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

In short, it's regarded highly because it's a Kubrick film. Essentially that means the movie was micromanaged and shot, and reshot until it was absolutely perfect. Kubrick just has this way with making stunning shots. The cinematography in this movie is just outrageously incredible. Every shot and angle has meaning, every scene is powerful and moving. In my mind (of the movies I've seen so far) the only movie to make better use of the camera as its own character is Citizen Kane. It's just an excellent demonstration of why I love Kubrick so f***ing much.
 
In short, it's regarded highly because it's a Kubrick film. Essentially that means the movie was micromanaged and shot, and reshot until it was absolutely perfect. Kubrick just has this way with making stunning shots. The cinematography in this movie is just outrageously incredible. Every shot and angle has meaning, every scene is powerful and moving. In my mind (of the movies I've seen so far) the only movie to make better use of the camera as its own character is Citizen Kane. It's just an excellent demonstration of why I love Kubrick so f***ing much.
Nobody in this thread would say that the cinematography was bad. The problem was that Kubrick sacrificed pacing and a coherent plot on the altar of creating meaningful, awesome-looking shots. The latter is partly Clarke's fault - the man was always much better at creating the feel of a science fiction novel than at writing an actual story arc - but it's hardly as though Kubrick made things any better.
 
I sincerely liked it. Sure, some scenes were maybe "too slow", but there was some charm in it, a something of mystic inspiration (especially when the apes scene, unforgetable).
 
What about a list of must-see slow paced movies:

-2001 (among many others by Kubrik)
-Solaris
-Dersu Uzala
-Barton Fink
-Aguirre the Wrath of God
-Medea (or any other of Passolini)
-Lost in Traslation
-Stalker
-Fargo
-Caro Diario
-The Exterminating Angel
...
 
Is that slow paced in relation to the car chase crowd ?
or slow in relation to the demands of the atmosphere to be created ?
(demands driven by the subject matter - not the car chase crowd)

And I hope that was Tarkovsky, not Soderbergh.
 
Not everyone likes the fast action crap churned out endlessly.
 
Not everyone likes the fast action crap churned out endlessly.

And it are comments like these why I'm increasingly beginning to hate admitting I like 2001.
 
And it are comments like these why I'm increasingly beginning to hate admitting I like 2001.

If you're getting all binary on me, I enjoyed the car chase in Blues Brothers.
 
Ironically the allegedly best car chase scene is in one of the slowest paced movies i have ever seen.
 
The movie however, is tedious, confusing, boring and overly slow-paced, not to mention it didn't even have an engaging plot.
That´s a pretty good description.
I´ve seen this movie once - and I remember being mostly confused and waiting for something to actually happen or for some sort of story arc to emerge.
Nobody in this thread would say that the cinematography was bad. The problem was that Kubrick sacrificed pacing and a coherent plot on the altar of creating meaningful, awesome-looking shots. The latter is partly Clarke's fault - the man was always much better at creating the feel of a science fiction novel than at writing an actual story arc - but it's hardly as though Kubrick made things any better.
Also this.
 
I attempted to watch 2001 once, but I got bored and switched it off. That evening I just wanted to watch a film and relax and I picked 2001 on a whim, so probably not the best choice to be fair.

That said, I have no real desire to try and watch it again.
 
If you're getting all binary on me, I enjoyed the car chase in Blues Brothers.

I'm also able to enjoy car chase scenes. It's like coke; Easy to take in for most of us right from the start, whereas movies like Solaris and 2001 are like coffee and beer: It may be disgusting at first, but you'll learn to appreciate it if you take your time.
 
I really disliked it.

I saw it once as a pre-teen, and hated it. But, I was young. I figured that I didn't 'get' it. So, I watched it again as a young adult, thinking I was more mature. I still hated it. I find it boring and nauseating.

So, I guess it's "eye of the beholder". I won't doubt that some people really, truly, like it. But not me.
 
I didn't like 2001 at all, but than again I don't like sci-fi in general. I really liked (most of) the other Kubirck films, though.

And it's not about the pace. There are great slow paced movies out there, like the aforementioned Dersu Uzala. Even Godfather part I is quite slow paced compared to modern movies, and IMO one of the very best films of all time.
 
The movie is slow but I think the pace works. The visuals are stunning and the scenes always payoff. Also to say it does not have a coherent plot is just untrue. The overall story of evolution is clear and you have enough time to sort out the details in the hours and days after viewing the film.
 
2001 is as interesting as watching paint dry and the ending is confusing as hell. You don’t know what happened! I felt somehow insulted by this ending, it was like a huge "Eff you!" to my logic. I could imagine the director saying "I can't believe you actually sat through the whole thing, sucker!" with a huge smirk on his face. 2001: A Space Odyssey simply felt like pretentious BS for the entire duration, which was made longer by interminable eons of walking and floating. It functions only as fodder for film snobs everywhere to discuss how much they "get" Kubrick.

Of course, we see the same trend in literature and poetry too, where snobbery is the norm and a means of showing superiority. It’s so pervasive and frustrating, that it’s more noble to take a stand on the opposite extreme and say: a turd sandwich is a turd sandwich, I don't care how the sophisticated ones consider it to be of high gastronomical value. It is really just a piece of sh*t!

Even Godfather part I is quite slow paced compared to modern movies, and IMO one of the very best films of all time.

Well, it didn't have 20 minutes of a space ship flying through space (and nothing else) with Strauss music playing in the background.
 
Yes, and the ape scene is still ******ed, regardless of its meaning or importance. At least I got some laugh out of this one, some other scenes in the movie isn't even funny.

How would you have shot it differently? I'm not really sure what about it you didn't like.
 
2001 is as interesting as watching paint dry and the ending is confusing as hell. You don’t know what happened!

Of course, we see the same trend in literature and poetry too, where snobbery is the norm and a means of showing superiority. It’s so pervasive and frustrating, that it’s more noble to take a stand on the opposite extreme and say: a turd sandwich is a turd sandwich, I don't care how the sophisticated ones consider it to be of high gastronomical value.



Well, it didn't have 20 minutes of a space ship flying through space (and nothing else) with Strauss music playing in the background.

Did someone lace the fondue ? So much bile...
 
2001 is like a surrealist painting: it might make no sense at all, but its still a work of art. (A masterpiece in this case, in my opinion).
Sure, I don't get art, the only one I like is... surrealist art, in fact, but regardless of the sense it might make to anybody, the movie is still incredibly well shot. And the apes scene is superb. I don't get how people don't get it.
 
2001 is like a surrealist painting: it might make no sense at all, but its still a work of art. (A masterpiece in this case, in my opinion).
Sure, I don't get art, the only one I like is... surrealist art, in fact, but regardless of the sense it might make to anybody, the movie is still incredibly well shot. And the apes scene is superb. I don't get how people don't get it.

It does make sense though.. but then again I have read 2001 and all the sequels: 2010, 2061, 3001, Time's Eye, and Sunstorm.. Still haven't read the conclusion (Firstborn), but am probably going to get to this soon.

2001 does stand on its own but you need to fill in some of the blanks with your own imagination.
 
Top Bottom