MovieChat Forums > The ABCs of Death (2013) Discussion > G is for Gravity Explained

G is for Gravity Explained

posted 11 years ago by Black_Dahlia
28 replies | jump to latest

Normally I would decry how dense and unobservant filmgoers are nowadays, but after absurd assfest of asininity that was F is for Fart several thought centers of even my brain were threatening to shut down permanently.

G is for Gravity opens, in first-person view, with a presumably male protagonist driving to the beach for one last ride on his surfboard. As he unloads his gear he places several bricks in a backpack, which he straps on (remember this, it's important later). He totes his board down the beach breathing heavily, probably nervously, possibly sobbing and enters the ocean and mounts up. He paddles out for a while until the water is sufficiently deep and then dismounts the surfboard.

Ah, but remember the backpack full of bricks? Their additional mass weighs down our protagonist and keeps him from surfacing again, whence he would find a breath of life-giving air. It seems GRAVITY made it so. Any doubt is washed away in the final shot of the surfboard's aft pointing skyward, opposite the combined mass of our now-dead protagonist, his backpack, and the bricks held in their position beneath the water's surface by the force of gravity.

M. Night Serling could not have pulled off a better twist, lest he was still alive or didn't start sucking.

[–] baphomet1313 11 years ago

I agree with your assessment of G is for Gravity. My only problem with it (the film, not your explanation) is this: It is obvious he has on some sort of helmet cam and is filming it all. Does this float up at the end and that is how we see the board "standing" up? Or, are we just supposed to assume it is meant to be filmed 1st person and he isn't actually filming it all? That was my problem with it.

"I kept it in a cage,
watched it weeping but I made it stay"
www.watcheditweeping.com

[–] Black_Dahlia 11 years ago

I dunno, maybe it's his soul.

I didn't mean to imply the segment was good or even had much artistic merit; it just seemed like everyone on this message board didn't like it yet almost no one knew what the heck was going on. I'd rather people hate what is rather than what isn't.

[–] moviewizguy 11 years ago

On the other hand, maybe the film was just incoherent for the audience to get it at all. What you've said made sense and seems like a good idea if executed competently, but I saw none of that on screen. It seemed as if the guy was just surfing and dying. That's literally what was portrayed on screen. It's not the audience's fault they didn't get what the filmmaker was trying to show because his technique was too subtle for anyone to catch. As you can see, nobody remembers the bricks in the backpack because it was too early in the film to take into account when the film ends.

[–] Black_Dahlia 11 years ago

When a scene clearly shows you, no matter how briefly, someone filling a backpack with bricks it's supposed strike you as a bit odd, and hopefully stick with you in the back of your mind.

But as I said I can blame no one for not noticing an odd detail when they just sat through a several-minute odd detail dealing with a sexual flatulence suicide pact.

[–] moviewizguy 11 years ago

Well, it's also the filmmaker's responsibility to not have the moment go unnoticed because it was so brief and quick. He could have stayed with the shot a lot longer or somehow bring it up again close to the end.

[–] Littlebitsofgaming 11 years ago

nobody remembers the bricks in the backpack because it was too early in the film to take into account when the film ends.

The segment is about 3 mins long...you are suggesting people can not remember 3 min previously?

I remembered the bricks in the backpack...cos it was only a few mins previously.
It's not the film's fault, not the film-maker's fault that a lot of people have the attention span of a goldfish.

And so, God came forth and proclaimed widescreen is the best.
Sony 16:9

[–] skorkk 11 years ago

I don't think he's actually supposed to be filming it. We're just seeing things from his perspective. Same thing happens in U-we're not supposed to think the vampire has a camera attached to him, we just see what's happening through his eyes.

[–] Black_Dahlia 11 years ago

Spot-on. People forget what real first-person perspective is after so many shakycam movies.

[–] haggar 11 years ago

Good you told me those were bricks, because all I could see was one log and then a few smaller unknown objects.

Still, doesn't explain the surfboard being upright, unless that's normal for surfboards (never owned one).

[–] Black_Dahlia 11 years ago

The dead guy is presumably hanging upside-down from the lanyard, which is a cable attached to the board and a surfer ankle. The lanyard is attached at the back, making the front bob upward.

