RATE or REVIEW The Last Movie You Watched.

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
But Bullock did a great job, why is she being bashed here? It was a performance that's worth a nomination, not a win, but a nomination.

I don’t feel she did anything incredible, she did an okay job at best, I could pick about 50 actresses of the top of my head that probably could’ve done a better job. Usually when I think someone deserves a nomination/win, I can’t really see many other people doing that great a job at that specific role.

However, I don’t think she was horrible, just decent. Anyone that feels she deserved a nomination doesn’t bother me though, I’m just going off my personal feelings. I also thought it was insane she won an oscar for Blind Side. I prefer her in less series roles, drama doesn’t really suit her.
 
Tom Cruise is awesome.

couch-jump-cruise-o24.gif
 
Cruise is a nut-job, but I do like many of his movies. I try not to follow celebrity reality. There's not much "reality" or anything to relate to, when someone's making $20m+ (or more for back-end deals) on a movie and has a personal chef/trainer/ass-wiper with them wherever they go. Plus he's a scientologist and there's not much more that needs to be said about that kind of crazy. I'd respect him a lot more if he were a hermit.
 
Woooah, what the hell is going on? :lol

Apollo 13 is great, I won't bash it, but Gravity is better, Gravity is one of the movies with less physical and scientific inaccuracies if any, included Apollo 13, the biggest inaccuracy and it isn't physical nor mechanical was the orbit of the different space stations, that's about it.

Hair wasn't floating because she had short hair wtf? :lol
You CAN do all the things she did.

The only mechanical inaccuracy I could find was when she used the fire extinguisher, and not because of the extinguisher, but because she traveled in a straight line when she should have done so in diagonal, keeping the same horizontal momentum as the pod, other than that everything is recreated perfectly, which is way more than you can say for ANY other sci-fi movie.

If you think Gravity is too fantastic, you don't have your basic mechanics knowledge in order :lol

Cuarón did an amazing job conveying the sense of dread and hopelessness of being in a lifeless hard as **** environment like space, and Bullock acted exactly how I see a rookie astronaut acting in that same situation, when she got rocketed during the 1st debris rain and was caught in the inertia, spinning uncontrollably I felt I was going to pass out, picturing myself in that exact same situation.

And the FX and sound were mind bending.

So, people who said she was annoying, why? Really, why? Is it because a person in desperation and hyperventilating uncontrollably is annoying? Well duh! :lol

Gravity deserves all the praise it gets imo.

I'm sure you're a smart guy, but I'll take the word of all the astronauts and astrophysicists who have written at length on how many errors there were in that movie.

I think I rated this pretty high in an earlier post, maybe 8/10, possibly 8.5. But it didn't stand up to a second viewing for me, so on reflection, 7/10.

I thought Bullock and Clooney did a very fine job with the terrible writing they had to work with.

(Apollo 13 still holds up in my book as a 9.5/10 movie)


Cruise is a nut-job, but I do like many of his movies. I try not to follow celebrity reality. There's not much "reality" or anything to relate to, when someone's making $20m+ (or more for back-end deals) on a movie and has a personal chef/trainer/ass-wiper with them wherever they go. Plus he's a scientologist and there's not much more that needs to be said about that kind of crazy. I'd respect him a lot more if he were a hermit.

I've given up on trying to hate his films because he's a knob. Give the man his dues, he's a great entertainer.
 
I'm sure you're a smart guy, but I'll take the word of all the astronauts and astrophysicists who have written at length on how many errors there were in that movie.

Yeah I'm no scientist, I'm only enthusiast to physics, and this movie holds up to basic physics knowledge scrutiny, that is something very rare for sci-fi movies, not even Apollo 13 fares as well as Gravity in comparison.

I've read a few analyses from real scientists and astronauts and they're not as bad as most sci-fi movies.

The one movie that is immaculate in that department is 2001 and uses a lot of theoretical physics and some fantasy elements, Gravity's sci-fi is less distant to today's technology so it's easier to scrutinize.

Out of curiosity, can you share some of those articles?
 
Ragnarok 6/10.
Rise of the Planet of the Apes 8/10.
Dawn of the Planet of the Apes 10/10.
 
Back
Top