Jump to content

GOAT: Polarizing Movie Discussion Part 2: 2001: A Space Odyssey


JohnnyBlaze
 Share

2001: A Space Odyssey  

18 members have voted

  1. 1. Is 2001: A Space Odyssey the Greatest Movie of All Time?

    • Yes, absolutely. It's influence is far reaching.
    • It might be. It deserves to be mentioned in the discussion of GOAT anyway.
    • Probably not. But I did enjoy it to some degree at least.
    • Definitely not. There's very little there that's worthy of praise. That black monolith might as well have been a bottle of sleeping pills because that movie put me to....zzzzz....
    • I've never seen it. But I will check it out now or else JohnnyBlaze will burn my stomach with flames that launch from his eye sockets.
      0
  2. 2. Is the ending still unclear even after all these years?

    • No, I'm a clever little prehistoric monkeyian. I got it the first time.
    • I'm good...I think. I've read different interpretations online before and just use whichever one makes me look the sexiest.
    • I was cruising right along in all my comprehension glory until all those colorful swirly things started to do that vortex job.
    • All I know is that there are several images in the movie that Rush has used. That's all that matters.
      0
    • I didn't see it so I'm voting for Nicole Kidman naked in Eyes Wide Shut.
      0
    • I didn't see it either but I'm not interested in Kidman nude so I better check it out or else JB's eyes will burn me again.
      0


Recommended Posts

It might be a little dated now but we used to go see it at the midnight movies back in early 80s and really be amazed at the quality of effects for a movie over 10 years old and enjoyed the effort of making a film like this.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it was a big deal back when it came out. It also has influenced a lot of movies over the years but as far as being great? Hard to say. I think it's boring as heck, personally.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it was a big deal back when it came out. It also has influenced a lot of movies over the years but as far as being great? Hard to say. I think it's boring as heck, personally.

It reminds me of full metal jacket in that it plays like 2 movies attached together. For this one I prefer the first Half to 3/4 of the movie over the psychedelic ending.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the time it was ground breaking. I even went on a guy I didn't care for just cuz he had a car (this was in college) and offered to drive me the hour to see it. It was worth it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are those who say Kubrick used the FX of this canvas to show how he helped NASA (and the "they's") fake the Moon Landings. There are also rumors that "The Shining" is laced with clues confirming the same.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly think it's one of the most boring movies ever made.

 

But that doesn't take away the worthiness of it all. It is what it is and for those who enjoy it, woop woop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. it bored me out of my skull but i oddly respect it.

 

Mick

Agreed. It left a very important mark on cinema

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, it is definitely in the discussion for greatest of all time ... I love everything about it - the pace, the visuals, the isolation ...

 

And the reason I clicked "got it the first time" is only because I know what it meant to me .. Not sure if that is what Kubrick intended, or how others feel, but the ending struck me as pretty powerful

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not the best ever, but it is beautiful, powerful, thought-provoking, and pioneering. Definitely one of the best ever.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kubrick made far better movies IMO. But it's still a great film and a pinnacle one in his career. It's fair to put it in contention for GOAT I think. Edited by PolarizeMe
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The meat of the movie which was the trip to inspect the obelisk and the Hal computer system malfunction could really be turned into a great remake w/o the apes and the now over the top psychedelic aspects of the ending while still making a statement about man's journey. I think it ripe for a remake/reboot.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/05/18/07/4078B58F00000578-4517450-image-m-131_1495088791454.jpg

 

Behind The Movies: Where Are They Now ?

 

http://www.cinedogs.gr/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/2001-3.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The meat of the movie which was the trip to inspect the obelisk and the Hal computer system malfunction could really be turned into a great remake w/o the apes and the now over the top psychedelic aspects of the ending while still making a statement about man's journey. I think it ripe for a remake/reboot.

 

I definitely wouldn't want a remake.

That prehistoric man sequence is essential in order to show the role of the obelisk in the next big leap in history.

 

I haven't read any of Arthur C. Clarke's books but IF they were going to do anything, the best way would be to do the second sequel...

2061: Odyssey Three.

 

A Kubrick movie should never be remade. However, moving on and telling your own story is another thing entirely. Stanley had no issue with 2010 being made. BUT after 2001 was completed (and way before 2010 was even a thought) he had all props, sets, and unused scenes destroyed so that nobody could use them. He didn't want them to be exploited.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The meat of the movie which was the trip to inspect the obelisk and the Hal computer system malfunction could really be turned into a great remake w/o the apes and the now over the top psychedelic aspects of the ending while still making a statement about man's journey. I think it ripe for a remake/reboot.

 

I definitely wouldn't want a remake.

