Author Topic: 2001: A Space Odyssey  (Read 3355 times)

you read ythe book about 2001? He pointed that out in there.

I thought HAL = Heuristic ALgorithmic.
At least thats what arthur C clarke said.

I'm not sure why, but when I rented the DVD it wouldn't let me fast forward at all so I got stuck watching that whole caveman montage for 20 minutes which bored me to tears.

After that there was some guy talking to another guy in a space station. After that I just got too bored and quit. I've heard it's a great movie, but the director should have considering a little thing called "pacing".
The pacing was just fine. Just people today have a rather short attention span and can't appreciate...hey a shiny quarter!  :cookieMonster:

One of my favorite movies.

The pacing was just fine. Just people today have a rather short attention span and can't appreciate...hey a shiny quarter!  :cookieMonster:

The pacing wasn't fine. They spent too long on a simple subject that could have been expressed in half the time.

Movies shouldn't be about how much they can cram in your throat in as little time as possible.

The film is perfect, and so is the book.

I just do not get why there is a fetus in space with giant evolution inducing rocks.

I just do not get why there is a fetus in space with giant evolution inducing rocks.
I know, dude

I just do not get why there is a fetus in space with giant evolution inducing rocks.
Well, the monolith evolved Bowman into an incorporeal, godlike being, which is the "fetus in space". (It's called the Star Child in the movie though :D)

:O Right when I clicked to this topic "Also Sprach Zarathrustra" came onto my ipod.
Fot those who don't know the song, linkage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrHRWGsCfN0

Forgive me for not buying into the mindless nostalgia.

It's true that you shouldn't "cram" your movies plot and message into a short film, but it is also true that the director and the producers shouldn't become too self indulgent with the length of the film. Padding the length of a movie is worse, to me, than cramming it into a bearable piece of entertainment.

Even if your movie does have a deep meaning behind it, that is no excuse for ignoring some of the most fundamental rules of entertaining media.

Some people just enjoy things that are boring to others.

Reactor worker. This moving was not so much on the plot line but as it was to the pioneering of Science fiction into the movie theaters. This movie is widely considered the first major scifi movie because of it's high use of effects such as the scene when they docked into the space station. I would give it an 8/10 for what it was shooting for but a 5/10 overall. Boring and long it is, but very innovate for it's time.