I just watched 2001: A Space Odyssey

[Wallydraigle]

I liked it, but I thought the end sucked.

 

[Sugadaddy]

<<

<< So that makes them better movies? I understood "Corky Romano" the first time I saw it but it sucked. Perhaps NOT being able to understand it by watching it once is a good thing... >>



Slow down there, punchy! Who said they are better movies? The person I was referring to said that because it was made 30 years ago, it may be harder to understand. >>




Nope, that's not what I meant.

I pointed out it was made 30 years ago so you can appreciate its technical side a little better. Of course it doesn't change anything to the story...

 

[Nemesis77]

<< Computer geeks don't get this movie!

Where do you think the computer's name came from?

HAL 9000
That's one letter before I, one letter before B, and one letter before M. >>



HAL has nothing to do with IBM, it's a coincidence, and nothing more. Clarke said that had he noticed that similarity, he would have changed the name. HAL stands for "Heuristic ALgorithm".

 

[pulse8]

<< I pointed out it was made 30 years ago so you can appreciate its technical side a little better. Of course it doesn't change anything to the story... >>



Well, you never mentioned in your post anything about the technical side in your post so I was taking that response to reflect what you were talking about.

 

[EpsiIon]

<< Once you have read and understood the book, the movie becomes far better and those "boring" sequences make sense. >>



THAT is exactly the reason the movie ABSOLUTELY SUCKS. A movie's storyline making sense should not be contingent upon whether or not one has read the book. And saying it's good because it "raises questions" is absolute garbage. THE BOOK raises questions. The MOVIE forces you to read the book just so you'll have some idea of what all that crap was about. Since my girlfriend enoyed the books, she explained it to me a bit, and this made me hate the movie even more. It's obvious that you can't possibly understand what's going on purely from the movie.

This movie was the first case of the dreaded "all special effects, no coherent storyline." It's ironic that people loved it so much and yet bash the movies of today that do the same thing. Can't we at least be consistent?

notfred wrote:


<< That movie sucked, I think you have to be on acid to like it. Either that, or you have to pretend you like it cause everyone else does. It was the longest peice of crap I ever watched. >>



I can't agree more.

Epsilon

 

[Jfur]

I wonder if the people who hate 2001 like movies like Armageddon, where each scence lasts 30 seconds and things are costrantly blowing up?? Perhaps 2001 is meant for "older" attention spans

 

[Wallydraigle]

<< This movie was the first case of the dreaded "all special effects, no coherent storyline." It's ironic that people loved it so much and yet bash the movies of today that do the same thing. Can't we at least be consistent? >>



It depends on whether the publicist can pawn it off as being "artsy" or not. If a movie makes no sense but is viewed as artsy, then it's fashionable to like it.