That prehistoric man sequence is essential in order to show the role of the obelisk in the next big leap in history.

 

I haven't read any of Arthur C. Clarke's books but IF they were going to do anything, the best way would be to do the second sequel...

2061: Odyssey Three.

 

A Kubrick movie should never be remade. However, moving on and telling your own story is another thing entirely. Stanley had no issue with 2010 being made. BUT after 2001 was completed (and way before 2010 was even a thought) he had all props, sets, and unused scenes destroyed so that nobody could use them. He didn't want them to be exploited.

 

Maybe it's just that AncientWays didn't like Hal's accent

 

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The meat of the movie which was the trip to inspect the obelisk and the Hal computer system malfunction could really be turned into a great remake w/o the apes and the now over the top psychedelic aspects of the ending while still making a statement about man's journey. I think it ripe for a remake/reboot.

 

I definitely wouldn't want a remake.

That prehistoric man sequence is essential in order to show the role of the obelisk in the next big leap in history.

 

I haven't read any of Arthur C. Clarke's books but IF they were going to do anything, the best way would be to do the second sequel...

2061: Odyssey Three.

 

A Kubrick movie should never be remade. However, moving on and telling your own story is another thing entirely. Stanley had no issue with 2010 being made. BUT after 2001 was completed (and way before 2010 was even a thought) he had all props, sets, and unused scenes destroyed so that nobody could use them. He didn't want them to be exploited.

 

Maybe it's just that AncientWays didn't like Hal's accent

 

;)

 

I'm scared James Cameron would spend a billion dollars on a remake that would suck. He'd use the hair from deceased chimpanzees for a prehistoric man costume which would lead to fans saying how brilliant he is. Still (and somehow), he'd make 500 billion dollars profit.

 

I'm scared a Christopher Nolan remake would have Dave Bowman suspended on wires and floating around for an hour doing nothing. Some uninspired plot twist ending would be inserted and many would call THAT brilliant. And that too would make 500

billion dollars profit.

 

So basically, I don't want it but I imagine a remake is somewhere down the road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The meat of the movie which was the trip to inspect the obelisk and the Hal computer system malfunction could really be turned into a great remake w/o the apes and the now over the top psychedelic aspects of the ending while still making a statement about man's journey. I think it ripe for a remake/reboot.

 

I definitely wouldn't want a remake.

That prehistoric man sequence is essential in order to show the role of the obelisk in the next big leap in history.

 

I haven't read any of Arthur C. Clarke's books but IF they were going to do anything, the best way would be to do the second sequel...

2061: Odyssey Three.

 

A Kubrick movie should never be remade. However, moving on and telling your own story is another thing entirely. Stanley had no issue with 2010 being made. BUT after 2001 was completed (and way before 2010 was even a thought) he had all props, sets, and unused scenes destroyed so that nobody could use them. He didn't want them to be exploited.

 

Maybe it's just that AncientWays didn't like Hal's accent

 

;)

Time to let it go

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The meat of the movie which was the trip to inspect the obelisk and the Hal computer system malfunction could really be turned into a great remake w/o the apes and the now over the top psychedelic aspects of the ending while still making a statement about man's journey. I think it ripe for a remake/reboot.

 

I definitely wouldn't want a remake.

That prehistoric man sequence is essential in order to show the role of the obelisk in the next big leap in history.

 

I haven't read any of Arthur C. Clarke's books but IF they were going to do anything, the best way would be to do the second sequel...

2061: Odyssey Three.

 

A Kubrick movie should never be remade. However, moving on and telling your own story is another thing entirely. Stanley had no issue with 2010 being made. BUT after 2001 was completed (and way before 2010 was even a thought) he had all props, sets, and unused scenes destroyed so that nobody could use them. He didn't want them to be exploited.

 

Maybe it's just that AncientWays didn't like Hal's accent

 

;)

 

I'm scared James Cameron would spend a billion dollars on a remake that would suck. He'd use the hair from deceased chimpanzees for a prehistoric man costume which would lead to fans saying how brilliant he is. Still (and somehow), he'd make 500 billion dollars profit.

 

I'm scared a Christopher Nolan remake would have Dave Bowman suspended on wires and floating around for an hour doing nothing. Some uninspired plot twist ending would be inserted and many would call THAT brilliant. And that too would make 500

billion dollars profit.

 

So basically, I don't want it but I imagine a remake is somewhere down the road.

I can understand your point Johnny. I wouldn't want Cameron to do it but someone that would respect it. I see a chance to combine the horror and sci fi aspect together to make it a bit more intense a la alien. Hal is scary. Scarier than they made him in the original.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...