>watch 2001: a space odessy >expect some masterpiece because Kubrick is supposed to be good >end up completely disappointed >20 min scene of monkey screeching was more interesting than the entire rest of the film >entire film is just "humans put too much faith and control in technology", just a moral and no actual story to follow >every single dialogue scene is extremely boring and too long >every cinematic shot to show off the visuals is about 5x too long, literally >movie depends entirely on music and visuals (both incredible) and nothing else >storyline is the worst case of drawn out shit i have ever seen
I'm not even making this as bait because "hurr durr I know better than the classics". I actually just don't get it. The dialogue swaps between forgetable and painful, every scene is far too long, the storyline is just one line and is incredibly weak, and the entire film is totally dependent on its beauty in sound and visuals.
In all seriousness, why do you guys think that? Would be nice if we could have an actual discussion
Cameron Flores
this was the number one movie in 1968
Noah Wright
The entire movie is shit. It looks and sounds pretty. Nothing to do with Kubrick or script writers. Movie was only successful because scifi was young and the movie's premise was fresh and new.
It hasn't aged at all and should be thrown into the trash in the same way as out of date food. /thread
Watch some more movies, especially science fiction, from the 60s and you'll realize just what a huge fucking breakthrough this movie was in every way. Planet of the Apes came out a year or two later and the two were grouped together as sci fi breakthroughs. Watch that and realize just what an incredible achievement 2001 is.
That said I agree with you, itis boring as fuck. A movie I'm glad I've seen but would never watch repeatedly. Many of his movies are better. Barry Lyndon is his best.
Dylan Jones
We are HAL now...
Robert Thompson
>redditor filmlet thinks 2001 is slow Now go watch Tarkovsky and send me a postcard
Brody Perez
you fucking lurk more. this place is a shithole. there's a reason the other boards only know tv as that one place that guy keeps posting CP
Xavier Rodriguez
Please OP let's have an actual discussion and explain to me, why do you have shit taste?
Dominic Howard
>knowing the current state of reddit How bout you go back newfriend!
Carter Smith
>I actually just don't get it That's refreshing to read someone self aware enough to realize they just don't get it instead of attacking the work.
>knowing something about another place means you're there
right, and when I read about kim jong un, I must be north korean? fuck off dumbass, this place spends so much time lamenting reddit because Sup Forums has a ""superior"" (read: edgier) userbase, that it's hard to avoid hearing about what reddit is like
It's a pretty good sci-fi movie with weird as fuck bookends for a beginning and an end. The beginning at least sets up the rest of the movie well. The proto humans are at peace until they discover tools, which culminates into war. The transition from act 1 to act 2 is also very good, iconic in fact. Act 3 is just weird as fuck and neither enhanced the story nor brought a satisfying conclusion. Dave should have died while destroying HAL. That would have been the perfect punctuation for the story's message, that technology leads to the destruction of man. Instead we got... I'm not really sure. Call me a brainlet, but I really don't know what the fuck he was going for there. I thought the movie was about tech and we got alternate dimensions or space magic or some shit.
Brayden Smith
too bad the only people that were interested in the thread were people that got upset by another anonymous internet users' opinion and typed out an angry "BWAINWET" comment
Isaac Howard
dont be a pretentious little faggot user. the newer generations who pretend like this is some major masterpiece is not realistic at all. there is nothing wrong with a kid not liking 2001. its actually quite understandable.
Liam Ross
Here's a picture so somebody actually reads my boring ass post.
I don't think you could say they were "at peace", they were uncivilized.
Justin Turner
Yeah this is what I got from it as well. My problem can be trimmed down to two things, 1) the story was simply weak and 2) it should have been a short film - too many shots that took too long and did too little (im not asking for a film that caters to the attention spans of people who watch marvel films, but god, the film is fucking slow
wonderful counterpoint, must have taken you a team, a lab and a couple of years to have analysed and debunked my point so well
Xavier White
I think an aspect of the movie that is largely ignored is the boardroom scene where the military official sets up the fact that state secrecy is what enabled the creation of an AI which treats humanity itself as its enemy. I think the message is that mankind's only hope for survival is to transcend our militaristic instincts.
Robert Torres
Okay, so they didn't all get together and decide they were at peace. But they also didn't have a means of quickly and efficiently killing the fuck out of each other until they discovered clubs and the damage they cause. Before that, they really just bickered and screeched at each other. No murder or war.
