I never go to the movies anymore, so I didn't see Gravity until it came out on pay-per-view yesterday. I was tremendously impressed with this film. It's a bravura tour de force of technical skill and dramatic tension. But beyond all that, I felt it had a strongly spiritual – even mystical – message, which I wasn't expecting from a generally realistic movie about outer space.
To explain what I mean about the mystical message, I have to reveal key plot points. I don't like to do this, because I hate spoilers. So I am hereby advising you not to continue reading this post if you have any intention whatsoever of seeing Gravity. And I do recommend seeing it. You can always come back and read this post later.
Okay?
Just to be clear, in what follows there are big-time S P O I L E R S.
.
..
...
If you're still with me, I assume you have already seen the film or have no intention of ever doing so.
Gravity centers on two astronauts, Matt Kowalski (George Clooney) and Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock). Incidentally, in a film that makes many nods to Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey, it's probably not a coincidence that the two main characters have names beginning with S and K, Kubrick's initials. And who is the most famous Kowalski in movie history? That would be Stanley Kowalski, the Marlon Brando character in A Streetcar Named Desire. I'm pretty sure that both the initials and the Kowalski name are a tip of the hat to the pioneering filmmaker whose vision made subsequent space movies like this one imaginable.
But I digress. The film begins when a cloud of debris destroys an orbiting space shuttle, killing most of its crew. Only Stone and Kowalski are left, and they become separated. Kowalski drifts off into space, apparently never to be recovered. Stone manages to get aboard a Soyuz escape capsule on the International Space Station. After heroic efforts not only to board the station but to disentangle the capsule from its prematurely deployed parachute, Stone discovers that the capsule is out of fuel; all her effort has been in vain; she is hopelessly stranded. With no options left, she dials down the lighting, turns off the oxygen, and prepares to drift off into unconsciousness and death.
She is startled awake by raps on the capsule's door. Kowalski has returned. He wrests the door open and enters the capsule, saying cryptically that he got some extra juice for his battery -- "It's a hell of a story." Stone tells him the capsule is marooned for lack of fuel. Kowalski takes this news in stride, saying immediately that there's another option – they can use the landing jets as a form of propulsion. When Stone demurs, he asks if she wants to live or if she would prefer to simply give up and die. It's already been established that Stone lives a lonely, empty life on earth, still mourning the loss of her four-year-old daughter in a freak accident some years earlier. Kowalski suggests that maybe she would prefer to remain cocooned in the emptiness and alonenesss of space, where nobody can hurt her. But if she decides to go on living, she has to commit to it fully and go all out.
Stone takes this in. When she turns to answer, Kowalski is gone.
You see, he was never there at all. At least not physically. The whole encounter was, in conventional terms, a hallucination. Earlier in the film it was noted that low oxygen levels can bring about lightheadedness and confusion. It appears that Stone, suffering from hypoxia, imagined the episode and dredged up the landing-jet idea from her subconscious.
And yet ...
Stone herself apparently doesn't think so. Though she has already said she's never prayed in her life, suddenly she finds herself directing what can only be called a prayer to Kowalski. She asks him to give her deceased daughter a message when he meets her. At the conclusion of her plea, she asks for his answer, hesitates for a beat, and then says, smiling, "Roger that."
Moreover, when she sets to work activating the landing jets, she says "Wow, you're one clever son of a bitch, Matt." Clearly she's still giving him credit for the idea. And by this point, having turned the oxygen back on, she isn't suffering from hypoxia anymore.
Another struggle follows, in which Stone uses the Soyuz to access a second space station, from which she will make her descent to Earth on a Chinese capsule. This new capsule is in bad condition, buffeted by another round of debris and already starting to burn up as it touches the atmosphere. The odds are against her. Even so, her attitude is altogether different from the panicked desperation we saw earlier. Now she seems almost to revel in the challenge. Talking to an offline Mission Control, but really talking to herself, she says that in the next ten minutes she will either land in one piece or burn up on reentry. "No harm, no foul. Either way, it'll be a hell of a ride."
From seeing life as a tragedy -- the perspective engendered by the death of her daughter -- Stone has gone to seeing it as an adventure. Remember Kowalski's words after entering the capsule, when he was asked how he got there. "It's a hell of a story," he answers cheerfully. If he's not a hallucination, but a visitor from the next life, then he got to the capsule by dying ... and evidently he found it a memorable and happy experience, another great story in the never-ending series of personal anecdotes he loves to relate.
Not only does he find death liberating, but Stone finds herself liberated, as well. If death is only a transition and not to be feared, then the loss of her daughter is only temporary, and not a sufficient reason to throw away the rest of her life in grief and solitude. Life, seen as a small part of a wider spectrum, loses its terrors and becomes an adventure. Whatever happens, it's no harm, no foul -- just a hell of a ride.
