It is with a heavy heart that I make this weighty announcement about a new film.

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments.

  • Comment number 97. Posted by TUATHA

    on 9 Mar 2014 23:46

    Mark, your pain & anguish in making that statement were gut wrenching. Well done and be brave - it shall pass.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 97: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 97: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 96. Posted by Sadiq

    on 17 Dec 2013 17:09

    I agree with you that this is the best use of 3D yet, and that this is the first film I have seen which should be seen in 3D.

    But for those who disagree: http://xkcd.com/880/

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 96: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 96: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 95. Posted by SiouxZee

    on 15 Nov 2013 03:35

    He's right. I'm anti-3D movies, but the 2D version of the film is flat and made-for-3D effects look odd. Whilst watching the 3D version you don't notice the special effects, you just think you're up in space floating around with the astronauts. I don't really think you can say you've seen the film until you have seen it in 3D.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 95: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 95: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 94. Posted by spatenall

    on 11 Nov 2013 18:11

    Standard hollywood rubbish. Sentimental, pseudo-religious nonsense.
    Also the purposeful 3D bits - stuff flying round, tears, etc is all pointless and detracts from visuals and purpose.
    Great acting by Bullock but very weak plot and little character development.
    91 minutes and over long...

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 94: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 94: 1
    Loading…
  • Comment number 93. Posted by Saba Khan

    on 11 Nov 2013 13:12

    All this user's posts have been removed. Why?

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 93: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 93: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 92. Posted by Dr Locke

    on 10 Nov 2013 23:17

    I thought it was stunning. And the threed really works in an un-showy, naturalised way. At one point I had a weird well of course feeling, like when you're dreaming you can fly - well of course it's in 3D: it works so well, why wouldn't you shoot this stuff in 3D? I think I was watching a screwdriver float past Sandra Bullock's left arm at the time - a lot of them weren't spectacular effects, but they worked.

    Can I bring something else up? There was one 3D trailer when we saw the film, which was for the second Hobbit film. And the 3D in that was, I thought, really shockingly bad. They'd clearly read some comments about light loss - the screen was flooded with light - but the 3D effect was incredibly crude: it looked as if we were watching two or three flat layers stacked one in front of another, like a Viewmaster slide. The effect was, ironically, to make the actors look flat, and make the whole thing look cartoony. I expect I'll go and see it when it comes out, but I'll definitely be seeking out a 2D screening.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 92: 1
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 92: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 91. Posted by streetrw

    on 10 Nov 2013 10:02

    In recent years I've attempted to see all the 3D films in their 2D versions as I've simply not felt the extra effect was worth the extra cost. Sometimes I've had to travel further than I wanted to see a bad film badly projected (Dredd) because it was the nearest screening in 2D; sometimes I've reluctantly put up with the 3D because there wasn't a flat version available (Texas Chainsaw). And sometimes I've made the exception because the director is someone who knows what they're doing: Hugo (Scorsese), The Hole (Dante)....and now Gravity.

    To be honest, I don't think Gravity gains anything by being in 3D; I suspect it will work perfectly well in 2. But equally I don't think it suffers for the 3D either: it works well, especially in that stunning opening sequence. I think the size of the screen is the more important factor; to this end I saw it at the decently-sized main screen at CW Northampton. The 2D screenings were in smaller auditoria and in truth I feel the scale and scope were a worthwhile trade for the 3D that was well-enough employed to not become a distraction.

    Conversions are still the work of Satan, though.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 91: 1
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 91: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 90. Posted by Rightflyer

    on 10 Nov 2013 08:51

    That's it. The end of the world is nigh. If anyone wants me I'll be lying down in a dark room with a paper bag over my head and bungs in my ears.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 90: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 90: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 89. Posted by Toffy

    on 9 Nov 2013 18:36

    i went to the imax in birmingham this morning for the first showing of gravity in 3d. i have been waiting for this film for a long time and i wasnt dissapointed. the film was gripping from start to finish. i actualy cared about the characters in it. just goes to show just because its a big special effects film it dosnt have to be all style and no content. Gravity has breathed life into the half dead 3d and found a pulse. is there anything else that can save 3d from the grave?...

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 89: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 89: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 88. Posted by babyfacemichael

    on 8 Nov 2013 22:47

    Great blog.I usually hate 3D as an annoying distraction , that takes you out of the story your trying to follow. But to every rule there is an exception. It did work in Pi, and Dredd , Gravity we shall see.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 88: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 88: 0
    Loading…
More comments

More Posts

Previous

Next