I fell asleep after 25 minutes, the films is SO TEDIOUS, I couldn't stand it! the visuals are Ok, but to be fare, I was impress at any moment for anything about them...

    Seriously I think is the most overrated films ever!!!!

    By the way, the films is full of cliches, the character of clooney is something quite pathetic...
    Expand
  45. Mar 13, 2014
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Great visuals,great direction,great musical score, BAD screenplay and average acting.At times Bullock's character really irritated me, and how can an astronaut who's only had 6 months of training be so calm and know so much about the workings of the shuttles? Really disappointed they didn't make a better effort to write a better story, visuals and music alone don't make a great movie. Expand
  46. 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 SandraIt 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
  47. Nov 15, 2013
    2
    Coming here and seeing that the critic's score of this movie is 91 and the one of a movie like "The Green Mile" is just 61 surprised me a lot. A great trailer and then nothing: insignificant characters, repetitive plot, banal ending. Don't waste your time and money.
  48. Nov 21, 2013
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This film is dire. Goodness knows how it comes by such critical acclaim. The CGI is excellent, but when you've whirled around in space for the umpteenth time the novelty starts to wear off. There is almost no plot. There is no realism in the dynamics of free fall. You just can't dangle on the end of a rope when there's no gravity. The film just repeats the same scenes over and over. Bullock tries to use US reentry vehicle, but it all goes horribly wrong, then the Russian reentry vehicle, but it all goes horribly wrong, then the Chinese one, which works, hoorah! Each change of vehicle necessitate Bullock squeezing in and out of her spacesuit in her underwear hang on isn't that Ripley's thing in Alien? When Bullock is under stress she hums to herself (hang on isn't etc etc). And oh God protect us from American (sorry guys) schmatlz. Bullock has a young daughter, but that's not enough, it has to be a dead daughter, but that's not enough, after Clooney dies, Bullock sends him off with a message for her dead daughter. Ugh. As someone else here said, given the way disaster is piled on disaster it was a wonder there wasn't an alligator shark monster from the black lagoon in the lake that she so fortuitously landed in. Expand
  49. Jan 26, 2014
    0
    I spent money on this movie and it was a waste of my time. I saw the trailer before I went and saw the movie and at the end over the movie I was very disappointed because the trailer made it look good but the trailer was the whole movie. I tell all of my friends to watch the trailer and that's the movie. This movie was a waste of time and money. I have no idea why everyone liked it so muchI spent money on this movie and it was a waste of my time. I saw the trailer before I went and saw the movie and at the end over the movie I was very disappointed because the trailer made it look good but the trailer was the whole movie. I tell all of my friends to watch the trailer and that's the movie. This movie was a waste of time and money. I have no idea why everyone liked it so much but I guess it was because everyone these days are stupid and can't think about anything but the simplest things that that go on. I say to the people who made this movie go and watch an episode of doctor who and then look at this movie. I am saying you guys suck and British people are so much better. Go take a lesson from Steven Moffat because he knows how to write an amazing story line and keep it going and make it better as it goes on. I will never watch a movie that is made by you and I will tell all of my friends the same thing I told them about Gravity that it sucked and is waste of time and money and no one in their right mind should go see it. Before I go might i just add that the acting sucked as well I hated that actors that you got they absolutely sucked and should never act again. Expand
  50. Mar 18, 2014
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie is a disgrace to science. None of the writers heard of inertia? Bullock wouldn't have made it out of the opening scenes. I haven't seen a movie this bad since Buckaroo Banzai. Clooney was horrible and so care-free about dying. CGI and one cliff hanger after another. Horrible script. This movie is everything thats wrong with society. If I could give this movie a negative numerical rating, I would. If you love sic-fi, pass this movie by. Expand
  51. Nov 18, 2014
    0
    Wow. This movie is quite simply unbearable to watch. While the visuals are compelling and groundbreaking, the script is so horribly mundane, cliche, and unbelievable that the film comes off as unintentionally comic material. George Clooney does the best with what he is given; however, his character's arc is so brief it leaves you wanting more than just Sandra Bullock in a tight tank top.Wow. This movie is quite simply unbearable to watch. While the visuals are compelling and groundbreaking, the script is so horribly mundane, cliche, and unbelievable that the film comes off as unintentionally comic material. George Clooney does the best with what he is given; however, his character's arc is so brief it leaves you wanting more than just Sandra Bullock in a tight tank top. Furthermore, not only is the entire film's premise a stretch of basic space science, the ending is extremely unrewarding and empty. Please, save yourself some brain cells and some time, and choose something else to watch. Expand
