TPWW Forums

TPWW Forums (https://www.tpwwforums.com/index.php)
-   entertainment forum (https://www.tpwwforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   2001: A Space Odyssey has been restored (https://www.tpwwforums.com/showthread.php?t=134838)

Seanny One Ball 04-24-2018 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Guycott (Post 5112167)
There is a glaring difference in "not sharing love" and denying how pivotal and influential the film was.

I'm a far bigger fan of Clockwork Orange or Full Metal Jacket, and think 2001 down there with the first Star Trek movie in terms of being pretty flippin' boring, but this is one of those flicks that the cinematography touched a lot of correct nerves in a lot of correct people, much how Citizen Kane or the original Birth of a Nation did ages before for movies period, or Blade Runner in science fiction in particular.

Quote my vitriol on the topic of 2001: A Space Odyssey please. I initially thought you were being sarcastic because I don't see any bitter criticism or malice towards 2001 in here.

I think what has happened here is that you are another fanboy who gets upset when people don't just accept that your views are the truth and you have chosen to accuse me of something despite being unaware of its definition.

That would be stupidity. You are guilty of stupidity in here.

2001 did not exclusively influence every single sci fi film made in the decade afterwards.

Are you deliberately being a thick bastard?

Seanny One Ball 04-24-2018 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seanny One Ball (Post 5110993)
One of the most overrated films ever put to screen. Kubrick wasn't a genius.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seanny One Ball (Post 5111020)
No, it's easy to say because it's not a great or particularly good film. It's a very pretty, absurdly boring graphic novel. It looks exactly like a great big comic minus the action and adventure.
I'm not a fan of films that rely on visual effects rather than scripts. I'm not a Kubrick fan at all and aside from that I firmly believe that long before 2001 there were better films that offer more to the genre.
Arthur C Clarke was pretty cool though.

Rod Serling was the greatest contributor to screen science fiction and there's more credible, thought provoking, provocative writing in a Twilight Zone 30 second intro than in the three hours of 2001.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seanny One Ball (Post 5111030)
I'm not denying the technical prowess of the film nor am I arguing against anybody enjoying it.
What I am saying is that to me it is simply boring.
I'd get bored of looking at any pretty things especially if they didn't do much beyond look nice. That's why I don't hang pictures up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seanny One Ball (Post 5111033)
Kubrick just wasn't my kind of storyteller. Him and Michael Cimino had a lot in common that way. Too busy painting with cameras.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Guycott (Post 5111493)
That was a lot of vitriol over 2001.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD (Post 5112207)
I like that he says everybody else is upset. This all started with his revolt against one of the most well known major influences in cinema. Cause he didn't like it.



None of this is vitriolic.
It's certainly unforgiving, but clearly not vitriolic or a "revolt". Saying something is boring is not bitter or malicious you idiots.

You guys are fucking terrible interpreters.

If someone makes a thread about something you cannot expect everybody to respond positively if they don't like it.

Fuck off.

Kalyx triaD 04-24-2018 09:07 AM

lol Fact is the movie changed the game. Whatever else you wanna say about me or the movie or director is completely Irrelavent. And you're not helping your case shrieking about how calm you are.

Seanny One Ball 04-24-2018 09:11 AM

So stupidity really is a choice folks, let it be known.

Tom Guycott 04-30-2018 02:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seanny One Ball (Post 5112243)
Quote my vitriol on the topic of 2001: A Space Odyssey please. I initially thought you were being sarcastic because I don't see any bitter criticism or malice towards 2001 in here.

I think what has happened here is that you are another fanboy who gets upset when people don't just accept that your views are the truth and you have chosen to accuse me of something despite being unaware of its definition.

That would be stupidity. You are guilty of stupidity in here.

2001 did not exclusively influence every single sci fi film made in the decade afterwards.

Are you deliberately being a thick bastard?

Are you confusing me with Destor? Because I think you confused me with Destor. Which means you aren't taking the time to read and absorb before you respond. Or don't drunkpost. Whichever fits this.

I never at any point said 2001 exclusively influenced films in the decade blah blah blah. That's a paraphrasing of what Destor said. However, the slurpfest from other high profile directors about 2001 around that time is pretty accurate, so I didn't dispute it like you seem to be.

My first post about Kubrick ploughing your mom and filming it was sarcastic. You must be new here. Before you respond to that inaccurately, I am fully aware that you are not new here I've seen you around before posting in other topics that was again sarcasm. I guess I'm going to have to go back to using [/sarcasm] in my walls of text.

That bit you quoted from me even mentions how much I wasn't exactly a champion of 2001, but I'm somehow a "fanboy"? How does that work?

You're picking a fight on a message board with at least three people over a film that two of us aren't exactly disagreeing with you over how boring or good it is or isn't; but you seem to conflate your personal opinion of it not being good with not being factually hugely influential - which it was. You pose your responses in a way as to deny that important folks actually did like it and actually did site it as something that gave them mindgasms to do the shit they wanted to do, and the progeny of flims inpired from the inspired films owe something to 2001 by proxy.

But I'm the "thick bastard", right? Watch throwing those stones, Mr. Glasshouse.

Seanny One Ball 04-30-2018 06:23 AM

I wasn't confusing you with Destor at all. You accused me of vitriol, I deny that. You refuse to back up the accusation because it holds no water.

That seems a bit thick to me.

Seanny One Ball 04-30-2018 06:30 AM

You have also obviously confused what Destor said. Destor was talking in absolutes, I was telling him that this was daft and extremely easy to disprove.

2001 was influential, it just didn't influence every single film for the next ten years.
That was the point I disagreed with.

If that is really so hard for you to understand then I can only feel bad for you.

There is no other way for me to explain this exceedingly basic premise. You are on your own.

weather vane 04-24-2022 11:54 PM

Good thread.

Destor 04-25-2022 05:39 PM

i agree

Seanny One Ball 04-25-2022 05:55 PM

Reliving the greatest hits I see.

What a time to be alive.

weather vane 04-26-2022 07:58 AM

Was searching to see if anybody made a thread for Barry. Brought me here. Wonderful accident.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:34 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®