Wyatt Morales
Well the thing about Space Odyssey is that it was revolutionary for the time amd people called it a masterpiece because it had never been done before and people nowadays just make the assumption its a masterpiece before even watching it. Personally I love the movie because of its visuals and overall aesthetic but I have to agree with you on the point that the story lacks substance
Jaxon Baker
whatever your "point" was it just makes you sound like a newfag, I'm sorry user
Juan Roberts
>crying newfag
this cult bullshit of "i got here first" is why this place is worse than reddit. Sup Forums has a narrower field of acceptable mindsets and people literally get upset over who has used the site longer
no-one cares if you've been wasting your time on an indonesian cockmashing forum since you were 15, you're not special and you'r better than no-one
Nathaniel Sanchez
I'm serious though, your criticisms of the board just make it seem like you haven't been here very long. Ofc Sup Forums is shit you mongoloid
Wyatt Mitchell
>look everyone ive been here for ages. am i cool or what? for fucks sake user. get a life
Daniel Foster
I already said that this is my 3rd post here. literally the only thing I know about tv is that there was that cp guy and that tv is for films and tv stuff
no idea why youre pointing out that im new here
Lucas Taylor
ABANDON THREAD
William Price
>every scene is far too long It's really not user. It's a movie about a journey through the vastness of time and space. Long shots with minimal dialogue, holding on a shot, etc all help to decompress the sense of time inside the movie itself. A good comparison is interstellar, which tripped over itself rushing from the next boring action set piece or desktop wall paper and never gives the movie any time to breath. As a result a movie about how time and space are infinitely vast and its only human connection that gives us meaning in the bleakness feels like its events that happen over a weekend. Shot composition, the score, the effects, the edits, it's all a masterclass in film making.
Alright. This one (unironicaly) made me think. I really enjoyed Interstellar and your reply is actually a very interesting perspective that I didn't consider. I guess that more than excused the space shots then, but the dialogue scenes were really fucking bad imo. They manage to say so little in so much time. I've been in so many meetings that were genuinely more interesting
Joshua Brown
>>every cinematic shot to show off the visuals is about 5x too long, literally
well, can't say I disagree with that
Robert White
Because you're whining "I dont get it" why the fuck would anyone continue this discussion.
James Johnson
in front of people like you? i fucking doubt it grow up and smell the roses user
Ryan Miller
>complains that user should go back to circlejerkland >by using circlejerk replies
genuine question, are there any sites that dont actually circlejerk?
Samuel Edwards
That makes the ending make a little more sense when viewed that way. Still, I think the viewer could come to that conclusion on their own by seeing how technology and war always go hand in hand and almost always lead to devastation. Instead we saw Dave literally transcend into some higher being, which was jarring, at least to me.
I agree, it would be better if Kubrick got to the fucking point, but like others have said, it wouldn't be a Kubrick piece if it did.
Daniel Mitchell
no every site has a semi-hivemind shit going on. since everyone keeps being hostile to eachother here Sup Forums is the least hivemind of them all
Thomas Smith
>They manage to say so little in so much time. It's called visual narrative, he's not telling the story through exposition, he's telling it through the visual medium.
Ryan Carter
>I think the viewer could come to that conclusion on their own by seeing how technology and war always go hand in hand and almost always lead to devastation You mean without the aid of the film and its themes? lol I suppose so, but then Kubrick wouldn't have a job.
Nolan Ortiz
The monkey triumphantly realizing he can smash the cow skull with the bone, and the match cut to the pigs head being caved in is one of the most genius things I've ever seen in cinema.
Kubrick makes even the smallest creative choices look like monumental achievements
Luis Foster
>much attention span
Michael Roberts
Yeah I love that juxtaposition. Explains so much with so little.
Julian Parker
Yeah I said I liked the monkey scene in the op. good mix of "rlly made me think" as well as a simple case of fantastic transitioning. as i said, best part of the film
Lincoln Lee
The movie is about the next step in human evolution, the step from being a species of upjumped apes to being interstellar deities. Moonwatcher's invention of the club changes humanity from dying apes to spacefaring humans, and the journey to the space monolith, and through it, is the next step.
Christopher Rodriguez
It's a good bait and switch movie. I like tricking people into watching it.
Cameron Allen
What I mean is that by the time the viewer reaches the end of the film, I think the case for escalation of technology resulting in the escalation of warfare and vice versa has been made. The viewer could then take that as a cautionary tale without the film adding on "so if you ever want to evolve past dumb apes with bones, you gotta move past war and be a Star Child."
Tyler Hernandez
But it seems like you didn't take that view towards the end of the film yourself until this discussion, or am I misunderstanding you?
Thomas Martin
>entire film is just "humans put too much faith and control in technology", just a moral and no actual story to follow
I'm going to swallow my rage and just explain it as best I can.
