User Score
7.9

Generally favorable reviews- based on 2021 Ratings

User score distribution:

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. Apr 18, 2014
    9
    The film doesn't take long to kick off its survival and tense theme by delivering stunning effects and shots of Earth. The entire film is compacted with suspense and I must say this is the first time I have seen an effective film with only two characters that manages to keep you hooked for the entire running time. There isn't much to its story - just a human wanting to get back to Earth - but the haunting soundtrack and picture bring the atmosphere alive.
    Generally, Gravity is a unique and favorably original film which should hopefully inspire a new generation of space-themed movies.
    Expand
  2. Apr 14, 2014
    8
    The visuals alone are so stunning and gorgeous (10 out of 10) and they make me give the film an 8. I don´t even know how they made it. It´s real, it´s tense and it´s a crazy journey that should be epic in all fronts. But on the other hand I have some problems with it. The script/story is weak. There´s not much more to enjoy than the visuals. Let´s just say the story itself is average. The most important thing in a film will always be the script , character development and the acting. No matter how good the rest of the things are, a film can´t get a 9 or 10 if it lacks (even if it´s on purpose, like probably in this case) a great script. That´s why I "only" give it an 8. The acting from Sandra Bullock surprised me. I have never appreciated her work, I don´t consider her one of the best actresses at all. But I have to admit she was very solid, great performance. Despite everything, it is a must see and it´s not long. You won´t regret watching it. It´s a fantastic adventure. Expand
  3. 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 watching Sandra Bullock being catapulted around space. That's pretty much the entire film for you. There, I saved you the rental money. Expand
  4. Apr 13, 2014
    8
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Regardless of whether or not it was scientifically accurate (I'm not a scientist, I'm a film-lover), I found a lot to like about "Gravity". The dazzling visual innovations were beyond belief - echoing the sentiments of others, Alfonso Cuarón emerges as a virtuoso of cinema, rendering "Gravity" with such sheer brilliance I was often left speechless by the magnificence of what I was witnessing. The direction is accentuated by stunning cinematography, a sleek editing job and a score that's a true thing of beauty. Sandra Bullock's soulfully hysterical immersion immersion in the lead pays off, and Clooney is reliably charismatic (before heroically perishing in the depths of space.) The story does get bogged down in sentimentality, though, and that's the film's biggest flaw. This doesn't blunt the finale, however, a showcase of such visual splendor it made me want to jump for joy. Expand
  5. Apr 9, 2014
    10
    The negative reviews tend to be from dullards who want to make themselves interesting by criticizing a movie that has been so widely praised, or people who want to critics the movie for not attempting to be what they want it to be.

    Instead of criticizing it for what its not though we should enjoy what it is, a 90 minute roller coaster of a sci-fi movie that keeps you on the edge of your
    seat from start to finish. I wouldn't change a single thing about it and haven't met anyone in real life who has truly disliked it. Expand
  6. 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
  7. Apr 5, 2014
    9
    I didn't like Gravity. I probably won't watch it again, but that doesn't mean it wasn't fantastic. The cinematography (albeit simulated) was simply mind-blowing and gorgeous. Kudos to the studio that produced all the CGI in this film. In every way, the production quality was top notch and raises the bar.

    Moreover, both George Clooney and Sandra Bullock astounded me. Clooney, willing to
    play a smaller supporting role, did so with panache and Bullock was gratifyingly believable in her isolation, desperation, and determination. Definitely worth watching. Expand
  8. Apr 4, 2014
    9
    I pretty much knew I was going to love this the moment I first saw the trailer. Sandra Bullock is absolutely fantastic here and the movie is tense, emotional, and (mostly) believable. It's also an absolutely gorgeous film to look at. I really do not think space has ever looked better in a movie. Some scenes are a little slow and watching the main character just happen to press the right button in a shuttle (or whatever it was actually called) despite being labeled in a language she doesn't understand is a little far-fetched, but overall I was absolutely enthralled with the film. This is one I highly recommend, and I give it a 9.9/10-Near-Perfect. Expand
  9. Apr 4, 2014
    1
    One of the worst films I've seen. Cinematography excellent but plot was beyond weak! I was waiting for a twist at the end that would salvage something from my hour and a half of viewing but even the end was rubbish! Far fetched, scientific flawed, but acted well and the sound guys did an amazing job also. Weak storyline ruined what could have been - but definately wasn't - a first class film.
  10. Apr 3, 2014
    5
    Smoke and mirrors effects and music paired with emotionless acting and in-space impossible physics and millions of one-in-a-million mishap scenarios with no story. A thriller for no reason. How did this win so many oscars? People in this age are favoring movies that make them feel - not stories that make them change, but that doesn't mean the movie is the best of all time.
  11. Apr 2, 2014
    9
    A movie that exploits the fear of being lost and thinking there's no way out. For me, a real thrillride with some of the best visuals ever made. A must watch for everyone who's thinking about watching it. This isn't a movie anymore, it's a piece of art, DO NOT LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE SAYING IT ISN'T WORTH IT CAUSE YOU'LL BE MISSING OUT, watch it and form an opinion for yourselves, it's worth it!
  12. Apr 1, 2014
    0
    Horrible piece of sh*t, insulting physics and logic from the very premises. I won't make a list of errors here, but suffice to say it's impossible to watch this without going "what the **** why the **** every few minutes.
  13. Mar 30, 2014
    7
    Entertaining movie, great visuals, although you might get a little bored given the lack of dialogues and silence, needed for the movie to develop properly. Simple story but nice, if you can imagine the getting lost in infinity.
  14. Mar 30, 2014
    1
    I am shocked how bad this movie is, taking into account all the hype that's in the air. It looks good, but the plot is weak and trivial. Also, for the sake of the plot, science is just ignored in few scenes. How exactly you ask ? Well, picturing wrong the force of GRAVITY is a good example! Btw, the title is very loosely refering to the movie, it doesn't have much sense.
    Again, if you
    like CGI effects and that's good enough you will be happy. If that's not enough, save 90 mins of your life. Expand
  15. Mar 30, 2014
    9
    The visual experience is tremendous. Awe-inspiring. Something that deserves to be seen on a large screen and in 3D. The soundtrack is an equally chilling accompaniment.

