2001: A Space Odyssey... Am I the only one that...

[dfrey79]

Ok, I know this may sound ridiculous to some, but I just watched this tonight for the first time.

Am I the only one that thought this movie moves so painstakingly slow that it was unwatchable? I know there are the purists that will imply it may be "above" me. But wow. I watched 33 minutes of and had to stop.

I actually enjoyed the beginning with the early man, and got goose bumps when the 'ape man' picked up the bone and smashed the skeleton and the theme music kicked in. Great symbolism. I had high hopes for the movie.

Then we got to space. I don't know what it is... If it was the ridged 60's dialog, or maybe just bad acting, but the first scene with dialog killed me. Then it seemed like all I was watching were stewardesses walking around delivering food. That's about where I lost it and switched it off.

I know I probably didn't give it enough time. But it was too slow for me.

I was just curious if everyone on the board likes this movie, or are there others that couldn't sit through it?

 

[Tony]

You must be under 40.

 

[CB2001]

I like this movie a lot. It's a true testiment to Kubrick's amazingness as a director and probably the first science fiction film that took the genre, which at the time was considered a B-Grade genre, and made it socially acceptable. Not only that, it also predicted, if not inspired, many advancements in scientific technology and space exploration.

Is the film long? Yes. But it's not a problem with me. I would rather sit through 2001: A Space Odyssey three times, than to sit through Gigli one time.

 

[letmebestormy]

dude, you didn't even give it 34 minutes.

hard to really have a discussion about the film when....you haven't seen it.

 

[James Kenobi 1138]

It picks up once you're on the Discovery, and even more as HAL starts to unwind. The stuff on the space station and moon is a little droll but it get's better after that.

 

[micdavis]

HAL didn't unwind, he did his best to interpret his orders. Ordered to lie by people who find it easy to lie.

 

[dfrey79]

Yeah, that's what I figured. Maybe I'll pick it up again tomorrow. I'm 38, so not far from 40, and I know all about the movie, I just never sat down and watched it. I understand the "origin of life theme" and was really excited when watching the beginning. (I guess I never made it out of the beginning, ha!)

I'm usually more tolerant, but for some reason I was getting too bored too fast.

I was just wondering if there is anyone that actually didn't like it.

It picks up once you're on the Discovery, and even more as HAL starts to unwind. The stuff on the space station and moon is a little droll but it get's better after that.

 

[dfrey79]

La la la la la, i'm not listening.... La la la la!

hal didn't unwind, he did his best to interpret his orders. Ordered to lie by people who find it easy to lie.

 

[STARTREKTOS]

I am only 30 and thoroughly enjoyed it. I admit it was a little slow but it was still great. Do we need to put a spoiler alert on this discussion. LOL I am just kidding. But you know how some people are.

 

[James Kenobi 1138]

HAL didn't unwind, he did his best to interpret his orders. Ordered to lie by people who find it easy to lie.

Yeah, but we don't learn that until 2010. In 2001 the perception is that HAL is going mad.

 

[STARTREKTOS]

I never did see the sequel. I think I will check it out.

 

[Clutch]

You don't watch it, you experience it. 2010 is so 80's. ugh

 

[STARTREKTOS]

Hey I love 80's cheese. I just saw V the miniseries for the first time 3 weeks ago. Talk about awesome. Now Moocriket and my self are trying to get together and watch the final battle. I can't wait.

 

[DARTH SABER]

I never liked 2010 that much. It went out of it's way to explain everything. I liked the fact that 2001 let's the viewers piece the story together.


If 2001 were a video game, 2010 would be the equivalent of a cheat guide.


DS

 

[CaptCBoard]

Okay, I'll answer the question that was asked--

Yes, there are LOTS of people who think this film is too slow and find it impossible to watch. Its just that there are many, many people who have had their lives effected by this film to the extent that they became scientists, computer engineers, astronauts and film makers. It depends on what you find entertaining and engaging. If you can get past the pace of the film, which is very deliberate, you will get to the root of what turns out to be several mysteries-- including exactly what the film is about. Kubrick chose to end the story right at the point that we, as evolved as we are, would no longer understand what was going on-- because we needed to evolve further.

