1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

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

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Dida, Feb 12, 2012.

  1. Earthling

    Earthling Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2008
    Messages:
    8,518
    It's understandable to not like 2001, even within the context of other science fiction.

    At the same time folks like contre are right that almost the entirety of criticism you hear is just people being people who don't appreciate cinema techniques and its history and would probably find any old movies boring. If you want to dismiss any sort of "classic" work as boring and terrible in the modern day then you at least know what you're doing, and 2001 is then not unique at all compared to any old movie you could choose to complain about. I think you could say objectively that 2001 still holds up far better than many others - something like Gone with the Wind is awful racist trash by modern sensibilities though is viewed as a "classic." As for the first part, disliking the various science fiction elements presented in the movie, there are acceptable other opinions:

    Solaris is a better film because it's the only visionary movie unfettered by corrupt capitalist influences.

    You prefer some other abstract science fiction movie (typically Blade Runner) because you strongly prefer a specific subgenre (e.g. cyberpunk)

    Any other opinion: You don't get sci fi.
     
  2. Atlas14

    Atlas14 "Sophomoric Troll Master"

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    7,502
    Location:
    Maryland
    Someone mentioned earlier that it's best watched while consuming/using some sort of drug, even if it's just alcohol.

    But if you didn't like the ape/monolith part, you obviously didn't fully "get it". That's my guess anyway.
     
  3. jtb1127

    jtb1127 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2011
    Messages:
    2,498
    Location:
    Arlington, Virginia
    Your inability to be entertained by that movie does not mean it didn't entertain the millions of people (including a lot of people on this forum) who were entertained by it. Furthermore, there are more purposes to a film besides entertainment. I think, and I'm certain a great many movie lovers would agree, that films should appreciated in the same respect as books. If you thought A Tale of Two Cities was boring does that mean it is a bad book? No, it merely demonstrates your incapacity to appreciate good literature. Likewise, this thread does the same for movies. Adding on to "movies are good if they entertain" rebuttle, is Transformers 2 a good movie because the explosions are entertaining? No. Again, I thought 2001 was very entertaining so it passes both tests.
     
  4. Joecoolyo

    Joecoolyo 99% Lightspeed

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,908
    Location:
    茨城県
    Hell, even the special effects are damn good. I only watched the movie a year ago, and I was stunned by how good it looked.

    Especially for a movie made that long ago.
     
  5. Tahuti

    Tahuti Writing Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2005
    Messages:
    9,492
    Gender:
    Male
    Yeah, Schindler's List is a real popcorn flick...
     
  6. Quackers

    Quackers The Frog

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2008
    Messages:
    10,282
    Location:
    Great Britain
    I definitely take stock with what the viewer puts in.
    The first time I watched it, I had read the book and was for a few months fascinated by SCI-FI and space and all that kind of thing - so when I watched it I thought it was an incredible film.
    The second time I watched it, I could not muster the interest nor the excitement which held me throughout the first viewing and by the time I got to the second part of the film I was incredibly bored (i was with a hot woman who bought it for me, true story) so that may have distracted me! However! I did feel quite bored by the end of the film.

    I think one of the crucial lessons to learn for a proper viewing of a film on a critical level is to focus and properly immerse yourself in it. If you still dislike it after that, it's fine.

    1st viewing vs 2nd viewing = I think the film is excellent overall and encourage anybody to see it.
     
  7. emzie

    emzie wicked witch of the North

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Messages:
    20,601
    Location:
    Ottawa, Ontario
    For starters, no. Film is an art medium. Sure it can be entertaining, like LMFAO might be entertaining to some. But just because someone finds LMFAO entertaining and doesn't find Bach entertaining doesn't make Bach bad.

    Second, the fact that you don't think film can be anything but entertainment explains why you hate 2001. You have been conditioned by modern film that is special-effects driven, that doesn't engage, that doesn't require any introspection. A film that requires thinking will be disappointing for you. That doesn't make it bad, it's just not your thing. Stick to Michael Bay or Roland Emmerich.
     
