IN SPACE NO ONE CAN HEAR YOU FALL... "GRAVITY"

Truth be told, when there is this much hype about a film, I worry. I mean, it’s hard to explain but you get caught up in the “aura” of the film and then… Well then you expect it to be life changing. Utterly “the ground moved” amazing. I mean I do. But then… Then it falls short and you get disproportionally upset with the whole affair. That’s why I was curious but cautious as I went to see Gravity the other night – in 3D I might add. I hadn’t actually revved myself up not to like it but I was trying to get my expectations down… And you know… My expectations can go all over the shop sometimes and that isn’t much good for anyone. I am very pleased to report however, that in a lot of ways Gravity exceeded my expectations… I needn’t have worried. Not in  this case. However… There were bits that disappointed me a bit. I will try and explain what I mean further down but first the story. You know, just in case you’ve been living under a stone or something…

Gravity is the story of Matt Kowalski (George Clooney) and Dr Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock) who unexpectedly find themselves drifting in outer space, tethered to each other but virtually nothing else. Dr Stone is just a mission specialist; a medical doctor who is specifically working on this mission and this one only – in other words “a civilian”. Kowalski however, is a veteran of “infinity and beyond”. His buoyant spirits and knowhow do indeed carry them both for a while but ultimately, is it enough? I don’t want to tap into my ‘80s soul and say “in space no one can hear you scream” – but they can’t you know… No air…

Ahem. Moving swiftly on, I want to give you one word: the photography. Oh. My. God. I have never seen anything like it, Cuaron proves himself a true technical master in this one.  And rest assured, I mean it in more ways than one. First of all, the shots of space are stunning. There is a very sharp reminder in the opening sequence alone that we are a very, very small, insignificant part of the universe despite our rather warped view that we are the centre of it. And philosophical messages aside, Cuaron uses his camera to suck you right into the film. I was reading on Twitter that one person felt as if they had “just got back from a space mission themselves” after seeing that film. I can relate. Cuaron uses the psychology of video games as much as anything else to make us feel we are personally “part of the action”. He does this by using a lot of POV shots, straight from the eyes of our main protagonist Ryan Stone. I was particularly fascinated by the fact that there are a LOT of these POV shots, but they do not jar at all- possibly because, even if we don’t all play “first person shooter” type games, we are a lot more used to the concept. I remember that  back in the ‘50s or ‘60s – if memory serves – one director tried making an entire film from the POV of the protagonist – it was a dismal failure. But these days, what with genres like “found footage” type horror films, more artistic endeavours like Sokhourov’s Russian Ark our tolerance for it seems to have grown considerably. The ever present video games- genres like first person shooters etc – also help to up our tolerance. All in all, the POV shots actually “make” the film as opposed to breaking it, I found. You slip directly into the characters skin and it gives the adrenaline that already pervades the film that little bit of a push…

Of course herein lies the need for a good balance. Because you can’t really rely on POV shots alone to get the audience to “bond” with a character – they need backstories. They need to be real. Kowalski is a typical “good old boy” with lots of stories to tell and an almost insatiable appetite for telling and re-telling these stories – we get to know about him quite quickly. Ryan Stone is a bit trickier. (This is not technically a spoiler but you may want to look away at this point if you’re really allergic to them skip to the next paragraph)But  she quickly wins us over when we find out she is still trying to cope with the loss of her four year-old daughter who died, of all things, from falling and banging her head in the playground. I loved that touch – not something complicated like “childhood leukemia” just “one of those things”, tragic in its simplicity and minimalism... Now, I have nothing against them having backstories – they’re pretty much essential. But there comes a point in the film when Ryan gives up and decided that she might as well prepare to die saying she “hopes to see her daughter soon”.  Then, of course, she decides to fight for her life (that one last push that will naturally prove to save her life ultimately) and in the course of that decision she pretty much seems to get over the death of her daughter and land on earth healed and ready to start anew – complete with a “conquering heroine” shot of her from round about her ankles making her look like a leviathan at the end.

