tomfleet94

The dialogue in this film is often wryly generic. Not only is this the only potential criticism of Gravity, it's actually (for me at any rate) another subtle positive. Cuaron recognises that his film revolves around a very simple premise: space collisions cause woman and man to hop between frying-pan and fire. If this were staged on Earth (in a boat, in a desert) it'd be predictable and only casually enjoyable. Instead Cuaron takes this simplistic framework and fills it with relentless physical tension, humbling cosmic scenery, and (most importantly, and most overlooked) a dread-inducing score. The sensation of watching a film that is so visceral yet so filled with physical nothingness is unrelentingly haunting. Clooney and Bullock are on form, but it hardly matters. The symphonic mastery of the action by itself makes this easily the best new film I've seen in months, maybe years. Proof that great movies are really only about entertainment.

Having absolutely loved Mulholland Dr., I was keen to see more of Lynch's films. This predecessor, while exhibiting a lot of the filmmaking chops that in part made the former so enjoyable, is unrewarding and at times grotesque. On paper it sounds great: an innocent young man gets tangled in the hidden criminal and erotic underworld that you'd never guess was there in his picturesque town. Some of the representations of this latent darkness are great (the shot zooming into the well-trimmed lawn to reveal a sea of gnashing bugs is inspired and very creepy), and indeed these two halves to the film are in themselves believable (Hopper's villain is nightmarish and feral, the ordinary citizens quaint and unassuming; which is unsettling in its own way). But whereas Mulholland Dr. took me through all the emotional reactions I can think of, the scenes here where these contrasting sides met only made me feel nauseous and uncomfortable (a naked and bruised woman lingering awkwardly in a family's front room, for example). Lynch's talents were evident here, and overall I admired it for its hard-hitting and challenging mission statement, but while I really wanted to love this movie I feel that, with its garish and even repulsive confrontations, it did its best to put me off.

This is one of the best films I have ever seen. Not just because I enjoyed every minute, but I think it's one of the most accomplished story lines and it has some of the most beautiful and emotional scenes I've seen. This is not an airy-fairy abstract concept movie. It makes sense; you just have to think about it a lot. I've watched it twice in three days and I understand it a lot better for it. IMDb has some excellent reviews if you really want to get to grips with it, but I'd recommend just giving it a go for yourself. As Roger Ebert said, this movie is like music: it runs on emotions. There are scenes that will shock you, scare you, scenes that drip with emotion and impact you heavily. If nothing else, you could take it as the sum of its parts and just enjoy it for the full range of different reactions it will provoke from you. It really is saddening to see how dismissive some people have been of this movie. As Lynch said, life is complicated, and so movies should be complicated too.

Clearly this film isn't for everyone. For me, it's Anderson's best, and one of the best films of recent years, because it combines realism (which some people mistake for lack of plot) with intensity, action with meditation, and amazing performances and settings. Jonny Greenwood contributes a haunting but earthy score, whose rawness often plays off the characteristic intensity of Day-Lewis' antiheroic protagonist. All this plays out in terms of a revealing meditation on the origins of the clash between capitalism and religion in modern-day America. Truly a film that ticks all the boxes see for yourself why it was the most mentioned film on critics' 'best of the decade' lists for the noughties.

Do not miss t point of this documentary. It is a window into the world of the cinephile conspiracy theorists that is almost as disturbing as The Shining itself at times. Crackpot theories range from connections to moon landing fakery to Holocaust undertones, each put forward by fanatical and obsessed writers and amateurs. The documentary gives these people plenty of opportunity to explain their ideas, but that doesn't mean it agrees with them. It relates how kubrick's movies were so intricate and detailed that they **** some viewers into an overlook-like world of endless overanalysis and misinterpretation

It's good