  8. rugbyLEAGUEfan

    rugbyLEAGUEfan Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    Messages:
    5,290
    Location:
    sydney australia
    How about the sequel with the granite jawed Roy Scheider ?
     
  9. Old Hippy

    Old Hippy Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    Messages:
    3,407
    considering Kubrick made it in 1968, its cinematic history of the finest, even NASA thought it good ... they chose him to make their moon landing movies if i recall

    for those that say it useless ...well just name a better 1968 film
    there are classics of their time Seven Samurai 1954, good bad and ugly 1966(whole franchise) even 8 1/2, 1963.... these films have an influence that continues to this day regularly appearing on directors greatest film lists
     
  10. MagisterCultuum

    MagisterCultuum Great Sage

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2007
    Messages:
    16,062
    Location:
    Kael's head
    ******** technically means slowed, delayed, hindered, or impeded. The ape scene certainly is slow and hinders the rate at which the plot can develop.
     
  11. Berzerker

    Berzerker Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    17,077
    Location:
    the golf course
    Planet of the Apes

    imo anyway
     
  12. Old Hippy

    Old Hippy Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    Messages:
    3,407
    i should have done a search first... :goodjob:

    personally I'm inclined to go the other way, but its close...
     
  13. Dida

    Dida YHWH

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2003
    Messages:
    3,425
    It is not exactly fair to compare 2001 with A Tale of Two Cities. The later has a coherent plot, make some sense and is not boring as hell. I realize something for what it is, you however, may continue to ride your high horse and enjoy eating your turd sandwich, as surely you consider it to be of high gastronomical value. Anyone who can't appreciate turd sandwich surely don't appreciate fine food, they are just ignorant and prefer ordinary stuff like cheeseburger.

    The first role of all commercially produced films like 2001 is to entertain its audiences. If it can do so in an intellectual and artful way, all the best. But the most basic requirement is that it entertains its audiences.
     
  14. Ramius75

    Ramius75 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 5, 2003
    Messages:
    6,218
    Location:
    Sing City
    I can only remember the scene from the History of the world part 1....
     
  15. RobAnybody

    RobAnybody Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2009
    Messages:
    893
    This is such an annoying argument. People can like more than one thing. I like Transformers, Memento, Blazing Saddles, Hoosiers, X-Men, Labyrinth, Unforgiven, Toy Story, & Poison Ivy 2 (but not so much Poison Ivy), among others. That's quite a cross-section of genres, & I don't think I'm alone in that. Some even require thinking.

    All that said, outside of the HAL parts, which are interesting, 2001 has a lot of long, slow boring parts then tries too hard & gets pretentious at the end.
     
  16. aelf

    aelf Ashen One

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Messages:
    16,308
    Location:
    Tir ná Lia
    I'm curious as to what you're basing this claim on.
     
  17. Ajidica

    Ajidica High Quality Person

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2006
    Messages:
    19,101
    2001 is an excellent movie, but half of the scenes are slow.
    It is really a case of whether you get blown away by the scope or bogged down in the details.
     
  18. Narz

    Narz keeping it real

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2002
    Messages:
    26,941
    Location:
    St. Petersburg, Florida
    I'm into sci-fi and film in general. I thought 2001 was a bit overrated though. It was definitely unique but I wasn't particularly moved by it. A few weeks later only a few wisps of what the heck it was about remained, kind of like a dream.

    I find the whole "if you don't share my preference you don't like/know x genre" kind of pretentious btw.

    I'm not Dida but again, you're judging one preference & basically saying anyone who doesn't appreciate this film the way you do has superficial taste.

    I really enjoyed many slow films, Dersu Uzala for one (which my GF found too slow/dull to watch), if I think of some others I'll post them.
     
  19. bhsup

    bhsup Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    Messages:
    30,387
    That's probably the best explanation/critique of this movie I've ever read. Nailed it pretty much perfectly.
     
  20. Ramius75

    Ramius75 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 5, 2003
    Messages:
    6,218
    Location:
    Sing City
    i actually like that more than 2001.
     

Share This Page