    The plot itself blends many realistic elements with bits of fantasy. The hurtling space junk is scary enough that most viewers won't stop to ask why a medical doctor is flying in space and repairing a satellite, or why
    in the vastness of the Earth's orbit everything is so close together. The central narrative is a classic survival narrative of a blip of humanity up against the vastness of nature. It approaches greatness, save for an unnecessary intrusion of sentimentality that creeps in towards the end.

    Still, a finely crafted and enjoyable film.
    Expand
  16. Mar 29, 2014
    10
    This heart racing movie, is great for viewers interested in action and romance as there is a lot of this throughout the movie ! The cinematography effects is very well and I viewed a video recently showing me the techniques used to make the viewers feel like they're 'floating' .
  17. Mar 29, 2014
    6
    Impactante a nivel visual, mantiene la tensión de principio a fin, aún así resulta lamentable que hayan llenado de nominaciones y premios a esta película en la que sus protagonistas actúan poco y nada; Sandra Bullock ni se acerca a lo que hizo en The Blind Side y no llega a los talones de Blanchette. Es el avance del cine 3D apoyado por la industria.
  18. Mar 28, 2014
    9
    Alfonso Cuarón with David Heyman have made a visionary movie, have used technology and music in the best way. Sandra Bullock is incredible and true. An really good and pleasant movie. It was a long time since I had not had that feeling of real pleasure in cinema.
  19. Mar 28, 2014
    4
    Very surprised that the critics thought so highly of this film. I must have missed something. I thought it was boring, ridiculous and full of clichés. Sure, the visuals were great, but as someone else said - "why not just play or watch a video game?"
  20. Mar 27, 2014
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Characters are not well developed. Plot is lacking. Ryan Stone does not seem well prepared or deserving of her job. She is portrayed as weak and helpless, although she is the heroine of the film. George Clooney's character is overly silly while simultaneously seemingly un-phased by the chaos around him. He under acts, while she over acts. They don't mesh. The seemingly unending chaotic events become so ridiculous, that I expect them to continue even after she lands ( I mean, the water entering the capsule, the heavy space suit); I expected her to get tangled in the parachute or get captured by natives or something. And the attempts to force religion and spirituality into the plot ("I don't know how to pray, because no one taught me")...give me a break. Overall I feel insulted as a movie viewer. As if you can just wow people with the view or something...could have been great...with different actors and a well developed plot....but I am not impressed. Expand
  21. Mar 27, 2014
    5
    Just watched this last night and was rather disappointed. Yes the space action scenes are cool and realistic, but the pacing and the plot leaves much to be desired. It's like a few minutes of "cool" sandwiched in 2 hours of "boring". And don't get me started on the ridiculous idea that the Russians, who have been a spacefaring nation for over half a century will make the stupid mistake of shooting down their own satellite when while it was in the same altitude as several other satellites and the International Space Station is ridiculous. The Russians usually just maneuver satellites they want to "retire" into the upper atmosphere and let it burn or crash to Earth.