[–] Lisasimpsonfan 11 years ago

I am going to hazard a guess that the director meant for the standing surf board to symbolize the surfer's tombstone because of it's shape. I didn't really care for that segment and wonder where the other $4950 went.

[–] threenails10 11 years ago

the fact that this is one of the most popular topics on this "whole" film and that I had to pause the movie to come check this out and get answers, says something about this director, I think. Honestly, I think it is the worst segment I've seen in it so far, but after reading this explanation and the fact that it did rise my interest and others to come here to find this out just says that there is something brilliant behind this director. maybe. maybe i dunno what i'm saying. hi.

[–] chilipalmer 11 years ago

Better to be confused than bored.

[–] trerio55 11 years ago

Hey guys you forgot something the triangle (three-sided polygon)in the surfboard, in 33:15 to 33:41 the blackness and shadows in the water for me that's death coming i live in Puerto Rico and we have a lot of beautiful beaches and i go alone and i swim until i am far of the shore and is deep, it looks very much like that in the short peaceful without waves i go all the time i have to say i am fan of H. P. Lovecraft he writes about the ocean,a lot of times i feel a blackness filling everything under my feet when i look down and under the water its strange i don't know how to explained it but it feels like death (Cthulhu)coming i probably make a short about it,going back to the triangle to many groups it is meaningful and symbolizes concepts as past, present, and future or spirit, mind and body.I like someone already say here it was not a camera in his head the first person perspective we see it was his soul that's my opinion.This is one of my favorites. P.S. ENGLISH IS NOT MY FIRST LANGUAGE.

[–] pete18031975 11 years ago

so confused lol

[–] taseron 11 years ago

People make such projects to show the thrill, violence and gore.
G for Gravity had none of them.

It would be better if they made him jumped off a roof if they wanted to kill him by Gravity. That would be easier them to film, too.

Worst of the ABCs.

[–] gckraus 11 years ago

I'm surprised so many people were so confused on this... I knew from the start he was going to kill himself, there was no shock or awe or anything, it was dumb IMO. It wasn't intriguing, nor clever, nor funny, nor brilliant, nor anything, just a director going cheap to keep the extra money I guess? Though I thought most of this "movie" was pretty bad as well but /shrug.

[–] BrycleySuxx 11 years ago

Okay but WHY DID HE PUT BRICKS IN HIS BACKPACK AND THEN GO IN THE OCEAN? I feel like common sense would be like"LOL don't do that or you'll drown!"

[–] skorkk 11 years ago

Are you serious? He wanted to drown. He was trying to kill himself, as it's been stated several times already in this thread.

[–] BrycleySuxx 11 years ago

Clearly didn't read the comments...

[–] ErosCorps 11 years ago

Just saw this on Netflix and i had to rush here to get some answers because i didnt get it.

At first i thought he went into the water, and a comet or some space thing hit him (like of ALL the places to land...it got him), because he goes under water but just hovers there and you see the big pile of rocks smoking next to him like that part of the shower broke up and landed there, then when it shows his board its burnt in patches? and then i thought his dead body was holding it down by the tether, but even then i dont think it would be heavy enough to hold a boyant as that board is, down to that position, it'd pop up....

Dunno, bags or comet im still like whatever, on to the next...

[–] guardian_owl 11 years ago

The OP is correct based on what was said in the commentary track. The director is a surfer and it is based on an incident where he was surfing and heard two guys talking and looking at the ocean at a board standing upright, that it looked like a tombstone. It turns out someone had weighed themselves down, paddled out into the ocean, and slid into the water to weight themselves down to drown themselves. The board bobbed up because it is tied to the person's ankle and it attaches to the board at the back.

[–] affliction504 11 years ago

Thanks.

If you saw the bricks you got it. If you didn't, this segment made zero sense.

[–] threavisv 10 years ago

I saw the surf-board bobbing in the water upright as a "gravestone" of sorts..

No, nuh-uh. Oh wait... was she a great big fat person?

[–] fulcis_beard 10 years ago

Genius reply. That guy was either trolling or incredibly inattentive.

[–] mr_chill_bill 11 years ago

I'm pretty sure it's the same way that Virginia Woolf committed suicide.

Hip-hop is basically the struggle to bring beverages to your mouth.