  52. Dec 26, 2014
    0
    I really have to say this is one of the very worst movies I have ever seen. I really did not expect a mind blowing sci-fi movie but this movie was honestly so boring and so senseless.. there is no comparison. I try very hard to find one positive thing about the movie but I cant. Even the effects and the sound are far from being excellent or mind blowing. This movie is just a very big failI really have to say this is one of the very worst movies I have ever seen. I really did not expect a mind blowing sci-fi movie but this movie was honestly so boring and so senseless.. there is no comparison. I try very hard to find one positive thing about the movie but I cant. Even the effects and the sound are far from being excellent or mind blowing. This movie is just a very big fail and waste of time. Rating this movie with more than 0 proves bad taste. I dont see any reason to give more than a 0 rating to this movie, maybe somebody can enlighten me Expand
  53. May 20, 2015
    3
    I found this film very boring, it does almost nothing happens and it's very long, it's without interest, it's very very annoying and I don't recomanded this movie
  54. Nov 9, 2013
    3
    I'm so INCREDIBLY disappointed. I could never imagine how clichée filled, "sentimental" and stupid this movie is. The dialogue (and the monologue!) is among the dumbest I've ever heard. As if that wasn't enough, I found myself questioning most of what was happening so many flaws and logical gaps. Frankly, the most enjoyable thing about this movie was the 3D and I really, really hate 3D.I'm so INCREDIBLY disappointed. I could never imagine how clichée filled, "sentimental" and stupid this movie is. The dialogue (and the monologue!) is among the dumbest I've ever heard. As if that wasn't enough, I found myself questioning most of what was happening so many flaws and logical gaps. Frankly, the most enjoyable thing about this movie was the 3D and I really, really hate 3D. I can't even imagine who would find this movie gripping. It's beyond me. Expand
  55. Nov 9, 2013
    0
    The most over rated movie in a generation. These are two one dimensional characters shot in 3D, nothing more. Strip away the glitter and you would be paying someone else to watch it for you. If you want a Disney roller coaster ride without the movement then go see it. If you want something that has anything besides visual marshmallow goop then skip it.
  56. Jan 27, 2014
    1
    I didn't watch this movie in an Imax theatre, so maybe the "ahh" factor what might be the reason that people are giving this movie such ludicrous high ratings all over the board eludes me, but in my opinion it's an aggravatingly bad movie.
    The visuals are great, everything looks fantastic, but that's it.
    This movie screams "preposterous". it pretends, in an arrogant way, to be a
    I didn't watch this movie in an Imax theatre, so maybe the "ahh" factor what might be the reason that people are giving this movie such ludicrous high ratings all over the board eludes me, but in my opinion it's an aggravatingly bad movie.
    The visuals are great, everything looks fantastic, but that's it.
    This movie screams "preposterous". it pretends, in an arrogant way, to be a realistic "current time" sci-fi movie/drama, but it crashes and burns with monstrous factual errors. after the fourth physics-defying scene i couldn't watch it anymore.
    Probably a great movie if you can suspend your disbelief, but the pretence of this movie is you don't.
    Expand
  57. Dec 12, 2013
    0
    One of the most overrated, boring, stupid films I have seen in a long long time. The only redeeming thing was the special effects. Everything else was ridiculous, stupid and boring. I actually wanted to walk out half way though, couldn't care less whether or not she survived at the end.
  58. Mar 22, 2014
    2
    I really don't get it. What is the big deal with this movie?? Its probably one of the worst Ive seen ever. Its up there with Starship Troopers 2 & 3 for quality. A movie has to be more than visuals, and behind all the glam of the earth shots there is nothing, maybe the most flimsy plot ever. Neither my wife nor I could sit and watch it, but after seeing al these fantastic reviews I thoughtI really don't get it. What is the big deal with this movie?? Its probably one of the worst Ive seen ever. Its up there with Starship Troopers 2 & 3 for quality. A movie has to be more than visuals, and behind all the glam of the earth shots there is nothing, maybe the most flimsy plot ever. Neither my wife nor I could sit and watch it, but after seeing al these fantastic reviews I thought there has to be something here. Mid way through I'd decided to watch to the end just for the slimmest chance and hope of seeing Bullock be killed, but had to be content that the movie just ends.