    This movie didn't make me care whether the main character lived or died in orbit. It was that lame.
    Expand
  22. Mar 27, 2014
    9
    The movie accomplished with flying colours its story premise. As explained in the beginning THERE IS NOTHING TO CARRY SOUND, NO OXYGEN, AND NO AIR PRESSURE. That is what Gravity aims at and that is why Gravity is such an achievement. Great score where sound is virtually impossible. Great ride where there is no time to breathe. We are constantly kept at the edge of our seats. Great visual storytelling where dialogue is purposefully impossible. Beautiful Photography. One Woman Acting Show by Sandra Bullock. If you are an acting driven movie lover or a traditional screenplay geek, you will probably find gravity limited. However, if you see Gravity for what it is, you will too find kind words for the picture and reach this conclusion: a simple, down-to-earth (literally) space journey extraganza which reminds us of our short existence in this life and the reasons we need to cling onto if we want to keep living. The Survival and Rebirth themes in this Movie also apply to 3D Cinema. Cuaron has taken the cinematic experience a step further. 3D is back in business. Expand
  23. Mar 24, 2014
    5
    I'm terribly sorry. Was I supposed to like this film? The CGI was very nice but plllleeeaaase! The plot was so banal it could have been written by a 9 year old ... or a movie industry executive (same thing). Visually this film is a 9 but the rest of it is a 2. See it and then forget it as quickly as you can and go watch 2001 again. Gravity has rating of O for OVERRATED.
  24. Mar 24, 2014
    8
    he is a very tiresome film that gives sleep but script, story, cast and I in my opinion sandra bullock is a great actress, the film a miss .... I do not know one ...... something else, and why I rate 8 to one fime not as expected also reach a large audience.
  25. Mar 23, 2014
    0
    the worst filme I whocht I bort on bule ray 3d and it was not in perst at all not whot I acspected at all wood not reck amend it to eney one.dont bye this film 0.0 ot 10
  26. 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 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
  27. Mar 20, 2014
    10
    This film is a masterpiece! Accurately shows that the films are made. Are an illusion, an art that can be interpreted in different ways, one could feel that he was in space. 3D is glorious, the soundtrack is superb and the direction of Alfonso Cuaron's beautiful. Actually I have to add more?
  28. 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
  29. 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, 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
  30. Mar 18, 2014
    4
    Fun film on IMAX 3D. Enjoyed the film but found the 2 hollywood actors completely annoying and ruined the experience. Also the director needs to be slapped for some moronic scenes i.e. clooney rinky dinking on his jet pack around the shuttle at the beginning. Worthwhile watching it only once and that is it. All the awards and oscars the film has won is nothing but hot steam, the rich praising the rich. Expand
  31. Mar 15, 2014
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The movie is really great. The way that the movie represent the feelings and that small moments of the situation is amazing. I was really feeling that moment, fear, thinking of the last moments when it was "this is it. It's over. I'm gonna die". All and all it was pretty amazing. Expand
  32. Mar 15, 2014
    6
    I'm sorry but this film is overrated. It's enjoyable... But overrated. All it is most of the time is Sandra Bullock breathing. Thats pretty much it. There's nothing much to it.
  33. Mar 14, 2014
    8
    Cinematically beautiful and tense. Gravity is a very exciting film to watch. It's one of those movies that will have you hooked until the end. Bullock and Clooney did adequate jobs in their respective roles. The only problems with this film are that the writing could have been done better. The main example of a way that it could have been better done is in the scene where Clooney reappears. He reappears in a guardian angle-like way and this scene is a large failing in a movie that done in a very real and tangible way up to this point. That being said there were no major flaws in the film just pieces that should have been touched up that could have made it flawless. Expand
  34. Mar 14, 2014
    8
    O filme tem ótimos efeitos especiais, porem, a história é muito ruim e totalmente chata, sem muita emoção, uma coisa mal feita, mas como eu já disse, os efeitos especiais deixaram o filme muito foda, fazer uns efeitos no espaço não é tão simples e conseguiram deixar simplesmente excelente, só faltou bons escritores para o filme ficar perfeito.
  35. Mar 14, 2014
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Serious people says "In space no one can hear your scream". I says "That's better. They can only shut up." To my great sadness here we got two spaceball who flying and spinning in space and trying to save themselves from black mouth of emptiness. Smart one is flying there right now when you read this. But the bullock lady trying hard. And she made it. Yay, she made it to Earth with a little glimpse of sadness on her tired nazi face. I swear to God, her face look like nazi in late 30s. CGI here is okay, but acting and directing is more like totally bum. Mexican gringo win some trophy for this, but don't be naive people. Go to see some old sci-fi or some Sigourney Weaver movie. This could be much better for your mind and heart. Expand
  36. Mar 13, 2014
    10
    An excellent movie in 3D that kept you on the edge of your seat. Sandra Bullock was awesome. I struggled at times to eliminate her feelings of helplessness. Recommend for the strong willed. Excellent cinematography.
  37. Mar 13, 2014
    10
    This is one of the best visually enchanting movies ever made . Meticulously choreographed and greatly acted by Sandra which for me is the best female performance of 2013. Yes the story is simple but is very effective and intense. This is a whole visceral experience . I was with her facing existential dread. This is pure masterpiece .
  38. 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
  39. 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,
    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
  40. Mar 8, 2014
    10
    "Gravity" is perhaps one of the most accurate representations of space. It's powerfully acted, has really excellent visuals, and you just really feel alone. I mean, when you see the shuttles destroyed by the debris and there's no sound, it's really freaky and effective. It's just absolutely brilliant.
  41. Mar 7, 2014
    7
    Just watched the 3D version on my 55-in LG 3D HDTV and I can understand why the reviews run hot and cold. I give it high marks for the technically challenging and amazing cinematics but lower marks for the pacing of the story, though it was sprinkled with fantastic moments of sheer stress and terror. Films like this just bring home how awesome we are in creating such fantastic cinematic experiences. Whether or not you like the actors or the story's plausibility you cannot help but be in awe of the photo-realistic visuals, you could not ask for a more realistic experience of low-earth orbit space events. I did appreciate that Dr Stone had to struggle for her life even after splashdown, that the screenplay didn't cop out on an easier ending. Will I watch it again, not likely, but the experience was memorable, akin to visiting a high-line museum, it's something you'll do once and be awed but it's not likely to be repeated. Expand
  42. Mar 7, 2014
    8
    A film that truly needs to be experienced in the theater. This is technically one of the most impressive movies I have seen and Bullock was great. While I didn't think this was a masterpiece, I was totally along for the ride.
  43. Mar 7, 2014
    4
    Let's simply make a few points, Pros and Cons Pros: 1. Great Visuals 2. Steady paced does not get boring Cons: 1. SANDRA BULLOCK..same character in every movie she is in, panics in every scene and is practically hopeless 2. Story..very weak and felt they had to fill it with pointless stories to fill awkward silences. 3. Predictable 4. All the stations get destroyed pretty much on the second Sandra Bullock arrives, even though the debris had already circled twice.
    5. Terrible ending

    This film is terrible. only good things are the visuals and the pace the movie goes at. if they casted a better female actress who didn't just panic and flap her hands about like in EVERY film she has ever done, this maybe would have been a worthy Oscar winner.
    Expand
  44. Mar 6, 2014
    8
    Gravity equals Innovation

    Gravity is a masterpiece of modern cinema in technology and innovation, the movie is mainly the hard work of one person Alfonso Cuarón, without his work this movie would not have been the same. The editing, direction, cinematography and sound are the things that defined Gravity. In my perspective the biggest problem of gravity ot´s the screenplay, the
    screenplay is not a masterpiece, it´s not a good screenplay, and I don´t even know if it´s a regular screenplay. It´s a good movie and nothing else,. Expand
  45. Mar 6, 2014
    5
    A pathetic joke ! + Very good photography, + Very good special effects, + It moves a little for a film in space, + Clooney and Bulloc if you are fans, That's all ! ... +/- Many Oscars, Golden Globes or César ? - No history, - Many physical inconsistencies - No morals or mental reflection, - Pathetic story of sandra Bulloc If we compare with "LOVE" Space time William Eubank (2011)
    No Newtonian physics problem, No Stars, but a wonderfull movie, a little jewel. and he receive No Oscars, Golden Globes or César ...

    Morality : To Have an Oscar is a pathetic Joke !
    Expand
  46. Mar 6, 2014
    10
    Intense and gripping in every way possible! It's truly one of the best science fiction films in recent years, and Sandra Bullock and George Clooney have done an amazing job in their acting! Simply a masterpiece!
  47. Mar 6, 2014
    7
    this film worth less than 7, but I gave it seven because of the output . I realy realy surprised because I did not expect it will be like this . the weaknesses are I did not like the movies that have one star show in The majority of movie scenes. I feel bored because I watch same face maybe one hour or more . the second thing is this movie shows me there is no distance between The Chinese space station and the International Space Station ! Expand
  48. Mar 6, 2014
    5
    You know when a person in a zombie movie is embarrassing incapable and hysteric? This is the same thing but in space. Along an extensive list of thing that will never happen.

