|
04-20-2018, 11:54 PM | #1 |
Trickster Demon
Posts: 59,750
|
2001: A Space Odyssey has been restored
|
04-21-2018, 01:38 AM | #2 |
Raw Video Footage
Posts: 45,950
|
Revolutionary movie.
Dumb ending. And yes, I 'get it'. |
04-21-2018, 06:38 AM | #3 |
World Class References
Posts: 30,619
|
One of the most overrated films ever put to screen. Kubrick wasn't a genius.
|
04-21-2018, 10:14 AM | #4 |
I am the cheese
Posts: 51,037
|
Easy to see it that way when you've seen all the work it inspired first. The waves of films that took direction from this and all the ones that took direction from them all owe 2001 a great deal.
|
04-22-2018, 06:12 AM | #5 | |
DIY MS FILMWORKS
Posts: 1,039
|
Quote:
Does this restored version add back in the footage Kubrick had cut out after the first week it was in theaters? |
|
04-23-2018, 12:06 PM | #6 | |
World Class References
Posts: 30,619
|
Quote:
Who the Hell is rating Bad Boys that highly?! |
|
04-21-2018, 09:49 AM | #7 |
Raw Video Footage
Posts: 45,950
|
I'd say he was ahead of the game, though honestly I like a great deal other directors over him.
|
04-21-2018, 10:57 AM | #8 |
World Class References
Posts: 30,619
|
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. |
04-21-2018, 11:25 AM | #9 |
I am the cheese
Posts: 51,037
|
Well its def not a script film. No one would argue against that.
But there isnt anything prior to 2001 with the scope of it. No scifi film maker from the decade after would fail to sight 2001 as the, not a but the, inspiration for their work. Disliking something doesnt effect the fact it was groundbreaking. |
04-21-2018, 11:56 AM | #10 | |
World Class References
Posts: 30,619
|
Quote:
Have you got a list of directors you can cross reference that claim with? I'm sure you're confusing inspiration with source here. That's a hell of a claim to make and much harder for you to prove than for me to disprove. The burden would be on you. Here's a life preserver. 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. |
|
04-22-2018, 10:44 AM | #11 | |
I am the cheese
Posts: 51,037
|
Quote:
source sôrs/Submit noun 1. a place, person, or thing from which something comes or can be obtained. "mackerel is a good source of fish oil" synonyms: origin, birthplace, spring, fountainhead, fount, starting point, ground zero; More verb 1. obtain from a particular source. in·spire inˈspī(ə)r/Submit verb 1. fill (someone) with the urge or ability to do or feel something, especially to do something creative. These are clearly interchangeable terms and its a fools errands to argue any different. Now with that said i hope you didnt think that would be a challenging challenge. This is the most inspirational film not called star wars. Like giving candy to a baby: Steven Spielberg called it his film generation's "big bang." In other words a film so influential that it birthed the the entire universe of thought for the genre. Lucas says it was "hugely inspirational", labeling Kubrick as "the filmmaker's filmmaker". And of course no Star Wars...what does scifi even look like? Thats all thanks to 2001. Sydney Pollack refers to it as "groundbreaking" course groundbreaking iimplies nothing came before that did what it did. William Friedkin states 2001 is "the grandfather of all such films". Grandfather of course is a colloquialosm used to describe what came first. Ridley Scott stated he believed 2001 was the unbeatable film that in a sense killed the science fiction genre. Which is to say that the film is the absolute mecca. Dwarfing everything before or after it. Film critic and film historian Michel Ciment wrote: "Kubrick has conceived a film which in one stroke has made the whole science fiction cinema obsolete." And furthermore its not that script that people praise it for. Its the oustanding cinematography, its exceptional use of score (possibly the best of all time,) and it stunning visuals (nothing comes close prior.) So if you judge a film by a single metric (monologues and dialogues make two i suppose) then yeah this might not be for you. But its excellence exists outside of your appreciation. |
|
04-22-2018, 11:58 AM | #12 | |
World Class References
Posts: 30,619
|
Quote:
I'm not knocking anybody that likes it when directors put a big scrolling roll of beautiful imagery on the screen with virtually no audio storytelling. I just don't particularly like it. Slik made a thread about a film you love and I happen not to love it. Your reaction is very insecure. I imagined you were made of sturdier stuff, Destor. |
|
04-21-2018, 11:27 AM | #13 |
I am the cheese
Posts: 51,037
|
Tbf tho i love 2001. But i can also watch silent pictures so i dunno...different strokes
|
04-21-2018, 12:06 PM | #14 | |
World Class References
Posts: 30,619
|
Quote:
Silent films are a different beast entirely. I enjoy some of them. 2001 is not a silent film. Kubrick just wasn't my kind of storyteller. Him and Michael Cimino had a lot in common that way. Too busy painting with cameras. |
|
04-21-2018, 12:57 PM | #15 |
Large Marge sent me
Posts: 32,245
|
|
04-21-2018, 03:26 PM | #16 |
World Class References
Posts: 30,619
|
High School Silent Film does have a ring to it
|
04-22-2018, 11:41 AM | #17 |
Raw Video Footage
Posts: 45,950
|
You can find dna of 2001 in something as recent as the Lost in Space reboot. Arguing its significance to the sci-fi genre is absurd and very 'hipster', tbh. You don't have to like Akira to know what it did for anime for instance.
|
04-22-2018, 11:55 AM | #18 | |
World Class References
Posts: 30,619
|
Quote:
Nobody is saying it wasn't a benchmark or a massive achievement. I'm saying I don't particularly like it beyond appreciating the technical skill and the pretty imagery of it, and there are others who have taken zero inspiration from it in the production of their own films. Destor just handed me a list of unsourced quotes from a short list of big name directors and critics when asked to back up his claim that every film made in the decade since 2001 was solely and directly inspired by it. |
|
04-22-2018, 11:52 AM | #19 |
World Class References
Posts: 30,619
|
So you can't provide a comprehensive list of directors who have all made science fiction films since that all agree that 2001 is their inspiration, that's what you're saying is it?