    I give it a 2 - 1 for some of the cool effects leading to the meteor strike and 1 for George Clooney who was mildly entertaining for his part.

    Confused and bemused.
    Expand
  59. Oct 24, 2013
    3
    I got back into my metacritic account after a long time because of my disappointment in the movie. First, this movie is hit hard in the lacking of a good script and one thing that I despise is cheesiness unfortunately this movie is loaded with awkward, goofy screenwriting many will disagree with this and that's fine. But I guarantee many of you out there saw this and saw beyond its veryI got back into my metacritic account after a long time because of my disappointment in the movie. First, this movie is hit hard in the lacking of a good script and one thing that I despise is cheesiness unfortunately this movie is loaded with awkward, goofy screenwriting many will disagree with this and that's fine. But I guarantee many of you out there saw this and saw beyond its very amazing cinematography and visuals which are the small bit of praise I will give for Gravity. Now to move to the acting and the characters, first off the acting was limited, it was much of just sandra bullock and unfortunately this isn't her best performance, not necessarily her fault here though. The fault lies in what I see as TERRIBLE characters and story to boast. I am someone who gets fully engrossed in a movie emotionally and its not a hard thing for me to usually do. This movie was just bland, if you look past the fantastic visuals and cinematography what you get is a story with a bland character and a couple moments of George Clooney being George Clooney. I am an avid movie goer and lover of movies, I don't hate on movies much but I was so disappointed in this movie due to the high metacritic score (usually a good sign in my opinion) but I seriously thought this was complete trash. Expand
  60. Apr 8, 2014
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Imagine a firefighter enters a building that is blazing with flames. He looks around, screams for 10 minutes, and runs away because he is completely unqualified for the job.

    That is what this movie is like, except replace the firefighter with an astronaut.

    The only good thing about this film is that it looks nice. But to be honest, it's not worth an hour and a half of your time to watch a film when you can just go on Imgur and type in 'nice space pictures' and start viewing galleries of visually appealing space pictures without having to listen to someone screaming and constantly gasping for air (when they are supposed to be an astronaut with some experience).

    The worst part about watching this film is that when it finally finishes, you realise that Sandra Bullock is in the middle of nowhere and will probably die anyway. So much for the whole 'survival' theme.

