What do you think of 2001: A Space Odyssey?

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2006-06-04 03:01pm

(I know I mispelled something in there)

The film. What do you people think of it? Like it? Hate it?

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2006-06-04 03:03pm

Off to OSF.

Brother-Captain Gaius · Post by **Brother-Captain Gaius** » 2006-06-04 03:05pm

Kubrik was a master. So is Clarke. 'Nuff said.

Dartzap · Post by **Dartzap** » 2006-06-04 03:16pm

I was completly and utterly baffled the first time I saw it. several viewings later.. and I still am

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2006-06-04 03:29pm

A lot of people absolutely despise it for being too wierd and too boring; I enjoy it for exactly those qualities; why wouldn't alien activites be inscrutable, and slow paced does not always equal boring.
Not when there's a visual feast onscreen, especially.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2006-06-04 03:41pm

The movie dropped the ball hugely in the last bits of it. None of it made sense, whereas the book made slightly more but not necessarily comprehensible.

Reading the other books was quite an experience, though I'm not sure if it's a good or bad one. It just makes me think we should grab every world but Europa, just to be safe.

Currald · Post by **Currald** » 2006-06-04 06:20pm

It's my favorite movie. I have my own theories about the end scenes, and other have their own, which is what the director intended: a nonlinear, audiovisual experience which the viewer would map their own meaning upon. Some people don't like that kind of cinema, but I find it to be stimulating.

Plus, love that space station!

Cao Cao · Post by **Cao Cao** » 2006-06-04 06:36pm

Generally I liked parts of it. But overall it was incredibly dull to me.
Frankly I think it needed some serious editing. For example that scene where the guy on the Discovery runs along the.. uh gravity wheel or whatever it's called. It just went on and on and on and on.

I enjoyed 2010 a lot more. It had all the grace and imagination of 2001 but without the utter bland dullness of half the movie.
Granted the ending was a little preachy though.

Currald · Post by **Currald** » 2006-06-04 06:41pm

Cao Cao wrote:I enjoyed 2010 a lot more. It had all the grace and imagination of 2001

(smacks forehead in horror) Oh! 2010 was so boring next to 2001, IMO. It just held the viewer's hand and walked them from here to there. There were no broader themes about the what it means to be human, just, as Homer Simpson said, a lot of stuff that happened.

Cao Cao · Post by **Cao Cao** » 2006-06-04 07:02pm

Currald wrote:
Cao Cao wrote:I enjoyed 2010 a lot more. It had all the grace and imagination of 2001
(smacks forehead in horror) Oh! 2010 was so boring next to 2001, IMO. It just held the viewer's hand and walked them from here to there. There were no broader themes about the what it means to be human, just, as Homer Simpson said, a lot of stuff that happened.

I didn't really see any of that in 2001 you see. Just a lot of long, pretty shots. Like Star Trek: TMP but not as boring and listless.
What mainly interested me in 2010 was that it was sort of HAL's story, leaving the sinister killer computer thing behind.[/i]

Prozac the Robert · Post by **Prozac the Robert** » 2006-06-04 08:13pm

I read the book first. I did enjoy the film though. I think it depended on me being in the right mood though. The same sort of mood required to watch a long snooker match perhaps.

DesertFly · Post by **DesertFly** » 2006-06-04 08:19pm

2001 is one of those things where I understand and admire the artistry, talent, and hard work put into its production, and I certainly do enjoy and appreciate the broader themes and the visual journey we're taken on, but I find that actually watching the darn thing is just too darn boring to do more than once.

Dennis Toy · Post by **Dennis Toy** » 2006-06-04 08:25pm

I enjoy 2001: A Space Oddysey. People say it was boring but i find it visually enjoyable. I like the ideas this movie gave to the audience. Hal-9000 was actually enjoyable.

Alan Bolte · Post by **Alan Bolte** » 2006-06-04 09:00pm

I don't object to long shots...if they're actually pretty. Maybe I'm spoiled, and it's better enjoyed if you were around in the 60s, but I don't need to watch an elevator descend for five minutes, even if it is on the moon.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2006-06-04 09:11pm

Scientifically accurate or not, 2001 proves that SciFi movies should have sound in space. If that wasn't annoying I don't know what is.
I feel about 2001 the way I feel about the LOTR books-an extremely interesting idea badly presented. The sequels were much better.

Cao Cao · Post by **Cao Cao** » 2006-06-04 09:37pm

Batman wrote:Scientifically accurate or not, 2001 proves that SciFi movies should have sound in space. If that wasn't annoying I don't know what is.

I agree somewhat, though I think soundless space does work if implemented the right way. Especially with good music. Firefly is a good example of this, as is the space station sequence in 2001 itself (though again it's another scene that goes on forever).

Drooling Iguana · Post by **Drooling Iguana** » 2006-06-04 10:46pm

2001 was quite possibly the greatest 30-minute short film ever made.

Unfortunately, it wasn't 30 minutes long.

Post by **Vympel** » 2006-06-04 10:49pm

Intensely boring, overlong, and incomprehensible.

Spacebeard · Post by **Spacebeard** » 2006-06-04 11:21pm

I always felt that the silence greatly added to the dramatic tension in key scenes, such as Frank's death and the famous "open the pod bay doors" sequence. That's not to say that every movie should have silence in space, but it certainly works as a dramatic device in 2001.

All I'll say about the pacing is that I've never been bored by any part of 2001 except the closing SFX show. An actual scene with sets, actors, and props gives you details to look at: an abstract mathematically-defined light show does not. On the other hand, I also enjoy Tolkien's prose and Tsai Ming-Liang's film direction, so I apparently have a longer attention span than some.

Another reason why I don't particularly care for the ending is that I've never been fond of Clarke's penchant for writing godlike alien beings. I always prefer SF to deal with that which is comprehensible to the human audience: the technology and society of humans, or of aliens with reasonably humanoid minds. I liked 2001 better when it was dealing with the Discovery and HAL than when it was dealing with a acid trip-inducing black stone, and I liked the Rama series better when it was dealing with an artifact from a highly advanced alien civilization than when it was dealing with God. That is, however, a matter of taste just like the pacing.

TimothyC · Post by **TimothyC** » 2006-06-05 12:04am

I loved it if for only HAL. The red eye is just so hypnotic,

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2006-06-05 05:27am

Classic film. I didn't like it when I first watched it because I didn't understand it, in my defence I first watched it when I was in primary school, but it grew on me. I haven't seen it in years though.

Big Orange · Post by **Big Orange** » 2006-06-05 05:36am

Pretentious, rambling and vague. But not a bad movie per se, just a very weird film and a product of it's time. And from what I've seen of it, it has not really dated either.

Nyrath · Post by **Nyrath** » 2006-06-05 09:40am

Excellent film!
Of course I had the advantage of having read the book before I saw the movie. And I seem to have a longer than average attention span.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2006-06-05 12:19pm

I like it a lot, but I have to be in a particular mood for me to really be able to sit down and enjoy it.

Post by **Gandalf** » 2006-06-05 12:21pm

I was bored. Really bored.

It just kept going.