2001: a space odessey

kakihara · July 05, 2012, 05:50:30 PM

tried to watch this. i fell asleep towards the end. i know its critically acclaimed. i know its considered a masterpiece, espescially considering the time period it was filmed. definitley ahead of its time. but damn, its so long and boring. correct me if im wrong, i think i need to give it another try. i found the begining to be the most entertaining part. "monkey touch the monolith!!!". i say that randomly now, if you havnt seen this movie that phrase makes no sense. say it, you almost always get a wtf reaction from somebody. opinions of this movie? oh, ive seen 2010, i liked that one.

Flangepart · July 05, 2012, 06:10:16 PM

My guess, there was serious human and computer interaction in 2010, 2001...not so much.
If you can't do without that, the 'Grand Idea' of 2001 will leave you wanting.

Rev. Powell · July 05, 2012, 07:20:17 PM

Quote from: kakihara on July 05, 2012, 05:50:30 PM
correct me if im wrong, i think i need to give it another try.

No, you're right, you need to give it another try.

Jack · July 06, 2012, 11:41:10 AM

My biggest problem was that the whole thing with HAL killing the astronauts was completely unexplained. It made perfect sense when they revealed the cause in 2010, but until that movie came out, I didn't have a clue. I can certainly understand the ending being left open to interpretation, but not the entire middle part of the movie.

RCMerchant · July 06, 2012, 04:33:48 PM

I loved it all.
The music,the Dawn of Man sequence,the insane supercomputer HAL,the whole granduer-and emptiness of space-one of my favorite sci-fi flicks EVER!

And of course...this trip....!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ou6JNQwPWE0&feature=related

Criswell · July 06, 2012, 05:31:21 PM

Quote from: Rev. Powell on July 05, 2012, 07:20:17 PM
Quote from: kakihara on July 05, 2012, 05:50:30 PM
correct me if im wrong, i think i need to give it another try.

No, you're right, you need to give it another try.

Yep this, and give the book a shot too. Its just like the movie, but stuff makes sense.

akiratubo · July 06, 2012, 10:16:18 PM

The part with the proto-humans was good. The rest ...

Much of the movie is crippled by Kubrick making love to his sets and models with the camera. Yes, Stanley, the model ships are pretty neat. Yes, Stanley, you've figured out some cool camera tricks to simulate zero-gravity. Can we please get back to the, er, plot now? No? You want to camera-hump your models and sets some more?

The part with the colors was unbearable. And the ending made me want to punch someone in the face.

I guess individual parts of 2001 would be captivating if seen as short films but, tied together into something resembling a movie, they just don't work together.

Pilgermann · July 06, 2012, 11:15:58 PM

I love that movie so much. I feel like it captures the awe and terror of space and our general existence. It's not the least bit boring to me.

RCMerchant · July 07, 2012, 05:47:43 AM

Quote from: akiratubo on July 06, 2012, 10:16:18 PM
The part with the proto-humans was good. The rest ...

Much of the movie is crippled by Kubrick making love to his sets and models with the camera. Yes, Stanley, the model ships are pretty neat. Yes, Stanley, you've figured out some cool camera tricks to simulate zero-gravity. Can we please get back to the, er, plot now? No? You want to camera-hump your models and sets some more?

The part with the colors was unbearable. And the ending made me want to punch someone in the face.

I guess individual parts of 2001 would be captivating if seen as short films but, tied together into something resembling a movie, they just don't work together.

Ouch!

Mr_Vindictive · July 07, 2012, 06:41:25 AM

This film is an absolute classic, and it deserves every bit of that title.

It is slower than a modern film, it's dreamlike, and it leaves a lot up to the viewer. Personally, I don't mind that at all. I enjoy a bit of ambiguity in my films. I don't mind thinking about the film, and trying to answer the questions it brings up.

One of my favorite things about this film is Kubrick's way of making the camera feel detached from the events taking place, while still making you feel engaged. I do hope that makes sense. Kubrick doesn't try to show HAL as being evil, or his actions being wrong, nor does he pass judgement on Bowman for shutting down HAL. I honestly find the scene with Bowman meticulously shutting down HAL bit by bit, to be somewhat heartbreaking. Daisy...Daisy....

This is a film I first shared with my daughter a few years ago. She is 9 now, and still absolutely loves it. She is enthralled by the story, the imagery, the score....everything I loved about it growing up, and everything I still love about it.

I know that Kubrick doesn't appeal to everyone. I know that film snobs like to throw his name around and act pretentious. Fact is though, that man had a hell of an eye for cinema. He could do no wrong!

Also, tidbit here: The instructions for the "space toilet" that Dr Floyd reads in the beginning were actual instructions. Kubrick was so dedicated to the ideas, that he had engineers work up the idea and put functioning instructions in the film.

ulthar · July 07, 2012, 09:22:26 AM

Quote from: Mr_Vindictive on July 07, 2012, 06:41:25 AM

He could do no wrong!

EYES WIDE SHUT?

(HA, I typo'd an "I" for that "U" in SHUT....should have left it).

Agree with what you said about 2001, by the way.

Allhallowsday · July 07, 2012, 10:59:04 AM

Quote from: kakihara on July 05, 2012, 05:50:30 PM
tried to watch this. i fell asleep towards the end. i know its critically acclaimed. i know its considered a masterpiece, espescially considering the time period it was filmed. definitley ahead of its time. but damn, its so long and boring. correct me if im wrong, i think i need to give it another try. i found the begining to be the most entertaining part. "monkey touch the monolith!!!". i say that randomly now, if you havnt seen this movie that phrase makes no sense. say it, you almost always get a wtf reaction from somebody. opinions of this movie? oh, ive seen 2010, i liked that one.

The first time I looked at this movie, I was bored with it too. Perplexed maybe. I've seen it now many times, and it has become ENDLESSLY WATCHABLE for me. I love the soundtrack, I love the long sequences... I love how much of the film is nearly motionless... it's like watching a clock's pendulum swing. Next thing you know, three hours have passed. I also love BARRY LYNDON (to my amazement, I actually love a RYAN O'NEAL film) another of those "motionless" STANLEY KUBRICK films.

tracy · July 07, 2012, 12:10:38 PM

Hal's voice creeped me out SO MUCH as a kid.....still does .

rebel_1812 · July 07, 2012, 12:15:20 PM

Quote from: Jack on July 06, 2012, 11:41:10 AM
My biggest problem was that the whole thing with HAL killing the astronauts was completely unexplained. It made perfect sense when they revealed the cause in 2010, but until that movie came out, I didn't have a clue. I can certainly understand the ending being left open to interpretation, but not the entire middle part of the movie.

Well it wasn't explained to Dave Bowman now was it. He had to deal with the thing going rogue. I think this is a case of its better left unexplained and you can interpret it your own way.

JaseSF · July 07, 2012, 07:00:43 PM

HAL was simply following its programming ... however HAL's interpretation may differ somewhat from ours. I agree with those who are calling this a classic. It is a more challenging film that may well take more than one viewing to fully appreciate and maybe even more beyond that for some. It really forces one to think outside the box and even outside the limits of what's on screen. Forces you to think it does but it's also a visual spectacular with something visually interesting always going on.