You're trying to fob me off with a bunch of big directors there, not the entire list which is what you initially claimed. |
04-22-2018, 12:13 PM | #20 | |
World Class References
Posts: 30,619
|
Quote:
I don't see how anyone could reasonably stand behind such a brazenly declaratory sentence and one which is so easily proven false. You're probably right about source and inspiration being acceptable synonyms but is that really the hill you want to die on? You don't win one argument by starting another smaller one, winning that and then walking away arms raised. You have said a silly thing that you cannot defend about a film that you love. I actually understand you wanting everybody else to love it but to claim that it was the sole inspiration behind every science fiction film afterwards is just stupid. Trot out all the Ridley Scott quotes you can, Ridley doesn't speak for all other film makers. |
|
04-22-2018, 01:40 PM | #21 |
Raw Video Footage
Posts: 45,950
|
Step outside yourself for a moment, mate. This is not a good look. Lates.
|
04-23-2018, 03:11 AM | #22 |
World Class References
Posts: 30,619
|
I think you need to get to know yourself a bit better first.
We could all use a little time. |
04-23-2018, 03:50 AM | #23 |
Raw Video Footage
Posts: 45,950
|
I don't write tangents over how many directors obviously were inspired by 2001.
I write tangents about social politics. |
04-23-2018, 04:14 AM | #24 |
Wrestling Marks Rejoice!
Posts: 10,138
|
That was a lot of vitriol over 2001.
Did Stanley Kubrick film a private movie with your mom and you walked in, only to have that look of melted innocence ruin his shot, so he made you come in 43 more times until you were completely glassed over with shock that it looked like apathy on film and he allowed you to leave... and the entire time, 2001 was on in the background? |
04-23-2018, 08:57 AM | #25 |
Trickster Demon
Posts: 59,750
|
2001 is tearing tpww apart
|
04-23-2018, 09:07 AM | #26 |
World Class References
Posts: 30,619
|
It's funny when people get upset over people not sharing their love. Always.
|
04-23-2018, 01:46 PM | #27 |
Raw Video Footage
Posts: 45,950
|
|
04-23-2018, 11:21 PM | #28 | |
Wrestling Marks Rejoice!
Posts: 10,138
|
Quote:
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. |
|
04-24-2018, 08:19 AM | #29 | |
World Class References
Posts: 30,619
|
Quote:
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? |
|
04-30-2018, 02:15 AM | #30 | |
Wrestling Marks Rejoice!
Posts: 10,138
|
Quote:
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. |
|
04-23-2018, 09:22 AM | #31 |
World Class References
Posts: 30,619
|
I do Destor though
|
04-23-2018, 10:24 AM | #32 |
Fire up Chips!
Posts: 27,456
|
2001 is one of those movies that you are supposed to like otherwise you dont know jack about films. Bored me to tears. Special Effects are great but that's about it. I like Kubrick but this and Barry Lyndon are two of the most unnecessarily long and pretentious movies made
|
04-23-2018, 11:38 AM | #33 |
World Class References
Posts: 30,619
|
2001, Apocalypse Now, The Deer Hunter, Raging Bull... there are a lot of big films with big reputations that I'd only be lying by saying I liked.
|
04-23-2018, 11:29 AM | #34 |
Raw Video Footage
Posts: 45,950
|
None of us are concerned with you loving it. You're showing your hand putting the discussion in that way.
|
04-23-2018, 11:39 AM | #35 |
World Class References
Posts: 30,619
|
|
04-23-2018, 01:46 PM | #36 |
Raw Video Footage
Posts: 45,950
|
|
04-23-2018, 04:59 PM | #37 | ||
World Class References
Posts: 30,619
|
Quote:
Quote:
You actually respond to virtually nothing directly because you're the sort of person who holds their hands over their ears and says "lalalalala" instead of aknowledging a fact that disputes/disproves whatever stance you happen to be taking at the time. This is a regular occurrence with you. Your mouth if too full of the garnish to engage in any meaty discussion. I think you just shit a brick and start attacking anything but the point really. |
||
04-23-2018, 11:59 AM | #38 |
World Class References
Posts: 30,619
|
Going to read the rest of Kalyx' posts with my eyes wide shut lads.
... Eh lads! ...lads? |
04-23-2018, 07:45 PM | #39 |
Posts: 52,478
|
2001 was cool
2010 sucked though |
04-23-2018, 07:53 PM | #40 |
Celestia's Left Hand
Posts: 17,359
|
I thought this was a remake for the first 10 seconds it looks amazing
|