Daniel M. Kimmel Focuses on Genre Ideas in “Gravity”
By Marcus Julianus, Associate Critic
“Gravity (2013)” by Daniel M. Kimmel provides plenty of genre context, but little commentary about the specifics of the film.
The entirety of Gravity (2 feels like an exploration of the sci-fi genre, rather than a critical analysis of the film. Kimmel explores the special effects of recent blockbusters and effectively concludes why “Gravity” is original. The problem is that Kimmel fails to expand on the concept. One is left with an idea, but little information to support the theory.
Gravity (2 mentions director Alfonso Cuaron once, but says little about the pros and cons of his work beyond the realm of special effects.
The handling of the character analysis in Gravity (2 is also problematic, as Kimmel fails to examine the stand-alone performance of Bullock, but once again makes another reference by comparing her performance with a summer comedy. One will wish Kimmel could stick to the film at hand instead of grasping in all directions for comparitive handholds.
In the closing paragraph of Gravity (2, Kimmel proves that is he only interested in the genre, and makes yet another reference to a sub-genre. All of this works perfectly well for the core audience (Sci-Fi Movie Page), but is likely to win over many new fans. Kimmel clearly has a vast knowledge of cinema, but only taps into a tiny portion of his potential to satisfy a large audience.