    It has a good visual and audio if you don't count the loud music on speaking scene. Is an fairly entertaining bad movie to get some laugh. Don't expect any quality because there is none.
  49. 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'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
  50. Mar 5, 2014
    10
    gravity is a sci fi adventure . alfsonso did a amazing job on this . Sandra bullock did a amazing and so did george clooney . so thank you alfsonso your are number 1 director
  51. Mar 4, 2014
    8
    Good movie for sure but mostly due to the stunning special effects which make up for the rather mediocre storyline. The movie is a bit hyped IMHO and you will probably roll your eyes a few times if you know a little bit about EVA, orbit's, etc. It's still worth watching, tho.
  52. 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. Thank goodness I didn't pay to see this in the theater. Save your money and your time by skipping this movie. Expand
  53. Mar 3, 2014
    9
    The only bad thing thing I can say about this film is , is there such a thing over character development ?Because i nominate Gravity that Oscar as well
  54. Mar 2, 2014
    8
    With such a big-scale production, a plot less thin and predictable would’ve been desirable, especially due to the fact that you need more than just visuals to make a film rewatchable. But there is really no denying that Cuarón has accomplished a most impressive and breathtaking film with Gravity, that should at least scoop the technical trophies at the Academy Awards.
  55. Mar 2, 2014
    0
    Better than '12 years a slave'?
    Oscar winner 2014?
    Let's watch it!
    And it was sooooo booooring. Uhh.
    The lauded earth and space sequences - omg, Avatar was much more inspiring in that respect.
    Only the over 70s in the academy jury could like that.
  56. 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.
  57. Mar 1, 2014
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Worst movie I have ever seen in my life. Yes it has good special effects, but it disrespects the basic laws of physics, for a movie that is focused in space, it should respect the basic laws, like weight.
    The film has really no story, horrible dialogues. In the beginning of the movie while Sandra Bullock is repairing the Hubble Telescope the other guys are playing around.
    She must had started the mission with less then 15% of oxygen, because right after the rain of debris she had 10% of oxygen remaining, wastes 2% of oxygen in 2 seconds, and survives with 1% of oxygen remaining for almost 10 minutes till she gets to safety.
    I don´t even understand how can this movie be so overrated(Metascore: 96/100), Inception is way better than this "movie" and has worse score(Metascore: 74/100)
    Expand
  58. 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
    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
  59. Mar 1, 2014
    1
    It was like having diarrhea. Worst movie I have watched in my whole life. You didn't feel an emotional connection with the characters. The logic was heavily flawed. Very cringe worthy. The visuals was good, but not good enough to justify for everything else. And Ryan(Sandra Bullock) was mentally retarded.
  60. Mar 1, 2014
    1
    I thought Ed Wood was no longer making movies because he died. His sequel to Plan 9 from outer space was vastly inferior. The acting, plot and dialogue didn't come close. Plan 9 had actual dialogue not silly women howling like dogs. Whaaa?
  61. 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 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
  62. Feb 28, 2014
    4
    While the visuals and sound brought this up a couple of points for me, the story itself was linear, very predictable and just boring. Seriously cannot see what all the fuss was about....
  63. Feb 28, 2014
    10
    truely "the best overall 2014 movie" since the last one Dr. Ryan Stone was a brainy pass to pass all the test with flying colors. every thing was a 5-star in term of movies. i give the the epic most recommendation is as possible.
  64. Feb 27, 2014
    8
    Gravity was a very unique and original movie and because it was also executed incredibly well, it was a great movie and deserves much of the praise it has received. The special effects, cinematography, perfect amount of first-person angles, sound, and lack of development all create a certain sense of unknown and suspense that keep you on the edge of your seat almost from the beginning. The acting, essentially Sandra Bullock, is also very good, albeit slightly overrated. While it isn't the movie of the year in my opinion, it is still an exceptional film and one of the few movies I've ever seen that I felt like 3D added something rather than taking something away. Expand
  65. Feb 26, 2014
    9
    This was alot better than I thought it was going to be. I mean, what could happen in space that would keep me interested. Well, despite that there was quite a bit of suspense and impossiblities was more than enough to keep me interested. And although i am not a Sandra Bullock fan, she was atleast believable in her role, while Clooney was not outside his "normal" typecast.
  66. Feb 26, 2014
    3
    This movie has the same problems as Avatar: It's all sizzle and no steak. I'm not going to lie, this is one of the most visually impressive movies I've even seen, but that's about all it has going for it. If you were expecting a gripping story filled with emotional themes about survival, love, betrayal, or revenge, then you'll no doubt be in for a disappointment.

    Visuals (10/10):
    Probably one of best I've ever seen in a movie, and even better if you watch it in 3D. Don't expect to get much enjoyment if you watch it on a standard TV though.

    Plot (2/10): I'm not overstating one bit when I say this: This movie has NO plot whatsoever. Without spoiling anything (although there is nothing to spoil anyways), this entire movie is about some woman in an astronaut suit floating around in space and jumping between satellites. No protagonists, antagonists, foil characters, plot-twists, climax, or any other common elements that make up a story. The intro of the movie failed to give any background information on the two characters, and the ending was highly predictable.

    Characters (3/10): This movie only has two characters, and both of them were completely void of any personality whatsoever.

    Clooney played as an astronaut with a one-dimensional personality with no emotion whatsoever. In one scene is was being painfully being hurled around space with space junk, and he starts saying this: "Looks like America has lost its Facebook". WTF? You are close to being chopped into pieces and you are wasting your time joking around? What's worse is that he is smiling through the entire movie with no fear whatsoever, even in times when he is close to getting killed.