    Also, 'Gravity' doesn't make sense as a title. It should be called 'Zero Gravity', 'Zero Oxygen', or 'Screaming Lady in Space'.
    Expand
  61. Jan 14, 2014
    2
    Another standard issue vapid hollywood action movie. They make astronauts out to be a bunch of no talent ass clowns who lose their **** in a crisis. And physics does not work that way. Come up with some more plausible plot twists that aren't completely deus ex machina.
  62. 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
  63. 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
    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
  64. 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 BullockMala 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 teniendo mejor cuerpo que una mujer de 20 años. Quien le dio tan buena critica? Expand
  65. 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
  66. Oct 22, 2013
    3
    Expectable though great looking sci-fi movie. Gravity is well shot and the special fx are pretty faultless. It looks great but the storyline is just disastrous and almost insultingly predictable. The character development is just ludicrously poor. Clooney is just a guy who´s character is almost not there. He´s not affected by the accident and is just emotionless like a machine. He show´sExpectable though great looking sci-fi movie. Gravity is well shot and the special fx are pretty faultless. It looks great but the storyline is just disastrous and almost insultingly predictable. The character development is just ludicrously poor. Clooney is just a guy who´s character is almost not there. He´s not affected by the accident and is just emotionless like a machine. He show´s some compassion towards Bullocks character though it is of such low amount of value to the movie as the movie is of low amount of atmosphere.
    In the moment the movie started to get interesting and you could get at least a development and a little piece of compassion towards Bullock it kills not only the atmosphere of this scene but also disrupts any bond of connectivity to the movie and Bullock. The end of the movie is annoying and boring, you don´t have to watch the movie to know what´ll happen. If they would have concentrated more on the story and the character development it would been a great movie but now... it´s just another undeserved academy award nominee I may would be giving them one for the cgi fxs
    Expand
  67. Nov 4, 2013
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Neither NASA nor any other space agency would ever send the character Sandra Bullock played into space. They don't need a hysterical woman who knows nothing about space or the technology she has to use.
    If you know nothing about physics or space you probably will like that movie but if you are interested in these things (like me) you'll hate it because you know that nearly everything is against logic or physics.

    And to be honest: In a SciFi movie I don't give a damn about a "deep" insight of the characters. Especially when their stories have nothing to do with the movie.

    Before I checked who made the movie I thought the same guy who did After Earth also did this one.

    At the end: The nearly drowned in the rescue capsule? Oh holy This nearly happened in real life to NASA astronauts and thus NASA (and all other space agencies) fixed that problem.

    The director just wanted to make a awesome 3D movie but didn't cared about a good and especially logical story. I hope he NEVER does a movie again so the investors have money left for good movies.
    Expand
  68. Nov 15, 2013
    1
    I was told that Gravity was boring in 2D so we saw it in 3D and it was boring....... and Stupid. George Cluney just played his part like a guy who thinks I'm beautiful so I don't need to act, so he cracks jokes while an exploding satellite destroys their spacecraft, 'looks like Facebook will be off the air haha'. When they make it to the ISS Bullock has to flip through the user manual toI was told that Gravity was boring in 2D so we saw it in 3D and it was boring....... and Stupid. George Cluney just played his part like a guy who thinks I'm beautiful so I don't need to act, so he cracks jokes while an exploding satellite destroys their spacecraft, 'looks like Facebook will be off the air haha'. When they make it to the ISS Bullock has to flip through the user manual to learn how to fly the thing, how ridiculous, really this movie is a joke, don't waste your money. Expand
  69. 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
    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 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
  70. 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. IThis 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
  71. 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.
  72. 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
    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 popped 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
  73. 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.
  74. Oct 23, 2013
    2
    I really don't understand how people can "connect" with such an annoying actress. The graphical effects were spectacular, but other than that I spent most of the movie wishing George Clooney would come back so I wouldn't be so bored. This movie is the same amount of a survival story as Spongebob Squarepants is an adult humor.
  75. 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 characterThis 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
  76. 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, sheIt 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
  77. 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 withThe 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
  78. 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
  79. Oct 18, 2013
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I really don't know how this movie got such high matacritic reviews. Scripts is so amateur, unrealisitic!! Even George Clooney is not at his best! How can someone so cool-ly sacrifice himself with sarcasm?!! Only in cheap Hollywood flicks! Basic physics laws are broken so miserably! For god sake, if in the space and state of weightless ness, two people are attached by a rope, there is no way one of the being pulled away?! so he having too cut himself loose to save the other one?!!! Hello! there is no gravity! don't forget!!
    Such a waste of scenario's idea! could have been a great movie with a different crew!
    Expand
  80. Oct 20, 2013
    1
    Visuals aside, this was a miserable, unrealistic movie. Bullock's character is clearly the most unqualified astronaut in history and is horribly frustrating and annoying to watch. If you want to see anything even remotely realistic, steer clear of this movie.
  81. Oct 20, 2013
    1
    If you want to hear Sandra Bullock and George Clooney scream for 1 hour and 31 minutes, than this is the movie for you... If you want to go see a good movie, go see Captain Phillips.
  82. Oct 21, 2013
    3
    Did I really see the same movie as all of those who are saying "amazing, one of the best movies ever, best I've ever seen, fabulous performances...."?