Humm… I guess what I’m saying is (welcome back if you skipped that paragraph) that backstories and character development aren’t Gravity’s strong points. But that’s kinda ok you see, because you don’t really go to Gravity for character development. Or I mean, you shouldn’t.  You should see the film either in 3D or in IMAX and really get immersed in the action – and amazed at the beauty of the photography. It’s fascinating really, because I really wonder if this film would be as successful without technology such as IMAX, 3D, HD and all the other “visual enhancements”. It would certainly be possible. It might even be good. It would, however, simply be an action movie. Even the POV shots wouldn’t have been enough to make the film so breath-takingly exciting.  So this, in my view, is a true 21^st Century film- if only in the sense that it wouldn’t essentially be what it is today without 21^st century technology. I will also have to argue that it is a distant cousin of AVATAR in the sense that while it is perfectly possible to enjoy it in 2D it’s just… Not the same.

My gut reaction when I finished watching AVATAR was “this is not a film”. It’s something between a film and a fair-ground ride (don’t get me wrong, this is not meant as an insult. My argument is that it is a completely different, far more “participatory” genre than a film and this is neither good nor bad. Just different). Now,  I have to admit GRAVITY is not so simplistic. Calling it “something like a fair-ground ride would be very unfair to Cuaron whose photography is a true work of art…  They are, however, quite closely related. The fact that you are (at least I was, and so were others from what I gather) breathless, dazed and a bit confused when you exit the cinema is a testament to this fact.

So we can conclude that Gravity is a technical triumph. Just possibly not a “philosophical” triumph. That said, does every film need to be? No. Is it well worth your money to go and see it -, and heck, shell out a bit of extra for the 3D? Yes. Enough said. Now go book your ticket ;)  

A ROAD TRIP TO ADULTHOOD : "Y TU MAMA TAMBIEN"

Talking about different types of road-movie and variations on the genre is all well and good in their own way, but what about the “typical” road movie? Young people, drinking, drugs, love and self-discovery… What about all that jazz? Alfonso Cuaron’s Y tu mama tambien is all of this and more. The lesson, as with all road-movies, is that the journey is sometimes just as important as the destination if not more so. There will, undoubtedly, be moments of self-discovery on the way. What we do with the things we discover however, is pretty much up to us…
But let’s not get ahead of ourselves here. Julio (Gael Garcia Bernal) and Tenoch are typical teenagers. They have girlfriends, but will have sex with anyone wherever they can get it, are into drinking, partying and having a good time. So this is exactly what they are getting up to at one of Tenoch’s cousins wedding when their paths cross with the sultry 28 year-old Luisa from Spain. The boys flirt with her openly and shamelessly and in the process invite her to accompany them to Heaven’s Mouth, a secluded tropical paradise of a beach that… Doesn’t exist. So the boys are both shocked and excited when Luisa accepts their invitation. Thus starts an impromptu journey across Mexico to a destination that doesn’t exist. But as the journey progresses, the boys will find there is a lot more to discover on the road than the beauties of Mexico and the sea. What they will actually do with these discoveries however, is a completely different story all together.
I categorically loved this film. It’s a shame, a real shame, that there are some little bits in it that niggle at me to the point of preventing me from calling it perfect. The trouble with working with a genre in this way is that, there are usually a lot of clichés lying around the place. Some of them you take, change, do something innovative and wonderful with – the way Cuaron does. Some however, you might just walk right into, and then actually keep lying around. Unfortunately, Cuaron does this quite a bit too. The result it a touching, original and beautiful film that occasionally throws up a hoary old chestnut or two. Personally I chose to concentrate on the original and the beautiful. I don’t want to say too much about the many discoveries the boys make along the way – not least because the sense of discovery we feel with them is a major part of the film - but the one thing I cannot help but point out is what an excellent job Cuaron has done of using the context to tell us a bit about his country. The road is always a major character in road-movies, but here it actually almost takes on a life of its own, as a voiceover tells us stories of seemingly random things we pass on the road, the realities of Mexico and the tragedies that occur but we may well not have even noticed if we were the ones driving by… A lot of thought is given in this film to the fact that there is always more to things than the eye can see. And reminds us of that those things are there, whether we want to face them or not…