Last updated on April 8, 2014
Gravity – Gravity is a pretty standard action thriller that’s notable for a unique setting, wonderful special effects, and for failing to really connect with me on any real level. Perhaps I demand too much? I don’t think so; plenty of big budget blockbusters appeal to me on that level, but the level of critical acclaim Gravity received did not resolve my desire to see it. At the very least, I’d get a relatively enjoyable space adventure, right? SPOILERS AHEAD, so please watch the film first.
Frankly, I just don’t get it. At base, it’s a disaster movie in space. The absence of sound effects when stuff actually happens turns most moments into a strange silent film of sorts. Unfortunately, the score (a mix of classical orchestration and electronica) attempts to fill the void. If the visuals, story, and acting aren’t up to the job of telling you how you should react, the music fills the blank canvas. Given all the emphasis on the silence and loneliness out in space, you wonder why Alfonso Cuarón loads the score all the way through with heavy atmospheric emotional cues in the electronic rumble. I honestly thought they would let it play without all that dramatic tension, but I guess I’m too stupid to figure that out?
The script really sent me over the edge, though. Apparently I was supposed to assume character development happened in the seventeen minute opening continuous shot. George Clooney’s retiring astronaut tells a story, Sandra Bullock’s engineer tells us about her dead child and…that’s it. The rest is just the struggle to survive. What am I supposed to latch onto here? The general experience of being human? Sandra Bullock being relatable, because who the heck knows how you would react in that situation? That’s my only guess. This is why I mentioned the musical cues – the movie’s story isn’t effective enough to convey what’s happening without it.
I appreciate the paucity of narrative elements – piecing it together visually makes for a much more enjoyable experience, after all. The straightforwardness of the whole enterprise made me quite happy. Even so, there’s far too much exposition. Granted, I know next to nothing on how space travel works, and neither would most audience members, but that’s part of the problem. A ninety-minute film gives us no time or ability to comprehend some of the more technical elements, so the directors/screenwriters could throw any imagined space things at me and expect me to believe it. They need to hurry it along, or else it will hurt the pacing of the “I am trapped in deep space” struggle.
If that was all there was to Gravity, then I would just leave it be. The religious symbolism and other strange subtext, however, is where I get off the train. As I mentioned earlier, the main character’s child died, and she has no desire to live. Thus, Clooney’s character acts as a strange pseudo-philosophical/religious/psychological stand-in, the wise mystic who leads her to a greater understanding of herself. All this comes in little bite-sized segments suitable for a mass audience. Also, a dead character appears and talks to someone. If that isn’t a spiritual subtext, I don’t know what is.
Little snippets of world religions appear here and there, from tiny Buddhas to mentions of prayer. Think of it as a sociological/cultural tour through multiple satellites from several different cultures. They represent the diversity of human existence, striking out existential meaning among the cold, uncaring darkness of the universe. This is why Bullock’s character goes through all these satellites: for both psychological healing, living in the face of despair, and continuing when all seems lost. It does explain the “rebirth” scene at the end pretty definitely (like evolution, almost!).
I know many people loved this subtext throughout the film, but I honestly don’t think it works. Symbolism functions as an addition to a screenplay or story. You don’t intentionally insert it to make sure people “get it”, and you sure as heck don’t introduce an arbitrary trauma into your main character to cheaply introduce this concept to the audience. None of it works because it doesn’t flow into the story. Once you analyze the narrative with any degree of sophistication, it starts looking like a drama tacked onto a thriller. If done well, it can work very well, but Gravity’s a mish-mash, not a holistically designed product.
I imagine much of the thought and ideas went to the visual design. Undoubtedly spectacular, I honestly don’t know how they created some of the effects and the movements on display, and there’s so much CG that I can’t tell what’s real or not. Each actor was rigged up to a giant crane of sorts, and that’s the only way to create those kinds of shots. I do not believe that a single better, and seemingly more grounded, portrayal of space ever appeared in a film. That amazement on the part of audiences certainly gave it a great deal of success at the box office, and that’s no surprise. IMAX would only have enhanced the overall effect. But is that enough to hang a movie on?
And yes, I think so. Usually special effects and just the bare minimum of plot plus tropes keeps me engaged as I turn my brain off. But Gravity didn’t want me to turn my brain off, and that’s exactly where it failed. I actively watch films like this, especially if it’s obvious that I need to pay attention, but there’s no payoff here. I expected her to survive, because how else could it end? That alone just strips all the tension and dramatic effect out of everything.
All of this is truly unfortunate. Gravity made me feel cheated, like it could have been something great. I know I am mostly alone on this, but I couldn’t wait for the movie to just end. If anything, I hope that the film inspires more space travel and exploration!