    Seriously? I guess this is the perfect movie for our ADD society where we need something sparkly to happen every 7 10 seconds... it's short attention span theater albeit pretty to watch with wonderful photography. It woefully lacks in
    Did I really see the same movie as all of those who are saying "amazing, one of the best movies ever, best I've ever seen, fabulous performances...."?

    Seriously?

    I guess this is the perfect movie for our ADD society where we need something sparkly to happen every 7 10 seconds... it's short attention span theater albeit pretty to watch with wonderful photography. It woefully lacks in character development and is void of any plausibility. It's The Perils of Pauline in Space, a paste diamond set in a Faberge egg of photography.
    Expand
  83. Oct 23, 2013
    2
    Cinema is the most thrilling and easy art ever, because you can show a picture and at the same time tell a story.

    What define a great movie I think this is the question you need to ask you, when you want to go and watch GRAVITY. If you define great movie by just the quality of the picture, MEN that's the best movie ever! But if you are not deaf (no offense), you'll define a great
    Cinema is the most thrilling and easy art ever, because you can show a picture and at the same time tell a story.

    What define a great movie I think this is the question you need to ask you, when you want to go and watch GRAVITY.

    If you define great movie by just the quality of the picture, MEN that's the best movie ever!

    But if you are not deaf (no offense), you'll define a great movie by the quality of the photography, the way the characters are built, the emotions going thru them, the sensations and the feeling coming from the situations (the music, etc), the story and the message of the movie.

    But i'm sorry, here only 1 of these things pull it out [the quality of the picture]. The rest is just lacking so badly.

    I wish I could tell how this movie is awesome, but that wouldn't be true... at all.

    I'm not going to repeat the lack of acting, the bad characters construction, the over-dramatic clichés (family picture floating around, foetus position floating in space and giant position to stand up at the end of the movie showing up how you can thrive through adversity), the biggest baddest day ever of the unluckiest person (not) on earth; but tell you about the biggest disappointment of this movie...
    There's no feelings, not a single moment of emotions from the spectators, no tears coming, no fear and anxiety, you just sit there waiting for something crazier than the last 5 minutes to happen again and again.

    I wish I went out of the theater with a little panic attack... but no, I just went back home and wrote this, because I was just disappointed. You can get a 10 better movies with about almost the same subject but way better, form the past 10 years; if you prefer video games go buy MassEffect 2 and just play the first 10 minutes, you'll have a better experience than the 1 hour and 30 minutes of Gravity.

    Last words Almost big studios, almost, you'll not get me so easily. Stop trying to refer and count only on award winners.
    Expand
  84. Oct 25, 2013
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I have never walked out of an IMAX film until this one. It was so unbelievably corny and just plain wrong I couldn't stand it. After Clooney's character died because the movie disregarded the law of which it was named after I was done with it. Should have been called "Open Water: In Space" Expand
  85. Oct 26, 2013
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The movie is way to predictable and boring. Though it may look cool, it is lacking a good plot and is over all a very poorly made film. The movie starts out interesting because it is a completely new idea but as the story progresses the movie starts to get dull and boring. This is because it is missing a proper climax and everything is way to predictable. One other mistake is killing off george cloony which meant adding to how boring the film was, they even try to bring him back but it was just not good enough and they did not put enough effort to making a good film instead they put out a lot of effort into advertising the film by using two famous actors. Not a good watch and i would definitely never watch it again Expand
  86. Nov 4, 2013
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I was very excited to see this movie. I was pretty disappointed that the entire runtime consists of Sandra Bullock falling though space. Let me break it down for you.

