What do you think of 2001: A Space Odyssey?

Post by **Dalton** » 2006-06-05 01:22pm

The visuals were astounding, and it is responsible for quite a few cultural memes, but overall I thought it was kind of on the boring side while at the same time being a mindfuck.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2006-06-05 01:27pm

I could do without the acid trip once Bowman falls into the monolith. But otherwise, I like the film. It's a nice change of pace from space opera (figuratively and literally). Hyperdrives and phasers have their charms, but they tend to reduce space to just the background, rather than an extremely dangerous environment with no analogy on Earth.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-06-05 01:29pm

2001: A Space Oddysey can be summed up in four lines:

1) Decent story
2) Innovative direction
3) Horrible pacing
4) Bullshit ending

Post by **Coyote** » 2006-06-05 02:02pm

It was a good movie, innovative and fascinating; it brought up a lot of good ideas and sparked the imagination. Right up until the ending. Then after 15 minutes of weird acid-trip kaleidoscope images, it just kind of fluttered away.

It definitely could have been handled better; the book made the 'Stargate' concept much more obvious and appealing-- Dave Bowman goes to all these different regions of space and sees alien civilizations, both alive and long dead.

Poor execution there at the end was what killed this movie in its tracks.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2006-06-05 02:26pm

Coyote wrote:It was a good movie, innovative and fascinating; it brought up a lot of good ideas and sparked the imagination. Right up until the ending. Then after 15 minutes of weird acid-trip kaleidoscope images, it just kind of fluttered away.

It definitely could have been handled better; the book made the 'Stargate' concept much more obvious and appealing-- Dave Bowman goes to all these different regions of space and sees alien civilizations, both alive and long dead.

Poor execution there at the end was what killed this movie in its tracks.

To be fair, it would have been impossible for them to stay faithful to the novel for that sequence, because of the limits of 60s special effects technology. But the 15 minute acid trip wasn't necessary; that's the one part of the film that's aged very poorly, because that kind of weird-ass shit was de rigueur in the late 60s but it's just boring now.

Instant Sunrise · Post by **Instant Sunrise** » 2006-06-05 03:02pm

Technically, the book is the novelization of the movie's script.

The movie had to be cut down because some of the shots couldn't be done at the time. Namely, the special effects engineers couldn't make a convincing Saturn at the time. So Saturn was cut out of the movie, and the monolith was moved to a Lagrange Point between Io and Jupiter, instead of being on Iapetus.

Elheru Aran · Post by **Elheru Aran** » 2006-06-05 04:23pm

2001=only movie that's capable of putting me to sleep. Each and every time. And it absolutely always happens sometime after Bowman enters the monolith...

Skylon · Post by **Skylon** » 2006-06-05 05:26pm

Depends on my mood and the day. Sometimes I'm honestly in awe of the damn thing. Other times frustrated.

But some shots are simple beauty.

B5B7 · Post by **B5B7** » 2006-06-07 11:14am

I saw it when it was originally released, and it was mind-blowing - of course I was young then, but it still holds up pretty well.
Its style is part of its story - the humans were portrayed as "wooden" to represent a dehumanised society, that the Starchild revitalises.
As for the ending - its from the era of LSD.
It's kind of an atheist religious movie.
It has lots of depth and subtlety - if you consider it bad, you probably think ST Voyager is good.

Its from the same time as TOS - and has some similar strengths.

Equinox2003 · Post by **Equinox2003** » 2006-06-07 02:48pm

To me it was boring, nothing more.

spongyblue · Post by **spongyblue** » 2006-06-07 03:02pm

http://www.kubrick2001.com/

Just incase no one's seen the site before. It definantly clears some things up.

B5B7 · Post by **B5B7** » 2006-06-09 06:26am

Equinox2003 wrote:To me it was boring, nothing more.

Eh, you've got a Voyager avatar!

Actually, I can understand why many find it boring - liking it is partly a case of when you first saw it [in term of actual year or your age] and personal taste and experience.
I also found SW, TESB, Alien and Scanners mindblowing when they first came out, but with passage of time they have less impact [though I still consider them good movies].

I also find some movies boring that have great reps.

Big Orange · Post by **Big Orange** » 2006-06-09 08:17am

Well 2001: A Space Odessey had no real plot, paper thin characters (except of course for HAL) with most of the director's attention was mostly on the SFX and visual set pieces.

