 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
May 11, 2008 - 2:04 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
JSWalsh
(Member)
|
It would have been interesting to see Kubrick make another futuristic science fiction as director. A.I. certainly bears his stamp to an extent, but I never cared for it the way some do--it's a cliche, but it really does seem to have the worst traits of both Spielberg and Kubrick in evidence.
For all my decreased love for the movie, I don't get the idea that it looks dated. The effects still impress in this age of CGI. I don't find the effects in, say, the last couple of Star Trek movies to be believable at all--they look like special effects. The 2001 effects look like real spaceships--not that fakey shakey-cam crap that's an attempt to make movies resemble bad video footage. Think of the shots of the Discovery--magnificent. The silence is SO effective, too. Most space shots in the CGI era just don't seem to be able to stand up to silence and music alone--the audience needs the WHOOOSH!
A couple of my students who are very into science really enjoyed 2001 (I asked the other morning), so it's not just a matter of "the kids these days, they need the WHOOOSH!"). When audiences are respected, they will appreciate it. Not all viewers, of course, but when has that ever been so?
As to nuts score's comment, 2001 surely has been one of the most written-about movies ever, so it's no surprise we can't come up with anything new! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
May 11, 2008 - 4:15 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Cooper
(Member)
|
And Kubrick's wise avoidance of politics (which Peter Hyams was incapable of doing in "2010") in the sequences between Floyd and the Russians, also keeps the film from being dated in a "Cold War is still going on" way.
Yep, a pretty tiresome part of 2010: To get out there in deep space for something way-existential...and to have it all brought down to earth again for some tepid, ground-based drama. With Kubrick, man, we were out there. Way, way out there...
And Eric (pardon the mini thread hi-jack): You might be intrigued by what Galactica's doing with religion at the moment (only the mildest conceptual spoilers follow)...approaching the basis of it as secular sci-fi; is there a cosmic power? What's its nature? Drama ensues as different doctrines either reliably portray this thing, or--potentially--get it very, very wrong...and that's if there's anything there at all... It's all very speculative and intriguing, and I haven't seen the subject dealt with this way before. It's about religion, not an advancement of it...in a universe where ultimate truths are only half-heard, misunderstood outright or just plain made up...while the glimmer of something twinkles in the dark...or doesn't. I think Kubrick would've liked this show. I should start a new thread about this...
--Coop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
May 13, 2008 - 6:19 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
antipodean
(Member)
|
I have a 2001 story.
A few years ago, a local cinema was doing a one-night only screening of 2001, which I got tickets to because I've never watched it on the big screen. As a bonus, two of the stars (Keir Dullea and Gary Lockwood) made an appearance before the main screening, holding an autograph session.
My daughter, rather inconveniently, chose that very morning to be born. Somehow I finally managed to get away from the hospital at about 4pm (bearing in mind I was still in my work clothes which I had been wearing for two days, at that point), get home to shower, change, then rush over to the cinema for the signing.
I managed to get both of them to sign a 2001 soundtrack CD for me, as well as a poster (in the horizontal European style) to my daughter - so now she has a 2001: A Space Odyssey poster signed *and* dated to her. (Mr Lockwood also kindly signed one of his Star Trek 8x10 glossies to her as well, what with it being her birthday and all.) I got back to the hospital at about 7pm.
I really hope she likes the film when she grows up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