    Phase 1: Satellite she's working on gets blown up. She falls for a very long time until George catches her.
    Phase 2: They float toward their ship, which they know is blown up. After confirming their friend who they saw die is dead, they depart.
    Phase 3: They float toward another satellite. Shortly after arrival in blows up. Sandra escapes in a pod and begins floating toward yet another satellite.
    Phase 4: Sandra gets to said satellite and then floats to earth. THE END.

    Nothing happened in this movie that made it stand out for me. The special effects are cool, but even those are few and far between that will really make you go, "Wow." I have no doubt this movie will continue receiving praise and will be Oscar material because it is very well made in the same way Lincoln was. It's a little sad that they didn't try to make it more interesting.

    3/10 Would not bang.
    Expand
  87. Nov 2, 2013
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. In a word: Boring.
    I was sorely disappointed by this film. I knew from the advertisements and some reviews I briefly glimpsed at (so as not the have the movie "spoiled" for me), what I was getting myself into. I can appreciate the fact that there is very little sound and the colour palette is very restricted. Survival movies focusing primarily on one character can still incorporate an interesting story. This did not. At all.
    This movie had so many wasted opportunities. Elaborate on characters' backstories. Display awesome imagery of space and Earth (like show us the Great Wall of China or something). Instead we got to listen to a country music radio station and heavy breathing for over an hour. Get ready to suspend belief.

    We're expected to believe that a woman as scrawny as Sandra Bullock is able to open a pressurized port-hole door and have it swing violently open? We expected to believe that she is strong enough to grip onto handles and bars while flying through space? We're expected to believe that while her life is on the line she's still able to crack wisecrack jokes to herself? We're expected to believe that during every stop she makes along her space travels her oxygen tanks magically refill? We're expected to believe she can propel herself along a very precise path with a fire extinguisher? We're expected to believe that by randomly pressing buttons (she literally plays "eeny meeny miney mo") on a complex space control panel, you're able to get back to Earth?
    This movie failed on every level!
    Expand
  88. Nov 5, 2013
    3
    Something is wrong here. How can 49 "official" critics can be positively unanimous about this movie ???
    Some of them calling this a masterpiece Come on. After the first stunning images and the opening scene, you can go home. All the rest is dull and pathetic.
  89. Nov 5, 2013
    0
    This is one of the worst films to come out this year, don't believe all the hype. They got great visuals and put a cheesy terrible story on top of it to try to justify making the film. The director doesn't take a single step into actually developing the characters, but instead casts Bullock is that typical weak female lead. Bullock is also terrible as usual.
  90. Nov 6, 2013
    2
    I saw this movie with my family and didn't think it would have been this bad but let me tell you its 91 minutes of cgi. To start with the beginning when the movie was starting you just stare at the earth for a good 3 minutes which isn't a big deal IF YOU DIDN'T SHOW IT AS MUCH THE REST OF THE MOVIE! I mean it s in almost every frame. Then the debris hits and kills the man that I GUESSI saw this movie with my family and didn't think it would have been this bad but let me tell you its 91 minutes of cgi. To start with the beginning when the movie was starting you just stare at the earth for a good 3 minutes which isn't a big deal IF YOU DIDN'T SHOW IT AS MUCH THE REST OF THE MOVIE! I mean it s in almost every frame. Then the debris hits and kills the man that I GUESS we're suppose to feel for because Oh! he's got a picture of his family. You can not throw a sentimental moment when you don't even show the persons back story! Then lets go with the rising action and such POINT A TO POINT B?! REALLY? Oscar worthy my ass. When you have a story that Does Not Show its just a point A To point B movie THAT'S A GOOD MOVIE. IT TAKES YOU ON AN ADVENTURE NOT DROLL FLOATING! Then the ending was the Worst ever. She doesn't even get home and you are to expect she does HOW?! shes in the lower hemisphere who the hell knows where she even is or if that shes alive!? 2 out of 10 Waste of my time. Expand
  91. Nov 10, 2013
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie was not worth the effort to watch. There was virtually no character development, very weak and almost non existent plot line, which in the end became incredibly predictable. The movie essentially came down to a cliche plot device, a female character with a pain riddled past who miraculously survives against all odds, and the laws of nature/science.

    (SPOILERS) I want to make a particular note to the infuriating ending. Not only does she make a decision no one in their right mind would make (taking off her helmet in a burning cabin); she somehow manages to escape said cabin whilst its being filled with water. THEN, she still has enough oxygen left in her breath to swim out, take off the suit and beat the water pressure, all on a single breath. This is but one of the many irritating scenes of the film.

    The only reason I gave this a 1/10 was just because of the spectacular visuals and the good use of cinematography, and surprisingly, one of the few films which actually made good use of the 3D projector technology, but this is not enough to justify what I can only assume a very high budget film.

    DO NOT GO AND WATCH, ITS A WASTE OF MONEY!
    Expand
  92. Nov 11, 2013
    0
    I will start by saying I am a huge fan of "user ratings" and I have consistently used this website to make viewing decisions. This movie was so bad, that I finally did it...I made an account so I could share with you, and hopefully alter your decision.
    Gravity was one of the worst movies I have ever seen! In a film that was rich in special effects that I will admit are quite stunning,
    I will start by saying I am a huge fan of "user ratings" and I have consistently used this website to make viewing decisions. This movie was so bad, that I finally did it...I made an account so I could share with you, and hopefully alter your decision.
    Gravity was one of the worst movies I have ever seen! In a film that was rich in special effects that I will admit are quite stunning, lies a hollywood turd that people are choosing to gawk at.
    This movie is literally the "SANDRA BULLOCK CAN GRAB ONTO POWER HOUR". If you would like to see her continually miss grabbing for 2 hours..then this movie is for you. Clooney is the highlight..all for about 5 minutes he is actually in the film! I hate this movie, I hate it so much.
    Granted its visually appealing, that is about all its got. DONT WATCH THIS GARBAGE MOVIE!
    Expand
  93. Nov 15, 2013
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. For having George Clooney being such anchor for this movie I expected more George Clooney. Not just ten minutes if him rambling then drifting into space. His name is on the poster after all. I found Sandra Bullocks character incredibly annoying. She kept acting like she had no idea what she was doing then wastes precious air talking to Clooney when she needs to get her bum on the ship. Did she not realize you need air to live? Face palm. Then that weird baby fetal position while he drifts further away. As for the CGI I'm pretty sure the three space stations they blew up were the same station. Very redundant .very predictable. I don't understand what the hype is about, I was incredibly disappointed. Expand
  94. Nov 16, 2013
    1
    This movie is extremmmmmely boring.....and the story is not nice at all.....it is just a short story being stretch to a length of 91min....Really boring. Furthermore, this movie contains much more educational content than a fictional story content....BUT WHAT I WANNA WATCH IS A NICE MOVIE BUT NOT AN EDUCATIONAL FILM!!!
  95. Nov 16, 2013
    0
    Terrible, even in 3D with the amazing CGI & soundtrack, I wanted to puke my balls out of my the entirety of this movie. The plot sucked balls, Clooney or however the you spell his name is a chode, and Bullock needs to reconsider her career options.
  96. Nov 22, 2013
    0
    This movie is atrocious. Sandra Bullock wailing like a dog at the controls of a spaceship?? The writers of this nonsense should be ashamed of themselves. Absolute Rubbish
  97. Dec 2, 2013
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This is my first ever movie review but I felt obliged to balance out what I can only be describe as a severe blow to my faith in my fellow species.

