Thread 213761945

So, was this any good?

>>213761945 (OP)
Opening scene was sick but I couldn't care less for the rest

I really like it
People who get mad about the ending/story completely miss the point
Put on good headphones and enjoy the kino

>>213761945 (OP)
They've never really "got" the whole nasa aesthetic. Thinking of interstellar, mission to Mars, gravity, ad astra. It all comes across a bit too advanced or a bit too simple never quite right. But I didn't rate gravity really. I don't k ow man I'm just riffing here.

>>213761945 (OP)
That's funny, anon, I was just thinking about it today. I didn't like it, nice visuals but too unrealistic. Worst of all was her not wearing diapers.

>>213761945 (OP)
One of the few movies that hold the mantra:
>should have seen it in the cinema

I liked how she just hiked from a space station to another. The film doesn't give a shit about orbital mechanics.

>>213762053
Yeah it was kino in Imax
It's also really good in VR 3d too. Makes it extra immersive having a stupid helmet on actually

>>213761945 (OP)
It was great. I'd put it above 'Interstellar'.

>>213761945 (OP)
neat flick in 3D

>>213761999
>They've never really "got" the whole nasa aesthetic.

What are you even babbling about? The entire movie takes place in current day space stations

>>213762103
Shut up you weird little freak

>>213761945 (OP)
You know when food is good and everyone just stops talking? I watched this movie with my stepmom and neither of us said a thing. Totally immersed in the movie.

>>213761945 (OP)
>was this any good?
theres a shot in it with bullock in short PJs and barefoot, i loved that, rest was okay

>>213761945 (OP)
Only watch it for the visuals.

>>213762103
I you want to nitpick the last space shuttle launch was in 2011 and this movie came out 2013.

>>213761945 (OP)
It looks and sounds awesome, its a good movie but probably the one I'd rate bottom out of Cuarons films.

>>213761999
i can see what you mean. if you look at space station pictures, they look really "lived in", cluttered, etc. like how a japanese/chinese person lives in a shoe box but yet has every piece of the wall covered in some ornament or tacky shit.
the examples you mentioned, completely skip over this aesthetic, and instead, present a very cleansed and neutered version of it, the "germs are bad, okay?" aesthetic.

>>213762130
I would say it's a combination of the visuals and the audio that makes it worth watching. The audio is good, both sfx and music

>>213761945 (OP)
it was quite a cinematic movie, suspenseful at times
BUT
her face is so fucking distracting cause it barely looks like her, too much faceloss

>>213761945 (OP)
feels like a lifetime away now, 2013 was kind of the final kino year. every year has felt like shit since, closest we got was 2022.

unironically

>>213762334
part of me thinks these space stations are fake simply because of how cluttered this shit is.
clutter like this is absolutely HORRIBLE for your mental health. theres no way these people can handle this all day everyday for months. nope.

>>213761945 (OP)
Yeah but i am forced by the /tv/ constitution of contrarian values to shit on the movie instead. Sorry

>>213761945 (OP)
okish
china for rescue tho

>>213762068
>orbital mechanics
if both space stations are in orbit at similar speeds what mechanics nigga? they're all orbiting equally. It's like jumping from 1 train to another while they move side by side

>>213761945 (OP)
i watched it then and rewatching now. doesn't seem very good

>>213761945 (OP)
it was mid. The marketing was cringe.

>>213761945 (OP)
It reminded me of those free IMAX movies I'd watch at my local museum as a kid

>>213762410
Looks like my old intel job in the military (except for the gravity)

>>213762501
if this is supposed to be a man then im gay

>>213761945 (OP)
Yes, though it takes a few too many liberties in terms of scientific accuracy, for a movie that tries to feel realistic and also teach some science lessons here and there. And some of the inaccuracies were not necessary at all.
For example, that Russian suit she's wearing in the OP pic is intended only for use inside a spacecraft, it's not possible to do an EVA with it (she would quickly burn or freeze to death, like here where the sun is shining on her), and yet she does it anyway, flying around with the fire extinguisher.
It could have been written so that she finds and puts on another EVA-capable suit instead...

>>213761945 (OP)
It's a cool theater experience because of the sense of scale, it's not a good movie

>>213762753
yes, also the scientific accuracy just gets more absurd the more its watched. even just the initial collisions they have with each other and parts of the ship would shatter bones and crush them, even before the debris

>>213762501
she's also in orbit, so she'd need to adjust her orbit to actually make it to the other station, accelerating directly at it would cause her to miss it. the calculations are not something you can just wing.

>>213762879
ok i won't bother..

>>213762850
Worst thing for me is how it ignores the vast distances between objects in orbit, and acts like all the major space stations and telescopes are within a short jetpack range from each other.
No, the Hubble and ISS and Tiangong would all have different orbits and latitudes and be many thousands of miles apart and with relative velocities making it impossible to aim and catch them, even if you somehow had enough jetpack fuel and oxygen and water for the trip and precise planning

>>213763109
exactly, if you have a scientific mind, or even common sense, its hard to watch. you cant even get excited about bullock because by then everyone knew she was a frigid bitch and the stupid attempts to make her look sexy were brief and completely unrealistic

>>213763819
I have no issue with Bullock's performance here, she sells it as best she can, and in her late 40s she was the right age for it. Problem is how the character is written, with how she's panicking about everything even when she would have trained for it, how she and Clooney seem to know nothing about each other despite how they would have extensively trained together, and so on. Potential astronauts who behave like her would not be sent into space at all, at least not yet

Was very good but not great. Its more of a mood film.

its a weak movie that was massively overhyped.