Many people would find that boring and pretentious (although I don't dislike 2001: A Space Odessey and I mostly find the movie more baffling that dull). I also read the book long before I saw the movie, so I understood what was going on in the movie a little better than others.

Currald · Post by **Currald** » 2006-06-09 10:22pm

I see the "acid trip" part at the end, in part, as the representation of the Monolith trying to communicate with Bowman. It starts out completely abstract, the move to more and more compehensible images, and finally arrives at the point where Bowman can understand what it's saying, which is, um, you're getting really old in an 18th century French apartment. Okay. That didn't make sense. Oh well. I'll try again when this subject is brought up again next year.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2006-06-09 10:33pm

The real question is if it's more boring than 'are we still staring at the blue thing' ST:TMP.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2006-06-10 04:36am

Stark wrote:The real question is if it's more boring than 'are we still staring at the blue thing' ST:TMP.

2001 had prettier footage. TMP had actual character conflict.

Take your pick.

Sofia · Post by **Sofia** » 2006-06-10 08:43pm

HAL was the best part.

"I can sing a song."

*shudders*

Currald · Post by **Currald** » 2006-06-10 08:51pm

Uraniun235 wrote:
Stark wrote:The real question is if it's more boring than 'are we still staring at the blue thing' ST:TMP.
2001 had prettier footage. TMP had actual character conflict.

Take your pick.

Apes hitting each other with bones isn't conflict???

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2006-06-10 09:15pm

Uraniun235 wrote:
Stark wrote:The real question is if it's more boring than 'are we still staring at the blue thing' ST:TMP.
2001 had prettier footage. TMP had actual character conflict.

Take your pick.

...are you contending HAL wasn't a character, or that he wasn't in conflict with the astronauts?

Post by **Kuja** » 2006-06-10 09:55pm

2001 one is a 'great' movie that drops to 'fair' because the pacing is consistently a touch slow and the ending sucks. HAL though, will always be the best part of it.

"Will I dream?"

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2006-06-11 12:16am

RedImperator wrote:
Uraniun235 wrote:
Stark wrote:The real question is if it's more boring than 'are we still staring at the blue thing' ST:TMP.
2001 had prettier footage. TMP had actual character conflict.

Take your pick.
...are you contending HAL wasn't a character, or that he wasn't in conflict with the astronauts?

HAL's easily the most sympathetic of all the Discovery crew.

When I watch it it doesn't feel so much like the characters are against each other as they are against the situation in general. HAL's doing what he feels he has to because of a programming conflict. Dave does what he feels he has to because he wants to survive.

Kirk and Decker, on the other hand, wouldn't have to feud so much if Kirk wouldn't be such an ass.

Is my statement defensible? No, not really, it was a badly worded way of saying that I find the interactions in TMP a lot livelier and more entertaining than watching Frank and Dave chat about HAL or watching Frank recieve a taped birthday greeting.

"Will I dream?"

I'm pretty sure that's 2010.

Post by **Kuja** » 2006-06-11 12:26am

Was it? Even so it was still HAL, and he was good in both flicks.

Aeolus · Post by **Aeolus** » 2006-06-11 02:45am

Skylon wrote:Depends on my mood and the day. Sometimes I'm honestly in awe of the damn thing. Other times frustrated.

But some shots are simple beauty.

It's great running in the backgroud. I like having that on when I am resting or Forbiddon Planet. I really enjoy both movies and the sounds and visuals are impressive without being distracting.

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 2006-06-17 09:07pm

I liked it. It takes a certain mood to watch it. When I was younger I thought parts of it were cool (the monolith scenes at the beginning and end), but I got bored because of the long long parts where there was no dialogue or action (blame childhood short attention spans).

When I was that age I also thought the original Star Wars was a bit boring for similar reasons.

I appreciate what it did for sci fi (to give it an air of respectability and show that bigger budgets could go a long way to telling the story right).

It's not one of my favorites, but I greatly enjoyed it, and each time I watch it I get something new out of it.

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 2006-06-17 09:08pm

I should add, that perhaps a lot of the appeal of it is also that they don't go out of their way to explain everything to you (like some other sci fi, ahem) thus letting your imagination fill in the gaps.

"Making you think" and "letting your mind run away with the concepts" are what tends to mark good fantasy for me.