I'll stick with my belief that Kubrick's and Clarke's work should be taken separately, but I'll keep in mind your insistence when I make my reconsideration over reading the novels. I'm also not reading the RAMA sequels due to a post on Slashdot that proffered the notion that the co-author's influence destroyed the integrity of the series and they kinda suck, and am not watching the latter half of the third season plus the fourth and the fifth seasons as well of Sliders for similar reasons. Managed to overcome my distaste at the removal of the Captain after the first season of Babylon 5, so all hope is not lost. Now to more pacing.
I'll stick with my belief that Kubrick's and Clarke's work should be taken separately, but I'll keep in mind your insistence when I make my reconsideration over reading the novels. I'm also not reading the RAMA sequels due to a post on Slashdot that proffered the notion that the co-author's influence destroyed the integrity of the series and they kinda suck, and am not watching the latter half of the third season plus the fourth and the fifth seasons as well of Sliders for similar reasons. Managed to overcome my distaste at the removal of the Captain after the first season of Babylon 5, so all hope is not lost. Now to more pacing.
Originally posted by: dennilfloss
You should have seen that movie at the theatre.
I take it that you, as a fellow Ottawan, did not pass up the occasion? Had I attended I could now truthfully say I regret nothing.
It's been a while since I saw it, but I am almost positive HAL received conflicting orders in the movie as well. As to what actually caused its eventual madness, that is left up to the viewer, as it should be. But I personally believe it was largely due to the conflicting orders.
I felt that the book was not really even worth reading once I finished it. I like Clarke as an author but I feel the Rama series are a much wiser investment of time. The film is fairly easy to follow and is a much more complete, artistic, and overall rewarding portrayal of the story. What you make of the very end is up to you, but I do not remember having any questions about the rest of the film.
Many of the "slow" scenes are meant to show us the wonder of what space travel and life in space would really be like. To this day I still believe they are the most accurate visions of what that might be like.
The fountain may share a few themes and attributes but it is a much different movie. It has a certain rhythym to it and a very directed storyline. 2001 is a lot more lingering and awestruck by what is happening in the film. The fountain is not so much interested in how incredible the things are that happen. It is much more of an allegorical tale.
HAL is among the great villans in cinematic history. So many films directly stole from or owe much to HAL.
I felt that the book was not really even worth reading once I finished it. I like Clarke as an author but I feel the Rama series are a much wiser investment of time. The film is fairly easy to follow and is a much more complete, artistic, and overall rewarding portrayal of the story. What you make of the very end is up to you, but I do not remember having any questions about the rest of the film.
Many of the "slow" scenes are meant to show us the wonder of what space travel and life in space would really be like. To this day I still believe they are the most accurate visions of what that might be like.
The fountain may share a few themes and attributes but it is a much different movie. It has a certain rhythym to it and a very directed storyline. 2001 is a lot more lingering and awestruck by what is happening in the film. The fountain is not so much interested in how incredible the things are that happen. It is much more of an allegorical tale.
HAL is among the great villans in cinematic history. So many films directly stole from or owe much to HAL.
Haha yeah, at least I finally "get" that episode in The Simpsons where the house is a robot with Pierce Brosnan's voice, or where that song came from that Bender sings to the ship in Futurama. Many, many references that I really thought were just original jokes
Err.... what on Earth are you talking about? Are you referring to when I said I don't have time to read the book? Well, it's not exactly a high priority, and considering I'm currently studying mathematics, physics, astronomy and philosophy at university, and I'm also half way through two other books (Not Even Wrong by Peter Woit and End of Faith by Sam Harris) I really don't have time between other readings, studying and socialising to read the book. If it were a priority I would make the time, but it isn't.
I don't know why I bother even responding to your nonsense Vic, you have to be the most egotistical, arrogant person on the internet. Problem is you're almost always wrong.
congratulations! you don't like movies!
from now on, you can save yourself the $5 and watch Fox all night.
Originally posted by: lozina
"getting" 2001 and enjoying it is a good gauge of a person's intelligence.
From this point on, every member of ATOT both gets it and enjoys it to levels never reached before.
It is an excellent movie for its time. Lacks action but has mystique. Most movies today involving space have a lot more continuous action. Watch the second film in the series 2010 and the first movie will make more sense and you will appreciate it more. So, sorry have to disagree it is a good film.
THIS ISN'T SPACE!
THIS IS SPARTAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
also... my uber facemelting priest in WOW is named Hal.
go me.
- Oct 10, 1999
- 31,352
- 12,844
- 136
read the book "The Lost Worlds of 2001". There, everything is explained in painful detail: the origin of the story, the idea of the movie, the finishing of the novel, the movie's limitations and the whole point of both.
I like how everyone acting like they REALLY understand this move hasn't even asnwered my questions about what its supposed to me. IF you understand the movie why don't you fill the rest of the people in here so maybe they can "get" it too.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
Thanks. I was talking about the fact that you devoted 2 hours of your precious time to watch a highly-rated, award-winning movie and you wasted that time by not slowing down enough to actually enjoy it and appreciate it. All because it didn't have mindless non-stop action and explosions.
HeroOfPellinor
Lifer
- Dec 27, 2001
- 11,272
- 1
- 0
"to ?explain? a Beethoven symphony would be to emasculate it by erecting an artificial barrier between conception and appreciation."
First you'll have to explain what you DIDN'T get. Otherwise we have no idea what you are looking for. No one is going to post a line by line analysis of the script or shot by shot analysis of the film itself.
So wait a second... Because I have a different taste in movies to you, I'm "mindless" and part of the "instant gratification" generation? Look ut Vic, your pretension is showing. Again.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
Too bad that's not at all what I meant. This has nothing to do with "taste." It has to do with running around like a chicken with its head cut off. Of course you don't have any time for anything.
I like how you keep calling me "pretentious." A lovely defense mechanism you have there. Surely you're not in denial.
- Oct 10, 1999
- 31,352
- 12,844
- 136
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter