Why is 2001: A Space Odyssey such a highly regarded movie?

Dida

YHWH
Joined
Sep 11, 2003
Messages
3,434
I just saw this critically acclaimed sci-fi masterpiece last night with a bunch of friends and we all concluded this movie is cr*p. I must give the film some high regards for its musical score, carefully done space animation and cool special effect (amazing given that it was filed in the 70's).
The movie however, is tedious, confusing, boring and overly slow-paced, not to mention it didn't even have an engaging plot. The acting was awful. The best performance was actually by the computer HAL whereas all of the human characters were bland and uninteresting. I thought the first part with the apes was not only too long but also stupid. A bunch of apes jumping, shrieking around a monolith, yeah that's very profound! Very other scenes in the movie were extensively long and drawn-out. Who wants to spend 5 minutes seeing moon shuttle in transit or the guy going through star-gate (or wormhole)? Maybe the director was trying to communicate a sense of the grandeur and hugeness of space, but he failed to do so.
 
It is not for impatient people or who don't like sci-fi.
 
Well it's not as good as Dr. Strangelove.

Best bit is near the beginning when Leonard Rossiter appears!
 
HAL's death scene still gives me chills.

Pretty much, in short, you need to be under the influence of some sort of drug for the maximum enjoyment of the movie. It makes the last thirty minutes or so a religious experience of sorts.

way to spoil it. :mad:

I have yet to see this film as amazing as that sounds. Maybe one of these days I'll see it, although, now I know how it ends...
 
The movie however, is tedious, confusing, boring and overly slow-paced, not to mention it didn't even have an engaging plot. The acting was awful.

I have a similar critique of it. I've rarely been more bored watching a "classic" film.
 
I'll assume this is meant tongue-in-cheek and you forgot the smiley.

No as a general rule it works pretty well.

People I know who don't like sci-fi don't like this movie, and the people who like sci-fi like this movie.
 
Before anyone watches thus I advise them to first watch the YouTube of Jupiter And Beyond The Infinite scored to Pink Floyd's Echoes.
 
When I saw 2001: A Space Odyssey for the first time, I was riveted; I was practically in a state of unease for more or less the duration of the film.

At the risk of being considered a snob first class, I'd say you need to be in the right wavelength to appreciate the movie for what it is, or you won't like it.
 
If you find 2001 boring, you're not into film. If you're not looking to be engaged, not looking to think, then please, stick to Transformers.
 
No as a general rule it works pretty well.

People I know who don't like sci-fi don't like this movie, and the people who like sci-fi like this movie.

I pretty much like no movie that isn't post-late 70's. I have actively role played in immersive sci fi galaxies for almost 7 years now. But since I do not like this movie, therefore I don't like sci fi?

SEEMS LEGIT.
 
I pretty much like no movie that isn't post-late 70's. I have actively role played in immersive sci fi galaxies for almost 7 years now. But since I do not like this movie, therefore I don't like sci fi?

SEEMS LEGIT.

double_negative_rainbow.jpg


Your anecdote is nice. Mine is about my friends and family. :goodjob:
 
For many people, even for some "critics" slow paced movie = bad movie. I would say however that only bad movie = bad movie. So pace has nothing to do with it. Most current films are fast paced and are also total and absolute crap. I think people need to educate themselves to approach movies in a different way. In fact many of the all time best movies are really slow paced.
 
The seems legit line pretty much confirmed it. Or at least the need for fast gratification.
 
I prefer the book over the movie, but yeah.. the movie is very unconventional. I like it.

A bunch of apes jumping, shrieking around a monolith, yeah that's very profound!

Did you understand the importance of the scene?
 
I just saw this critically acclaimed sci-fi masterpiece last night with a bunch of friends and we all concluded this movie is cr*p. I must give the film some high regards for its musical score, carefully done space animation and cool special effect (amazing given that it was filed in the 70's).
The movie however, is tedious, confusing, boring and overly slow-paced, not to mention it didn't even have an engaging plot. The acting was awful. The best performance was actually by the computer HAL whereas all of the human characters were bland and uninteresting. I thought the first part with the apes was not only too long but also stupid. A bunch of apes jumping, shrieking around a monolith, yeah that's very profound! Very other scenes in the movie were extensively long and drawn-out. Who wants to spend 5 minutes seeing moon shuttle in transit or the guy going through star-gate (or wormhole)? Maybe the director was trying to communicate a sense of the grandeur and hugeness of space, but he failed to do so.

Well it is a movie about a book by Arthur C. Clarke who was considered a grand master of science fiction in his day. I liked the movie the first time I saw it.

Elements like pacing, SFX, etc.. change a bit from generation to generation, and consider the movie was released during the Apollo era, not Columbia, so footage of space travel would actually be pretty nifty and novel.
 
BTW wouldnt be nice to have a movie about "The Songs of Distant Earth"? Maybe with the Mike Oldfied album as soundtrack (and very slowly paced of course :p )
 
Back
Top Bottom