    If you thought Clooney was bad, then don't get me started on Bullock. Seriously, whose idea was it to choose her, out of all the people? There are far more better actors out there that could've suited this role 10x better, but I'd guess they had to please the feminists somehow. All she does is whine and complain throughout the entire movie, saying stuff like "Don't leave me all by myself!" and "N-n-n-n-n-noo!". I'm not joking when I say this, she only speaks about 10 lines through the entire movie. What's worse is that she takes her clothes off in one scene. WTF? Isn't this movie supposed to be about survival?

    Emotional Content (3/10): I'm sorry but I felt no emotional attachment to Bullock whatsoever. How am I supposed to feel attached to a 50-year-old women that floats around in her underwear (which I actually found pretty disturbing), and someone who whines all the time? I literally felt like taking off her mask and hurling her into space, I just couldn't bear her any longer.

    Physics (1/10): Using a fire extinguisher to chase after a satellite floating at a speed of 1000km/h+ is really realistic, right? Of course your average Mcdonalds worker will think it's realistic, but if you have even a remote background in basic physics, this entire movie will seem cringe-worthy.

    All in all, this movie would make a great 4-D simulation ride at Chuck-e-Cheese's, but as a movie which you're going to sit through for 2 hours, this falls horribly flat.

    Pros: Groundbreaking visuals and special effects
    Cons: Non-existent plot, horrible characters and acting, no emotional value whatsoever, cheesy unnecessary jokes, unrealistic physics
    Expand
  67. 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
  68. Feb 25, 2014
    0
    I don't want to be rude, but I really didn't enjoy this movie. It's not about having serious "physical inaccuracy", it's just that this movie is missing some key elements required for any movie! Like you need to have a Protagonist AND antagonist for the story to work! This move has none. Also if you ever wanted a twist or something there is none. It was simply boring. Nothing else dull story with no twists and or plot changes, nothing. Expand
  69. Feb 24, 2014
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I’ll count myself flabbergasted if I see a better-looking movie than this in my life. The minimalist casting works very well in this movie’s favor and, speaking as a melancholic personality type, it’s personally nice to see Sandra Bullock play the protagonist as introverted and thinking.

    Failing to heed Houston doesn’t pay for Dr. Stone. Oxygen runs low. Time runs short. Hiding in a deserted Russian spacecraft might well kill her …

    Oh, wait, she makes it back down to Earth. But this is still a very moving character-survival story as it stands. I would give this greater than 10 if (A) Metacritic allowed it and (B) we saw some of Kowalski’s or Stone’s life experiences as they happened. Not that Bullock and Clooney’s voices aren’t interesting enough, but seriously, would it have pushed the budget that much more to show the background to how they got there?
    Expand
  70. Feb 23, 2014
    8
    Great movie. Is difficult, in this years, to find a good movie that has been realized very well. However, i think that it was just a new "2001: odissey in space" by Stanley Kubrick, but without the connection human-machine and the others infinite meanings of this masterpiece. "Gravity" remain a brilliant vision of space and a movie that you should watch rather of "The Hangover" or similar.
  71. Feb 22, 2014
    5
    Now obviously I don't have to say anything about the visuals of this movie and how astounding they are because you'll hear that from anyone who sees it. I would also say Sandra Bullocks acting is very well done despite not getting the best written character. The script in my opinion is the biggest weak point to this movie for me. The first time the debris hits them I was blown away, and I was really excited and anxious about if they would make it. But then it just seems t repeat itself over and over again and I started to care a little less after each bad thing that happens to her. This is one of the unluckiest people ever. Worth a watch for the amazing visuals but that pretty much the only reason to watch it, just like Avatar. Expand
  72. Feb 21, 2014
    5
    Gravity (2013): Utterly Weightless

    Let's just get this out of the way up front- if you're to garner even one iota of enjoyment out of Gravity it must be viewed on the largest screen possible donning a pair of 3D glasses. Surround sound is also imperative but if you've managed a Big Screen 3D setup, odds are you've got the audio side of the equation covered. Experiencing Gravity in any
    other way is simply not an option. I was fortunate enough to see Gravity on a 55" active 3D display in Dolby 5.1 (my home theater setup) and that would be considered the bare minimum requirement. It's certainly no Imax. Imagine watching the latest Pixar flick on a portable black and white monitor with the sound muted. Sound like fun? No? Then don't bother watching this in the comfort of your living room unless your home theater meets AT LEAST the previously stated requirements. This really can't be stressed enough. Onto the review...

    2001, Alien, Moon. These films are considered classics of American cinema for very good reason, they all have superb story arcs bolstered by deep, rich character development. Alfonso Cuarón’s latest theatrical release, Gravity, has neither. Much like the empty environment the film takes place in, Gravity offers up breathtaking visuals but is utterly devoid of anything else.

    Instead of a proper film, we're "treated" to an artistic experiment in the use of state of the art visual and audio effects to induce an intimate form of awe and panic. Something a standard 2D stereo film can't possibly replicate. And, as such, it's a smashing success. In one especially intense scene early on during Act I, Cuarón utilizes his trademarked long form single camera shot sequence (13 minutes to be exact) to make us feel the empty helplessness that Dr. Ryan (played adequately by Sandra Bullock) is surely experiencing. It works to great effect, and don't be surprised if a bit of sweat drips from your brow in the process.

    So far, so good and we feel invested in our own survival. Not Dr. Ryan's survival mind you, she doesn't exist so much as a character but more of a human prop to advance the films running time. No, the clever use of 3D photography has us invested far more in our own well being then either that of Dr. Ryan or Matt Kowalsky (again, adequately played by George Clooney). I, for one, have felt neither dread nor danger in the cinema or my own couch outside of this expertly crafted opening sequence.

    And then...nothing. This pony has flawlessly performed it's single trick. And it is quite the trick, but not something that can sustain any amount of interest past the 30 minute mark. I take pride in writing spoiler free reviews, so suffice it to say Gravity takes place in space (that much should already be abundantly clear), while "space stuff" sporadically explodes silently, life support mechanisms fail, and our two protagonists fight to make their way back to Cape Canaveral, or any place on Earth really, in one piece.

    While a superficial attempt at character development is made by the filmmakers to inject Dr. Ryan and Kowalsky with heart and soul, it doesn't work. The failure to make us care about the films only two human assets is Gravity's greatest weakness. Will Ryan and Kowalsky triumph over the terrors of being stranded in space when their only ride back home has been devastated, or will they float endlessly into the dark abyss until they die slowly of asphyxiation? We have no emotional investment tied to either character, so who cares if they live or die? Maybe Kowalsky is a pedophile who deserves it. I don't know anything about him other than he was at Mardi Gras in 1987 and likes to talk about it.

    Ultimately, Gravity is a visual spectacle that elevates the use of 3D in moviemaking to new heights, much like James Cameron did with Avatar. The difference being Cameron told a story, one that we actually cared about. The same can't be said for Gravity.

    As much as the movie going audience and critics alike bemoan the use of 3D in modern filmmaking, Gravity shows us that, when done properly, the addition of a third dimension draws us in much closer to the story being told. But if that story isn't engaging and the characters aren't captivating, no amount of floating wrenches and exploding spaceships will transform a lackluster movie into a good one.

    I love 3D and hope Gravity's success spurs a second renaissance for the fading technology. If nothing else, this film proves without question that 3D can draw viewers into a movie in a way that standard two dimensions never could. What 3D will never be able to do, however, is create an interesting story where one simply doesn't exist, as is the case with Gravity.

    If you have the means to experience this film the way it was intended, you should absolutely do so. It very well may change your opinion on the importance of 3D in movie making. Just don't go in expecting a good movie, because Gravity isn't one.
    Expand
  73. Feb 21, 2014
    10
    Great movie and one of the best space survival i have ever see. I think is the best movie Sandra bullock have done and was an excellent performance from her. Gz for this great film you have create guys!
  74. Feb 21, 2014
    10
    This is a really good movie and is really well executed.but there is only 3 people in the entire movie and with a budget of 100 million they could have at least showed the shuttle taking of or [spoiler] Sandra bullock being rescued at the end of the movie but after all it is is a really good film and well planned
  75. Feb 20, 2014
    1
    I'll preface this by saying I'm a film maker, so I might be a bit jaded...

    But this movie is about as enjoyable as being hit in the face with a big flopy donkey dick, easily one of the worst pieces of trash I've ever seen. Plot? who needs one. Characters? naaa, that's old. Empathy? Depth? development? screw it.

    I don't know how a movie can make this many mistakes. besides being
    boring as **** it makes no sense, and from a technical standpoint is ludicrous. I see now why chris hadfield found this movie so hard to swallow.

    2/10
    Expand
  76. 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 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
  77. Feb 17, 2014
    2
    When I watched this movie, I thought it was 1998 .. because that was the last time either of these main characters were popular!

    The movie looked great ! .. but Clooney and Bullock ! ? are you serious! ..ruined the movie for me.

    I could guess everything that was coming, and most parts I just kept thinking " how typical " .. it could of been a great movie, but it was obviously dumbed
    down for the mainstream and from the look of the 8.1 score it has got, it worked ! .. but not for me!

    My least favourite part, the country music and good old American boys themed start, god I hated that more that fundamentalist Christians.. they would of loved it though LOL
    Expand
  78. Feb 16, 2014
    10
    Immediately from seeing the trailer, I wanted to see this movie so badly. My first impression and repeatedly seeing the trailer made me so anxious to see it, and finally I did and it was ABSOLUTELY AMAZING. There are some totally tragic parts that I won't spoil, but the whole time it's thrilling watching Dr. Ryan Stone (played by Sandra Bullock) try to escape the space debris and you can't help but root for her. George Clooney's character brings lightness to an otherwise dark and terrifying situation. Also, Sandra Bullock plays Dr. Stone so well that you cringe when she cringes, and can see every aspect of her predicament from how she would be seeing it, which is so great. So overall, Gravity gets a 10 because it was such a gripping, smart movie. Expand
  79. Feb 15, 2014
    2
    Before seeing this movie in theaters, I had a feeling that it was going to be bland. I was right. The 14-word summary on Metacritic ("After debris destroys their space shuttle, two astronauts desperately try to return to Earth.") pretty much sums up the entire, barely-there plot of this movie. With only a handful on on-screen characters, and very little dialogue, the 91 minute runtime of this movie consisted of floating sequences, dull periods of silence, and more floating sequences. While this movie excelled in developing a realistic and encompassing space environment, it is not a movie I would ever see again. Expand
  80. Feb 15, 2014
    7
    "Gravity" was an amazing film. The graphics and animation--- mainly being the fact that it actually looks like it was filmed in space made this film one of my favorites. However not by a whole lot.
  81. Feb 14, 2014
    10
    Gravity is pure cinematic brilliance. Hugely ambiguous and flawlessly executed. Sandra Bullock carries the film beautifully in what is surely the performance of her career.
  82. Feb 14, 2014
    8
    The Goods:----------------
    Special effects, best implementation of 3D since Avatar, simple plot yet extremely engrossing, makes you feel like you are in space, great performance by Sandra Bullocks

    The Bads:---------------------
    Too short ( 1Hr 20Min), the over obnoxious Goerge Clooney got a bit irritating with his lame space jokes even after such catastrophe occurred, the fact that
    Sandra Bullock simply COULD NOT die ,lol, her actions were starting to get unbelievable and "bollywood" level towards the end......She has friggin 9000 lives ... As you can see, all my "Bads" are nitpicking....
    And those people talking about 1950s feminism of a female astronaut not being able to handle things like a man, pssfftttt Sandra's character is a doctor who got trained for 6 monthsONLY by NASA for this mission. If YOU WERE TRAINED FOR 6 YEARS U WOULD CRAP UR PANTS IF U WERE IN SANDRA's POSITION!
    Sorry for Caps, i got sick of the negative reviews out here...
    All in all, an awesome movie and my favorite for 2013
    Expand
  83. Feb 12, 2014
    5
    If you have any understanding of physics or general science knowledge or even just common sense you will find yourself scratching your head many times throughout this movie, or like myself just constantly downright frustrated and annoyed.

    If you enjoy watching Sandra Bullock screaming, panicking and spinning around in space for an hour, you will have a great time. Double the great time
    if you also enjoy watching her play a lifeless, boring character who you (not so) secretly hope will get hit by satellite debris.

    Otherwise, just sit back and enjoy the beautiful views of earth and space, and try not to be annoyed by the constant, overly-dramatic transitions from the serene silence of space to loud noises, explosions and heavy breathing.
    Expand
  84. Feb 12, 2014
    6
    The film is about a woman astronaut that tries to survive in space when a chinese satellite explodes and destroys her spaceshuttle and kills must of her colleagues .The only other survivor, Matt Kowalsky helps her.

    The movie had a lot of beatiful special effects, but for me it was quite repetitive.
  85. 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 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
  86. Feb 12, 2014
    5
    Plain and simple: Boring. So goddamn boring. Definitely does not deserve any of the hype it received. This movie may as well be called Debris, as that is what causes Sandra Bullock to lose her **** in space. Clooney was the best part of the film, when he's not even in it for that long. Visual effects were good but you might as well play a videogame if you wanted to see pretty visuals. Not the worst movie of 2013, but certainly not the best. Expand
  87. Feb 11, 2014
    7
    The movie was good except for 1 very important flaw. He is attached to her in a weightless state. Why did he have to unhook? There is no weight to drag her down. He could have floated up to her.
  88. Feb 11, 2014
    5
    Visually, I've never seen anything quite like it. My problem was that I I had a hard time turning off the technician side of my brain. I treated this film as a scenario rather than sci-fi, and frankly, I didn't buy it. (And from the comments I heard recently by the astronauts aboard the ISS who saw the film, neither did they.) Too many laws of physics broken for my taste.

    Bullock did a
    fairly good job as Ryan Stone, but Clooney's alpha-male bluster made me want to wretch.

    Great effects don't make a great movie. They are supposed to enhance a strong story and 'Gravity' is certainly lacking in that department.

    Having said all of that, I was entertained for 90 minutes, so I can't trash this film completely...but a Best Picture nomination...you gotta be kidding me.

    Gotta call a spade a spade...'Gravity' is at best a great idea for a simulation ride at Universal Studios, nothing more.
    Expand
  89. Feb 9, 2014
    0
    This review contains spoilers. Very boring movie. I was falling asleep. She should have died and at least we'd grieved a tiny bit. Other than awesome visuals, the movie lacks so much. We never did attach to the character because she was so pathetic. The story is empty and void of spiritual dimension. When Matt showed up again was the best scene but it was all a dream??? Collapse
  90. Feb 6, 2014
    10
    I very rarely watch movies at IMAX theaters. Between the hassle of finding compatible theaters, reserving seats, and covering the exorbitant ticket prices, often times the inconveniences of the IMAX experience simply outweigh any of its redeeming qualities. In fact, I only watched one film in IMAX this year. And I am so thankful that film was Alfonso Cuarón’s celestial drama Gravity.
    Let’s talk first about the visuals. Earth when viewed from high above the atmosphere, however spectacular, strategically appears like a dirty marble when compared to the glistening metals and soft whites that glow like diamonds against the pitch black space backdrop. Thus, in scenes where Sandra Bullock is drifting away from a wrecked satellite, her coruscating white suit set against the blackness of outer space masterfully emphasizes her isolation, eliciting powerful emotions of fear and solitude. The painstaking effort to render every detail of the satellites not only captures the beauty of the set, but also glorifies the devastation that ensues; tons of satellite debris ricocheting at the speed of a bullet reduce space stations to floating rubble in a manner so remarkably grand and cinematic, all we can do is sit petrified and look on with rapt eyes.
    These special effects are spellbinding but, as is true with all movies, they are useless without the right cinematography to give them depth and relevance. By combining drawn-out shots of slow zero-gravity movement with rapid vertiginous action shots reminiscent of falling in a dream, director of photography Emmanuel Lubezki (The Tree of Life, Children of Men) uses a myriad of perspectives to create an environment with a feel so multidimensional, it simply cannot be achieved with 3D glasses alone. This spaciousness does not invite us into outer space, but instead shoves us right into it. For ninety minutes, we’re truly alone in space, and it is heart stopping.
    I was shocked to discover the film only cost roughly $100 million to make (compare to $237 million Avatar). However, this may be due in large to the fact that it had only two actors (and a handful of voices). Sandra Bullock and George Clooney essentially carried the film’s entire weight. Although both gave wonderful performances, I have to tip my hat to Bullock. While Clooney’s performance evoked comfortable, Bullock’s Oscar-worthy performance evoked deep, genuine, distressful fear. Every expression was executed with emotive strength; every line was uttered with confident awareness. She truly was the star of the film (pun intended).
    The screenplay, written by Alfonso and his 30-year old son Jonas, approaches science fiction and suspense in an unorthodox fashion, much like 2001: A Space Odyssey did. Rife with symbolism and introspective dialogue, Cuarón’s screenplay manages to avoid such science-fiction pitfalls as clichéd vapid characterizations and contrived plot twists. Profound themes, such as the extended metaphor of rebirth, never compete for priority with more superficial themes, such as survival and solitude. For this reason, the film functions as a popcorn-munching blockbuster as well as a thinking and feeling piece of art better than any other blockbuster or art film this year. The way Cuarón handles both ends of the film spectrum with such apparent ease and perpetual attentiveness merits some serious laud (and maybe even an Oscar).
    In the end, Gravity proves to be an experience everyone will enjoy – science aficionados, visual effects buffs, art-house hunters – as long as it is watched in 3D (trust me, the extra seven dollars have never been so worth it).

    FINAL SCORE: 100 (perfect)
    Expand
  91. Feb 3, 2014
    9
    这是一部很美很简单的电影,从画面到情节都很简单,布洛克的独角戏演得不错,配乐不错很渲染气氛。
    但是,这部电影的价值只能在IMAX3D中才可以被释放,只有在那里才可以感受到它的震撼,不然就没什么意思了。
  92. Feb 3, 2014
    8
    "Gravity" is an absolutely magnificent directorial work from Alfonso Cuaron, featuring quite possibly the best performance Sandra Bullock has given in her career, some impossibly superb imagery, and an indelible score.
  93. Feb 1, 2014
    4
    This film is the most overrated thing I have ever watched. Not only is it just ludicrous to put religious themes in there but the fact that the laws of physics didn't even apply was the worst part, apparently the ISS was only 100 miles from the shuttle but if you look at the Earth and the ISS it is clear it is almost 3,000km away! Such a stupid film and mind numbingly offensive to people with knowledge on Astronomy. Sandra Bullick also acted horribly and unrealistically, no depth to her character at all, just strange reactions and boring backstory on her daughter. One thing I'll give it is the cinematography is superb but if you have a background on Astronomy DON'T WATCH THIS FILM! It will frustrate the **** out of you.  Expand
  94. Feb 1, 2014
    0
    Flawed Science and so dull. I was forced to bet with myself how many times the characters would miss the vital piece of space equipment before finally saving themselves again. Ghastly waste of time
  95. JFT
    Feb 1, 2014
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Whilst the premise is fairly original and the acting perfectly adequate, the overall plot comes off as repetitive and dragged out. After the third round of deadly debris it becomes hard to sympathize for the protagonist, and the dire, hopeless situation becomes almost humourous as she floats away to the third space station, only just managing to escape the debris, of course. The saving grace of this film is the overall cinema experience it provides, though given the bland plot its replay value is practically non-existent. The DVD and Blu-Ray copies of 'Gravity' will sit on the shelf gathering dust. Expand
  96. Jan 31, 2014
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Before reading this, i want you to know that I've seen Gravity in 2D (Blueray) yes I'm that guy.
    Gravity is studding visual masterpiece even in 2D, i will definitely watch it in 3D if i had the chance to,
    the Story is a survival story nonetheless and Sandra Bullock acting was over the top,
    However i hated George Clooney, i know he suppose to be the fun factor in the movie,
    but he was terrible, and I'm talking about the performance and the character,
    i mean "I Hope NASA have insurance because there is a lot of damage" seriously?
    and he's out there telling stories and making space jokes, that's totally killed it for me,
    but I'm not gonna judge the entire movie because of a secondary character but i wish he didn't exist.
    The music was beautiful and the whole atmosphere is just remarkable,
    but i was disappointment because of the fact that the movie is one hour 20 minutes
    but overall a wonderful experience and a must watch movie.
    Expand
  97. Jan 29, 2014
    10
    Gravity is one of those few films that attempt to portray the dynamics of outer space as best as it could be. At a running time of only an hour and a half, most of the film concerned the difficulty of the characters to move toward places they needed to be in order to survive. With no friction, the slightest push could set one off on a course taking them far from the home planet.

    Sandra
    Bullock delivers a strong performance as a newbie in the field, unaccustomed and uncomfortable with her environment, and she does well. Her every movement is clumsy and awkward. She feels sick, disorientated and panicked. The way she portrayed the character develop from this fearful bereaving person to the strong woman who finally faces reality and understands that while she has been dealt a cruel hand by fate on and off the earth, there's really nothing to do about it than just accept it and then fight for her life with every ounce of strength she has in her body.

    George Clooney plays Matt, who is on his last mission. He is a jolly figure who engages in humorous and distracting monologues with Houston. But the strength of his character becomes apparent the moment the apocalypse of that world arrives at their doorstep.

    The space-crafts shown are the International Space Station, Hubble Telescope and Chinese Tiangong. The majority of the action takes place around Hubble, where the characters are stationed. As always, the Russians mess up when they blow up a satellite of their own. The debris starts an accidental chain reaction which destroys every other spacecraft in its orbit, returning every ninety minutes to do more damage. The characters have to use this window to make their way without panicking as that consumes more oxygen. Alfonso Cuarón does well in weaving the entire environment in working to kill the characters.

    The visual effects were the most believable that I've seen in a long time. The constant was the rim of the Earth, which was a welcoming sight in the wake of the chaos taking place. Tiny water droplets, explosions and debris from destroyed spacecraft were created with painstaking detail and enriched the picture. The effects did not overwhelm everything else and aided in the development of the story. The set design was exquisite, showing the interior of space-crafts, their controls, space suits, floating and drifting spacecraft.

    There may be a few inaccuracies but they are quite forgiveable in contrast to the spectacle that Cuarón has created. The script was strong, so was the production design and visual effects. The direction managed to capture the sense of fear and confusion of the characters with some very poignant moments. The vast emptiness of space was constantly reminding everyone by its presence to its claim of being the main antagonist of the film.

    Already being compared to 2001: A Space Odyssey, I can only concur that Gravity rivals that only in the departments of entertainment value, visual effects and its ability to affect mood using imagery and music. The former had a more interesting story while the plot of the latter was conceived to suit the demands of the effects, which isn't actually a bad thing but isn't enough to get the movie in the same league as the classics.

    9.5
    Expand
  98. Jan 27, 2014
    8
    The movie`s visual and sound effects are outstanding, but the lack of characters on the story makes it suprisingly boring at some parts, thats probably why the short duration of the movie.
  99. 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
    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
  100. Jan 27, 2014
    5
    Visuals, atmosphere, Immersion is Triple AAA no doubt. Cinema Technology showcasing its unlimited potential as we watch stunning visuals in IMAX. However, visuals alone cannot make a movie good. The storyline was unfortunately below average with VERY VERY weak character development. Im not saying the acting was bad.. its just there is absolutely nothing interesting about their characters. This movie definately does not deserve a 0 or 1 rating, but im afraid more than 5 or 6 is pushing it. The movie had the potential, it just did not deliver Expand
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.