The sequel books were all spawned by Clarke, which extend the story only in the direction he could go as literary works. The film stands alone, though it shares a commonality with the book that Clarke wrote after the film came out. The story in the film is Kubrick's creation, based on a short story Clarke wrote. Kubrick and Clarke collaborated on the screenplay and share screen credit, but as the director, Kubrick guided the story along the lines he wanted to explore. Clarke's novel is a reflection of that story, with some minor changes.

2010 and the other sequels are Clarke's creation alone and necessarily needed to divert from the avenue Kubrick established in the mysterious ending of the film. And in case clarification is needed, the events of 2010 mainly involve the politics on Earth and it is only at the end of that film that the hand of the aliens is shown actively at work. What happened to Jupiter in 2010 is a completely different event from what the aliens were up to at the end of 2001.

Scott

 

[LordFett]

I like this movie a lot. It's a true testiment to Kubrick's amazingness as a director and probably the first science fiction film that took the genre, which at the time was considered a B-Grade genre, and made it socially acceptable.

When did sci-fi become socially acceptable? I think I missed that.

 

[T J]

You must be under 40.

I'm under 40 and I love the film. It did take me a while to get to the point where I got it, now I got it and love it. I also loved 2010, it's a different flavor but great. I even enjoyed 2061 and loved 3001, it was a great Rip Van Winkle story set in the future.

I thought beginning dialog part of 2001 was fascinating. It was the psychedelic trip near the end that I had a hard time getting around.

 

[SupMyNerfHerder]

If 2001 were any faster, it would be like playing a 35 RPM record at 45 RPM. (Do all the Gen-X & Gen-Y crowd here know what RPM refers to? Or a record, for that matter? :lol)

It's a brilliant, hyper-realistic, moody, philosophical, psychological thriller/mystery in space & time. Nothing ever happens fast in space - only launch and re-entry are fast, and that's because of thrust and gravity, respectively. Space ships don't bank hard or shift into sudden reverse, don't punch in their Warp, Hyperdrive, or Jump engines on a whim, and don't make any noise when shooting their LAY-ZERs...

Dan

 

[Colin Droidmilk]

I like slow - at least when done by Kubrick. The slowness of 2001 is one of its virtues as far as I'm concerned. Kubrick is inviting you to meditate in all the slow travel shots - contemplation of a type no SF film has bothered with for decades now. As for the 'bad acting' - there is only flawless acting in this film. The emptiness of the dialogue, all the stewardesses etc. is deliberate. When seen as a satire on human complacency in the face of the vastness that spawned it, the dialogue scenes with all their petty banality become quite funny and poignant - as does all the sandwich-eating, straw-sucking and souvenir photograph-taking. The deliberate emptiness of the dialogue was controversial at the time, though. Ray Bradbury was appalled to learn it was deliberate. When Clarke heard of this he commented, 'Oh, Ray will come round in the end!' Whether he did or not, I don't know. But I think it's great - and totally original and truthful - the way Kubrick chose to represent humanity not with characters but with these sleepwalkers. (Kubrick's Cold War depression about humanity etc.)

Drama occurs in the third act with HAL the onboard computer, but in some ways, you could argue it doesn't really fit in with the overall scheme of the film (though it's so brilliant, no way would I want it cut from the film!), which is no less than a million-year chronicle of ape-to- (CENSORED FOR SPOILER) with present humanity shown as this merely half-evolved form in between.

Finally, it's a film with a transcendental conclusion so powerful that it works as a religious film for the non-religious and religious alike. The final scene touches some yearning in the human psyche that for thousands of years has been touched only by the redemptive promise of religion. But Kubrick found a new way to touch it. This alone is enough to qualify it as one of the greatest films of all time.

 

[Contec]

If you really wanna see how different 2001 was for its time you should look at the movie "the green slime" made the same year. Check out the trailer here: YouTube - THE GREEN SLIME - 1968 - TRAILER

This movie also was used for the unaired pilot program for MST3K and the very first Riff Joel did just before the Station appears was " Whats interesting is that this movie was made the same year as 2001"