Stone makes it back. At the end, clutching the wet soil of a desert lake (actually Arizona's Lake Powell), she says softly, "Thank you." The thanks would appear to be directed to Kowalski, or to some higher power that put her in touch with Kowalski's wisdom at the crucial moment.
Gravity could be seen as simply an action film utilizing the latest special effects magic to thrill the audience. And it is that. But it's something more. Like 2001, its underrated sequel 2010, and Carl Sagan's Contact, Gravity uses outer space to reach for inner truths.
It's a great film - and one hell of a ride.
Nice post!
I saw it in the theater in 3D. *Extremely* nerve-wracking. I actually found it scarier before the debris hits--just their moving about in space was extremely scary. I'm pretty sure I couldn't do that.
I like your points on the spiritual nature of the film, and I agree.
Posted by: Matt Rouge | February 27, 2014 at 01:06 AM
Great post, Micheal!
BTW, in a related vein, if you don't mind me tooting your horn (I promise I'll wipe the saliva off it when I'm done:), I will link readers to your page of essays. Solid reading, folks! Check it out!
http://www.michaelprescott.net/essays.html
Posted by: A Comma in Infinity | February 27, 2014 at 02:29 PM
I didn't find the film that interesting - it was too predictable, I thought.
However, your description of it is truly excellent.
Posted by: The Gipper | February 27, 2014 at 03:29 PM
"too predictable, I thought"
As it happens, I talked about this on Facebook. Here's what I wrote there:
Some people feel the film's plot is predictable, but I think this misses the point. While many stories depend on novelty and plot twists, others are mythic and derive their power from iconic themes dating back millennia. The pleasure of stories like this is not being surprised, but simply watching them unfold. ("Avatar" is another example.)
Posted by: Michael Prescott | February 27, 2014 at 06:38 PM
"You see, he was never there at all. At least not physically. The whole encounter was, in conventional terms, a hallucination. Earlier in the film it was noted that low oxygen levels can bring about lightheadedness and confusion. It appears that Stone, suffering from hypoxia, imagined the episode and dredged up the landing-jet idea from her subconscious." - Michael
------------------------------
Maybe to truly understand what is going on during these transcendental experiences we have to let go of the whole idea of separateness. Or like the online essay about the holographic universe says, "our separation is an illusion."
Perhaps when we are closest to death is when that illusion of separateness breaks down and that is when our mind is the most open to receiving information from the other side - or the collective consciousness. "Ask and you shall receive."
"I remember understanding the others here.. as if the others here were a part of me too. As if all of it was just a vast expression of me. But it wasn't just me, it was .. gosh this is so hard to explain.. it was as if we were all the same. As if consciousness were like a huge being. The easiest way to explain it would be like all things are all different parts of the same body."
Excerpt from Michelle M's NDE description,
http://www.nderf.org/NDERF/NDE_Experiences/michelle_m%27s_nde.htm
Posted by: Art | February 27, 2014 at 07:39 PM
The interpretation of the appearance of Kowalski as Stone's Spiritual Guide, like so many things in life, is a Rorschach test of ones spiritual inclination.
The fact that I refer to Kowalski as a Spiritual Guide tells you how I interpreted it, but I've talked to people who liked the movie, but completely dismissed the spiritual aspect of it. In my opinion, they missed the whole point of the movie.
The production leaves this open to interpretation, which is probably one of the reasons it has such a wide appeal. The other reason is the lush 3-D cinematography.
The final release has only 156 shots, which is a small number for a film of this nature, so that tells you that the acting had to be professional and committed. Of course, with George Clooney and Sandra Bullock, this could be expected.
Michael, You MUST see Gravity in 3-D, preferably at an IMAX theater at matinee time. It takes the experience to a whole new level. I promise.
Posted by: Rabbitdawg | February 27, 2014 at 08:20 PM
Great review, this sounds like something I'd like to see.
But wasn't hypoxia as the cause of NDEs debunked? I remember reading one book on NDEs debunked, with the author citing experiments with low oxygen. It seems to be one of many things that make the brain less functional and yet, at the same time, strangely cause those experiencing it to have one of the most vivid, memorable experiences (an NDE) that they've ever had in their lives - go figure, I guess.
Posted by: Kathleen | February 27, 2014 at 09:53 PM
The encounter with the dead Kowalski isn't supposed to be an NDE. It's either a hallucination or a case of after-death communication (specifically a crisis apparition).
