Active Now

Malizz
Honey Dew
Discussion » Statements » Rosie's Corner » Any "2001: A Space Odyssey" fans out there? I saw it for the first time yesterday. Did you love it?
RosieG

Any "2001: A Space Odyssey" fans out there? I saw it for the first time yesterday. Did you love it?

Thumbnail sketch of the storyline in my own words

A pilot gets shanghied to a different dimension and lives out his life alone with a "companion" which is a very large black object who seems to provide all his needs until he dies. I see the guy eating but no kitchen no staff no prepping no servants.

The purpose of the mission was kept from him. That is why I said he was shanghied.

Along the way he has to "kill" a computer named HAL who refuses to do what he is told so HAL has to go


The background music is oppressive omnipresent annoying distracting
The movie was long boring pretentious and artsy fartsy to the max

I have no idea what I was supposed to take away from it that would be of any value or worth my time
I GOOGLED it hoping GOOGLE could unconfuse me and well you can see that did not help me.

Now of course there  very likely could be another reason why I am intensely disappointed.

I'm simply not intelligent enough to have grasped the meaning. It was over my head. SWOOSH!

I freely admit that could be what happened. So what did you take away from it? Were you bored? Did the music become aggravating?

Or were you entranced mesmerized with each moment and you think it is one of the best movies you've ever seen? I'm open to that.  What was your takeaway that is memorable and unforgettable?

Now I await the verdict. Fingers crossed I'm not a dummy here. But if I am well there ya go! :)

Posted - May 4, 2020
Tags : None

Responses


  • 6023
    Even when I first saw it I was disappointed in the ending.
    But it's what you get with a Stanley Kubrick/Arthur Clarke film based on a short story that deals with existentialism, human evolution, technology, artificial intelligence, and extraterrestrial life.  Especially considering it is from a worldview in 1968.

    When looked at as coming out years before the original StarWars (1977) ... the technology of the film is amazing.
    It may not be up to the level of StarWars - but is far beyond the technology level of Flash Gordon (1980).
    Which is another part of why it has a "cult" following, I guess.
      May 4, 2020 7:43 AM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    But what I wrote...my thumbnail sketch. Is that all it was Walt? If it attempted to embrace all you said then it was far too ambitious and for me personally missed the mark. So much of it tediously boring. That background music kept interfering. Background music is supposed to ENHANCE not DROWN OUT! Thank you for your helpful reply. So I'm not a dummy. It just isn't my cuppa tea. Fer shure! :) Happy Monday! :) This post was edited by RosieG at May 4, 2020 9:36 AM MDT
      May 4, 2020 7:54 AM MDT
    0

  • 6023
    I think your summary could be correct.

    I agree that the movie was too ambitious in that it tried to do too many things, in the time limit of movies.

    The prequel movie was supposed to explain that the black obelisk was an alien artifact that was responsible for mankind's evolution.
    And the spaceship was heading out to try and meet with the aliens.
    So when he is shown living in the white area ... he supposedly ascended to a higher level of existence.
    (at least, that's my recollection)
      May 4, 2020 9:24 AM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    He aged. He got old alone. He ate alone. He lived alone. Whatever knowledge he attained died with him. He did not report back to anyone. Of what use was the trip without feedback? I just thought the whole thing was a big morass. Fuzzy confusing directionless but framed to look as if it were profound moving and meaningful. I guess that style isn't anything to which I respond well. When I said artsy fartsy that's what I meant. So anxious to seem absolutely fantastic they overplay overdo and as a result underperform. I appreciate your chatting with me about it Walt. The only award it won was for special effects. Computer graphics is fantastic. They did it earlier and if the picture had been deserving of it I'd have enjoyed it more. But it reached for the esoteric and it lost me. We carry on as best we can! Hope all is well with you and yours and also in your state! :)
      May 4, 2020 9:34 AM MDT
    0

  • 6023
    I can't watch it because it goes too slow, for me.

    LOL - if a movie did the whole "HAL battle" scenes today, it would take like 5 minutes.

      May 4, 2020 9:46 AM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    I fast forwarded it a lot. Scenes that dragged on FOREVER to the music as a pen floats in the air to music! Geez. Or all the iterations of apes. You've seen one you've seen 'em all. Get on with it. Move along. Quit dawdling and milking it. It was really irksome. SIGH. Too slow is an understatement. They SLOWED IT DOWN AND STRETCHED IT OUT TO MAKE IT PROFOUNDLY MOVING. It worked the opposite for me. I don't like being manipulated or strung along. If I am made to wait for something it had better be worth it! Patient I am not. The movie would have been better in an hour TV show. Cut down all the clutter. Streamline it. Thanks Walt! :)
      May 4, 2020 9:52 AM MDT
    0

  • 1441
    i watched it maybe two or three times overall, and it was really great. althought i didnt catched the ending too . 

    but really well made for a movie from the 60s.
      May 4, 2020 7:48 AM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    Is my thumbnail sketch accurate franc? Is what I wrote what you got out of it? It just irritated the heck out of me because I think they overreached overstretched and it ended up overblown and overwrought.

    It is a small story. They blew it up to make it grander bigger. I think it could have been done in a way that made it more relatable and coherent. Oh well. Thank you for your reply and Happy Monday. How are you and your family doing? Fine I hope! :)
      May 4, 2020 7:57 AM MDT
    1

  • 10694
    Sounds like you got more out of it that I did. 

    Now, I love science fiction movies - especially ones that involve space and/or time (none of that horror crap they try to pass off as science fiction).  Even so, I find 2001 to be nothing more than a semi-psychedelic snoozefest.  Were the writers on LSD?   To be fair, I've watched the movie several times over the years, trying to give it a chance.  Several times it put me to sleep (it's over 2-1/2 hours long).  I'll admit that I was intrigued by HAL 9000, but even that fell short (was he on Valium?).  The movie's lack of dialog and background sound (I know, no sound in space) left nothing to hold the attention (keep me awake).  The classical music soundtrack was a nice touch at first, but it was overly loud (especially Requiem) and quickly lost its appeal.  It was also exceedingly slow.  I guess I prefer movies with a bit more action (I don't mean spaceship fights).  I rate it 2 stars **

    The sequel to 2001, 2010 (released 16 years later in 1984), was supposed to explain the first movie (2001).  It did not.  Although it did have a bit more action, it was a forgettable movie.







    2010
      May 4, 2020 10:25 AM MDT
    0