The movie is almost entirely about the duality between science and religion, yes the unreliability of technology is an aspect, but even more than that is the subject of mankind ascending to godhood, through the advancement of technology, but still suffering from the fact that as human beings, they are imperfect and their creations will be imperfect as a result. HAL9000, being the closest thing to a human being that humanity has ever put together, leads you to believe that he is perfect, never making any miscalculations and proving his superiority by continuously beating the human characters in chess. However, when asked to preform a task that would cause him to go against his programming, by lying to the crew about their mission, it drives him mad. There are similarities here between HAL9000 and Satan, who was also created to serve a certain purpose and was given a contradictory commandment by God, leading him to his downfall. There are also tie ins to the ayys and God, the babyman and christ, the monoliths and the cross, the list goes on and I'm far too lazy to really get into it.
>every single dialogue scene is extremely boring and too long >every cinematic shot to show off the visuals is about 5x too long, literally >movie depends entirely on music and visuals (both incredible) and nothing else >storyline is the worst case of drawn out shit i have ever seen
I can actually understand this argument, as I myself have an incredibly short attention span and as a result usually have to take breaks when I watch longer art films. The purpose of this from what I have seen is layered, it bathes you in a certain atmosphere, which in turn makes the kino parts more effective.
Jordan Brown
but im a mutha fucking starboy i i i i i i i i i i a look what youve done
Nathan Reed
I know the novel goes more into detail on the monolith (sentinels) being of alien origin but I love how Kubrick refuses to say either way if its alien related and leaves up in the air the possibility that the monolith could be left over from human civilizations past (it was found in a crater on the moon like it was deliberately sent there) or an experiment from the future in an effort to do some sort of course correction for a future civilization gone wrong.
That theory also works great with the star child in mind too. For all we know, since time seems to be irrelevant in the white room at the end, the star child could be Christ himself being sent to earth in the past. Or just a new form of human meant to put humanity back on the right path in the present day of the film timeline. So many possibilities. This is why 2001 has never been topped in terms of Sci-fi. It pretty much killed the genre. Modern examples like Annihilation are just embarrassing
min scene of monkey screeching was more interesting than the entire rest of the film accurate, the monolith scene gives me some serious religious dread.
>entire film is just "humans put too much faith and control in technology", just a moral and no actual story to follow
Nope, its about evolution, religion, morality and perfection from a Godlike standpoint as opposed to a human standpoint.
>>every single dialogue scene is extremely boring and too long >every cinematic shot to show off the visuals is about 5x too long, literally >movie depends entirely on music and visuals (both incredible) and nothing else >storyline is the worst case of drawn out shit i have ever seen
"It's too longgg" Isn't an argument. You have to look at art-films as moving paintings, pieces of art to appreciate and pull apart, just because there wasn't any explosions or lasers doesn't mean its a bad movie.
Isaiah Torres
heres the thing, the movie has been out for like 50 years at this point. im pretty sure its been long enough to be an established classic. if you didn't get it thats fine but theres plenty of essays out there written about why its a masterpiece
Michael Fisher
I think you're just as retarded as the shit flinging apes so you relate to their scenes the most. You haven't touched the monolith and seen the light of true kino yet. Give it time, maybe one day you'll be able to understand
Justin Stewart
A lot of people don't like it on first viewing. It is very long and very slow and not a lot happens (well in typical filmaking terms not a lot happens - over the course of the movie we go from the dawn of man to the begining of a new stage of evolution so clearly something happens in the movie). Try it again in a few years user, you might like it more a second time. And try to see it on the biggest screen you can. If you watched 2001 on your shitty laptop you're doing it wrong.
Liam Russell
It is a movie devoid of literally anything so that a bunch of people can fill in the gaps for him because he's too fucking lazy to create real characters and a plot.
Jacob Hill
It's incredibly forgettable. I just saw it recently too.
Leo King
This is the worst possible take
Christopher Thompson
>I didn't understand the movie therefore I'm going to shit on people who do :^)
>You have to look at art-films as moving paintings "It's art" isn't an argument either, it's a conclusion. Nobody needs to mindlessly appeal to self-appointed authority. That's not a discussion. You sound like a fucking retard, dude.
Matthew Bailey
The pieces are all there for anyone to get a basic idea of what was going on. You just have to be looking and not get so hung up on "muh characters" and "muh story" because it's not a film about insignificant things like that. It's a film with a far grander and vast scope of things in the universe. Stop baiting this hard faggot
Carson Garcia
How the fuck is "It's art" a conclusion? Art is something that says something, and its your job to put that something together. The merit of art is based in the message and the conversation that follows, and how long that conversation lasts. Its not about "MUH SLOW PACING" literally what the fuck is your point even
Logan Morales
No he's right. Why the fuck do you know what Reddit is like?