The website of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke says:
"The longer someone is unconscious, the higher the chances of death or brain death and the lower the chances of a meaningful recovery. During recovery, psychological and neurological abnormalities such as amnesia, personality regression, hallucinations, memory loss, and muscle spasms and twitches may appear, persist, and then resolve."
http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/anoxia/anoxia.htm
Interestingly, there is no mention of hallucinations during the onset of hypoxia, only during recovery.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | February 28, 2014 at 12:47 PM
I was waiting for her to reach under the seat and find the vodka. That would have confirmed that he was really there because she would have had no way of knowing where it was until he showed her.
Posted by: j9 | February 28, 2014 at 01:31 PM
Ok, just saw it. I can't say I was blown away, by I did enjoy the movie--I was even touched, at times--and it went by fast!
I agree with you, Michael, about the spiritual implications. They're clear, and welcome.
I just read a review by one of the users on Rotten Tomatoes. He says:
"it does attempt the themes of science and technology versus religion with constant reminders hinted at in the shape of Christian and Buddhist iconography."
Thinking back, I'm trying to remember a single word of dialogue that would bring either of those religions to mind, and I'm coming up short. But it's a common scenario: someone unfamiliar with basic metaphysical principles comes across a reference to the afterlife and reflexively puts a religious slant on it.
The truth is, it's a movie that even atheists can enjoy, because there *are* no specifically religious references (that I can remember), so one can safely fantasize that Dr. Stone's life-saving encounter with the apparently deceased Kowalski is exactly the sort of hallucination that happens when the body encounters a life-threatening situation like hypoxia, and the unconscious mind is free to come up with brilliant solutions to seemingly insurmountable problems.
"Wow, you're one clever son of a bitch, Walt."
Who's Walt? Is that a spell-check mistake?
Posted by: Bruce Siegel | March 02, 2014 at 05:29 AM
"I was waiting for her to reach under the seat and find the vodka. That would have confirmed that he was really there because she would have had no way of knowing where it was until he showed her."
Interesting point, j9. But that would have made it absolutely clear that after-death communication had taken place. Maybe the author wanted to leave some ambiguity in place so as not to offend committed materialists and narrow the potential viewership.
Posted by: Bruce Siegel | March 02, 2014 at 05:41 AM
"Who's Walt? Is that a spell-check mistake?"
Oops. Should've been Matt. I'll fix it. I can't blame spellcheck - just a brain fart.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | March 02, 2014 at 01:40 PM
"Maybe the author wanted to leave some ambiguity in place so as not to offend committed materialists and narrow the potential viewership."
And also just to preserve ambiguity for its own sake. Not everything has to be spelled out. I don't the movie was intended to be an explicitly spiritual journey, and offering proof of the afterlife would have, in a sense, cheapened it. Not to mention that Stone really wouldn't be looking for proof because she is (to my way of thinking) already convinced.
I think ambiguity can sometimes make the difference between a true work of art and a work of mere polemics. Compare Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead with her later novel Atlas Shrugged. In the first book, much of her philosophy is left implicit, allowing readers a degree of freedom in how they interpret the story. In the second book, everything is spelled out, and the result is that Atlas is didactic and often feels more like a lecture than a novel. The Fountainhead is, I think, a modern classic, while Atlas is more likely to be remembered as only a partial success.
Posted by: Michael Prescott | March 02, 2014 at 01:48 PM
We are all connected and our separation is an illusion. I am you and you are me and we are all each other. While we are here we see each other as being separate but the truth is that we are all connected by the Light that imbues our Universe with reality.
So if Sandra Bullock saw George Clooney while she was close to death I don't see any problem with that because the closer we get to death the more the illusion of separation that we experience in this life disappears.
Posted by: Art | March 03, 2014 at 12:48 AM
"I am you and you are me and we are all each other."
I am the walrus.
Koo koo ka choo.
;-)
Posted by: Michael Prescott | March 03, 2014 at 12:58 AM
You know how on Star Trek: Next Generation they had a holodeck and holodeck was controlled or connected to the starship's computer? Well all the characters on that holodeck were generated by the program in the computer. When they were living in the holodeck they acted and existed as separate individuals but in reality they were all programs running inside the computer. I don't know as a metaphor how far I can carry that analogy but from several NDE's that I've read I suspicion that may sort of like who and what we are.
"I remember understanding the others here.. as if the others here were a part of me too. As if all of it was just a vast expression of me. But it wasn't just me, it was .. gosh this is so hard to explain.. it was as if we were all the same. As if consciousness were like a huge being. The easiest way to explain it would be like all things are all different parts of the same body."
excerpt from Michelle M's NDE,
http://www.nderf.org/NDERF/NDE_Experiences/michelle_m%27s_nde.htm
"And it became very clear to me that all the Higher Selves are connected as one being, all humans are connected as one being, we are actually the same being, different aspects of the same being."
excerpt from Mellen Benedict's NDE,
http://www.near-death.com/experiences/reincarnation04.html
Posted by: Art | March 03, 2014 at 02:10 PM