Regarding the physics flaws, everything else was forgettable, except for the inertia of this scene
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYDaIyfitn8
where the entire premise of death of Clooney's character is retarded

>>213764764
I kind of agree, it was hyped to like, world ending levels then came out and was like, perfectly serviceable? Not sure why any of us were really expected to form our lives around it.

Also there was this weird "le science" angle? Like, us stupid plebs need to watch this film to learn about the effects of GRAVITY? GRAVITY wow so cool guys?

Yeah but it only works if you see it in theaters. It's also Alfonso best film because children of men has some leftie shit in it and Roma was an overhyped mess

>>213764764
>massively overhyped.
The fuck, I hadn't even heard of this movie. It had George Clooney and Sandra Bullock and space so I decided to watch it. For me it was far better than 'Interstellar'.

>>213761945 (OP)
No it is art house slop. It's terribly boring and ends with a character symbolically posed as a baby in the womb. One of the movies I most regret paying to see in theaters.

>>213765031
i dont know if youre a zoomer, but when the movie was in cinemas i feel like it got a lot of talk and buzz, one of those movies that people talk a lot while its in the cinemas, and gets forgotten after its out.

>>213764902
ye, it was like that

>>213764764
Not all scientific analyses agree about Clooney's death scene. Some of them think it's at least partly plausible if the parachute cords could behave that way and were continually stretching and absorbing kinetic energy until Clooney let go of the tether- that the cords were strong enough to fully absorb the momentum from just one astronaut and bounce back, but not both of them at once. In the zoomed-out shots, you don't see the parachute cords stopping at a certain length (at which point they should bounce back), you only see them stretching out further and further

>>213765068
No, it ends with her walking out of the water onto solid land.

It was unrealistic and boring.

>>213764764
>>213764902
>Also there was this weird "le science" angle? Like, us stupid plebs need to watch this film to learn about the effects of GRAVITY?
There is a very significant portion of the population that genuinely doesn't understand anything scientific, physical, chemical, mathematical, etc. They are like JJ Abrams and can't comprehend space in the slightest. They truly think everything works like star wars. And they refuse to learn except through the most passive means like movies or osmosis from popular media. So I'm all for trying to smarten up entertainment rather than keep it retarded

>>213761945 (OP)
In space, some materials of the same kind instantly fuse when having contact. So you can't have a monkey wrench made out of metal to turn a bolt that is also made out of metal.

for a movie that tries to be accurate on the physics there are plenty of mistakes. The only one that completely took me out of it was where Clooney's death.
>starts flying away into space.
>grabs a rope connected to Bullock
>stops moving in relation to her
>disconnects to "save her" and flies away into space

>>213762919
I don’t know if kerbal space program has a way to just straight to orbital adjustments/rendezvous, but it usually takes about 5-10 minutes of fiddling with the plotter to get a useful heading the first time, with zero understanding of this shit.

In the “simplest” scenario, they’re on the exact same orbit and she’s in front. If she just decelerated (thrust directly towards it) she’d also start falling, and there’d be no way to correct with what little thrust the fire extinguisher offers. So she’d need to aim in a direction upwards from earth, into deep space, to curve to the other station.

If they’re on different orbits she’d need to pull like six maneuvers to get to the other station.

>>213765145
I know, I heard that theory but its a stretch (no pun intended).
The funniest part is that there was a very easy way to make the scene better and physically correct - have them embraced, floating away together to their death, slowly. And then Clooney pushes her towards the station (pushes himself towards space). The conservation of momentum. so fuckin obvious

>>213762079
This is a good example of a film that is completely different on a theater screen vs watching at home.

I saw it in theaters and enjoyed it.

>>213765315
Isn't this vacuum welding? It's more like, a long slow process not like, things instantly seize solid.

>>213765315
Materials of the same element (with a few exceptions like copper and aluminum) not alloys can cold weld but we're talking pure elements here which you will not find in wrenches and bolts

>>213761945 (OP)
I saw it in imax 3d, close to midnight, and we were like 3-4 people in the whole cinema (this was before the jeet / gypsy / muslim flood in Eastern European malls), and it was worth it
wouldn't see it on a small screen even if you paid me though
>>213762053
>>213762079
exactly, it's kind of a gimmick movie but it's a good gimmick movie

>>213766224
It must be noted there's an additional way of watching it at home- in a high quality VR headset, which gets closer to the 3D theater experience

>>213766503
>>213766553
ah, alright. I thought it happened pretty fast. But for sure they take it into account when fixing shit in space? They use different materials? Or maybe I misunderstood.

>>213767074
Tin whiskering is a bigger concern in space, Google it

>>213761945 (OP)
no

felt like 20 minute short padded into a full movie

>>213768397
I will. First thing tomorrow ;-). Night.

>>213765031
It was huge until the oscar ceremony which it swept, made similar box office to Interstellar.