Easton Roberts
There is nothing to understand. There's no substance, character or anything. Even in Tarkovski's films you have something to grab unto and find meaning and story.
What does 2001 have? A bunch of pretty pictures? Impressive visual effects? Hal, a stereotypical bad guy whose only motivations (at least as far as the movie is concerned) are "NO HUMAN WILL GET IN MY WAY! MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!"? Or acting on par with anything Krysten Stewart has ever appeared on, which to call wooden would be an overstatement?
This movie has nothing.
Gabriel Gutierrez
Shut your nigger mouth. There has to be substance or else it's just another 13 year old trying to be hardcore and deep with his abstract poem about chicken wings.
Michael Rogers
see What level of brainlet do you have to be on to assume HAL is stereotypical, or to even land at anything besides him being the best character in the film
Jordan Scott
Oh shit, I didn't know we had the authority of art in the house.
Cameron Hall
>This piece of cinema, which I have already admitted is brilliant visually and musically, allows for personal interpretation
Holy fuck no, oh my god you just shifted my entire world view.
Also the scene when they find the obelisk in the present day is spine chilling. God what a fucking great movie.
Jayden Evans
You'd have to clarify which view. What I got out of my initial viewing was "technology enhances our lives, but also our capability for destruction and self destruction." I hadn't thought about the military and war specifically until you(?) mentioned this scene . What I dislike about the film is how that particular message gets diluted by the ending, which, as this post clarifies, adds space travel and moving on as a species to the mix. Thinking about it the way in which he describes it is enlightening, but I still think I would have enjoyed it more with a more grounded ending, one that ends in tragedy rather than hope.
Austin Turner
Have you, perhaps, considered that the long, drawn out shots with no music at all are meant to make you feel alienated and isolated, much like two astronaut alone in a rocket coursed to Jupiter? Have you considered that there might be more to movies than just expository plot? That image and sound can actually be used to evoke feelings, even negative ones?
Ryder Cruz
>Art is an attempt to convey a message >HURRR WHO SAYS YOU GET TO DECIDE WHAT ART IS AND HAS LITERALLY ALWAYS BEEN FOREVER
Luke Jones
>Ohhh no, it's not that HAL is a stereotypical villain based on his stereotypical villain speech that he gives to Dave about performing his mision without any humans. It's an allegory about Satan
You know what, fag, I can do the same
>Rady Player One is an allegory about the war between Palestine and Irak. With the main conflict between reality and fiction being the polar oposite of the conflict between Palestine's history and who is the rightful owner of the Holy Land, and the new history after their recent conflicts.
That dumb shit is the equivalent of that Rick & Morty that claimed Wubba Lubba Dub dub or whatever the fuck that catcphrrase is was a reference to nihilistic philosophy.
Prove me wrong.
James Mitchell
I never said it was brilliant visually and musically. The Transformers movies have pretty visuals as well. If anything, those movies at least add something by at lest trying to have just a basic story and knows what it is, instead of pretending to be an allegory about mankind's exploitation of the peruvian spices or whatever the fuck the next theory on 2001 is going to be
Julian Gomez
Even if we do accept your definition, why does that necessarily make it good? Anything can have a message, or be classified/presented as "art". This word doesn't hold any serious credence for non-plebs.
Hudson Butler
You'd have to be some kind of lesser evolved brainlet to actually believe these things so I'll just assume you're joking.
HA good post m8!
Henry Perez
>The Transformers movies(...) at least add something by at lest trying to have just a basic story
Just be quiet. Watch the thread die and don't post until you've lurked for a while.
I shouldn't have to "interpret" what you mean, you shouldn't be so pretentious as to have something to say but feel like I have to "earn" what you're saying.
Julian Garcia
>people still feel like they have to "get" 2001 It's an entry level arthouse film. It's really not that complicated. Maybe Kubrick is just smarter than you. (and that's a good thing)
Elijah Fisher
>watch movie that got all the smart people awards >its not even black panther >its not even SJW feminist pandering >where are the interracial sex scenes >no strong anti-white political agenda spoonfed >story didn't even have any capes >soundtrack lacked any pop artist models and had no rap music >no advertisements for fastfood soda and shoes
what even is this piece of shit movie? did they even have 'KINO' back then? its not what gets forced on me and my kids every day at all! what the hell am I supposed to do with this?! its not guardians of the galaxy at all!
