Gravity is good, Sandy challenges Cate
Gravity might be great.
Rapturous early reviews are coming out of the Venice Film Festival where Sandra Bullock and George Clooney presented the film for the first time yesterday. The film is being called a visual masterpiece, in particular its 13 minute opening – a single shot. This, then, is not The Great Gatsby. No one is questioning Gravity’s 3D. When given the option, 9 times out of 10 I prefer to see movies in regular D. Gravity would appear to the exception. Because according to critics, the effects do not distract from the performances or the story but work in service of them. Word is, both Bullock and Clooney deliver large – Sandy in particular. TIME’s Richard Corliss notes that she’s so good in the movie, the others who passed on it – including Angelina Jolie (twice!) – might look back in regret. The Hollywood Reporter’s Todd McCarthy concurs, positing that Gravity is “by far the best film she's ever been in”. Variety, while praising Clooney’s supporting turn, calls it a “veritable one-woman show”. So now, as we officially enter festival season and the very beginnings of a long awards campaign, another legitimate contender has emerged alongside Cate Blanchett (Blue Jasmine) for Best Actress.
As I’ve mentioned several times already here and here most recently, I am terrified to see Gravity. Space is like the sea – miles and miles of nothing and everything at the same time. It’s encouraging then to know that it’s worth the experience, and also that Alfonso Cuaron has managed to deliver a high quality picture in… 90 MINUTES.
Because you’ve heard me complain about movie lengths over and over and over again. An Oscar contender that’s only an hour and a half? I’m in.