Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/4/2006 4:47:06 PM EDT
If it's so great, then what's the meaning here? What makes this so great? Just seemed so random and unplanned. No wonder people walked out of the theatres when this was played in 68'. Granted, people then didn't see space as we do now, but good God, you can't make a 150 minute movie out of it. I sat and watched a movie that was 2 hours of special effects of floating mark-ups and only 30 minutes of any meat.

So you had a rock that took man from an ape to an intelligent being, we find it, send out an exploration team to Jupiter, the ship's computer deep-6's, they finally get to Jupiter, go into some sort of vertex, and we end up with a giant fetus...

Can anyone else not see this is a broken down and rather aimless film?
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 4:50:10 AM EDT
I remember people saying, "Wow, that was deep."

I'd ask, "So what message did you see in it?"

"I don't know, but it was deep."

Sometimes people are afraid to say they don't get it, so they just say it's "deep."

Others, who don't get it, give in to intellectual pretention, assuming an air of superiority toward those who say, "Well, that took a long time to not tell a coherent story."

It reminds me of a story I read of Pablo Picasso laughing at people who paid big bucks for his paintings because they wanted to seem artistically enlightened to their trendy friends.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 8:34:24 PM EDT
read the book,
it helps,



some,


really­,
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 9:37:00 PM EDT
Kubrick was a film maker's director, like Steely Dan is a musician's band. His passion was photography. His symmetry was always perfect. His vision was uncompromising. With Kubrick movies, one has to forget the common rules of script and pacing. It is about the total experience, not the plot or the actors. For instance, 2001 is considered by many critics (and me ;) to be the greatest film ever made, yet the plot is unfathomable, the acting is two dimensional and the pace has been known to drive some viewers insane. Charlton Heston walked out of the premier muttering.

But consider that over 30 years later, no film has come close to making the audience feel more like they are there, in space, experiencing the vast emptiness and loneliness of interplantary travel. This was done without the computer graphics we have today. That alone is amazing, and highlights Kubrick's attention to detail. Zero G toilets, entire sets that revolved to simulate the lack of gravity, meticulous modelling, and authentic console lighting, combined with soaring classical music to stun audiences with it's spectacle. It was more than a movie, it was a trip.
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 10:28:14 PM EDT
So you can't understand the movie unless you take acid?
Link Posted: 1/5/2006 10:31:57 PM EDT
I liked the sequil 2010 better.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 8:16:12 AM EDT
The message:
Computer suck, There is something else out there we don't understand and shouldn't fuck with, and 1960's hair will always look cheesy.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 9:37:51 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/6/2006 9:39:38 AM EDT by Sylvan]
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 11:17:20 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Brohawk:
I remember people saying, "Wow, that was deep."

I'd ask, "So what message did you see in it?"

"I don't know, but it was deep."

.



"Deep" is something that teenagers like.

Grown ups just call it a waste of time.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 12:45:28 PM EDT

Originally Posted By efpeter:

Originally Posted By Brohawk:
I remember people saying, "Wow, that was deep."

I'd ask, "So what message did you see in it?"

"I don't know, but it was deep."

.



"Deep" is something that teenagers like.

Grown ups just call it a waste of time.



That or the sixties weren't kind to them.
Link Posted: 1/6/2006 6:29:25 PM EDT
it's better once you've read all 4 books, but the movie still drags a bit
Top Top