    Visuals & Sound:

    The special effects are excellent and at their best during the spattering of "action" scenes (i.e. where debris is flying around).

    The first twenty or so minutes of the film are in this reviewer's opinion the only part worth watching hence why it earned it's score. After the second wave of debris there is very little else of note in terms of visuals.

    In regards to sound there was nothing particularly noteworthy either way.

    Plot and Acting:

    The plot is banal at best. Everything about the setting, the evolution of the characters and the circumstances they face comes across as contrived.

    Let us be sports and start from the premise that we'll pretend Sandra Bullocks' character (who I have no desire to remember the name of) is actually qualified to be out on a space walk. She portrays the most irritating, incompetent and pathetic woman I have ever seen in a film. It was cringe-worthy to watch. After about 30 minutes of the film, finally having had enough of listening to her hyperventilating, I honestly wished she would just snuff it.

    Regrettably George Clooney's far more entertaining character dies off around this time and I believe I might have awarded this film at least twice the present score had I gone on to watch him fighting to survive for the next hour.

    Instead I watched Sandra's idiotic character fail utterly to struggle for survival yet somehow miraculously make it back to a beach on Earth somewhere by the end of it.

    This film made me feel angry and rather embarrassed by its portrayal of the female lead. I don't think it is a question of bad acting but due to the script being very poor and as a result having to be over acted to try to create tension.

    Conclusion:

    I am baffled by the good reviews. Aside from two or three spectacular SFX shots and a similar number of chuckle worthy Clooney lines, there is nothing to recommend about this film.
    Expand
  98. Dec 16, 2013
    2
    It was almost an amazing film and I almost believed Sandra Bullock wasn't Sandra Bullock but I have never gone from being so engrossed in a movie to so uninterested and it's all because of their crappy physics.

    We are asked to suspend belief beyond belief. They set up the rules for the physics by overemphasizing it in the beginning and then we have to swallow that the rules don't apply
    It was almost an amazing film and I almost believed Sandra Bullock wasn't Sandra Bullock but I have never gone from being so engrossed in a movie to so uninterested and it's all because of their crappy physics.

    We are asked to suspend belief beyond belief. They set up the rules for the physics by overemphasizing it in the beginning and then we have to swallow that the rules don't apply later on in the film in order to accept the new plot turn. I couldn't do it.
    Expand
  99. Jan 1, 2014
    0
    This has to be one of the worst films that I have seen in a long time. Not even the presence of Sandra Bullock and George Clooney made this film work for me. No character development. Too many bad luck scenarios to make the film remotely believable. Absolutely amazing cinematography but a story line that was weaker than the tea at an all night diner. Sappy elements thrown in to make youThis has to be one of the worst films that I have seen in a long time. Not even the presence of Sandra Bullock and George Clooney made this film work for me. No character development. Too many bad luck scenarios to make the film remotely believable. Absolutely amazing cinematography but a story line that was weaker than the tea at an all night diner. Sappy elements thrown in to make you feel more connected but it was like throwing tomatoes at a wall. Sorry but I did not connect to any of the characters. Oscar worthy? I have to call BS. Simple survival story in space? Get a grip. Poorly written, good visuals. Feels like it was written under pressure. Sorry but I do not recommed this film at all. Expand
  100. Jan 9, 2014
    1
    Cool effects, but did bad science. Also, why is someone who works in a hospital (who happens to be a woefully incompetent astronaut) playing with electronics on Hubble?
Metascore
96

Universal acclaim - based on 49 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 49 out of 49
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 49
  3. Negative: 0 out of 49
  1. Reviewed by: James Mottram
    Nov 3, 2013
    100
    A stunning space saga that takes off for new technical frontiers without leaving its humanity behind.
  2. 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]
  3. 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.