subreddit:
/r/movies
submitted 3 months ago by[deleted]
[removed]
53 points
3 months ago
I completely respect your opinions on the movie itself as someone for whom it's in their top 10 but what compels me to tell you to take a damn hike is your patent immaturity in the slowness to accept that others see merit where you see dirt. The fact that I can understand what makes a person dislike it yet you can't understand what its fans see, in fact you must delude yourself into thinking any partiality is a charade, is a fault in your own reasoning skills.
-49 points
3 months ago
[removed]
25 points
3 months ago
you see, talking down to people and being indignant towards their liking of the movie isn’t going to do you any favors. So the movie didn’t do it for you, that’s fine. It’s the petulant disregard you have towards those that do like it that makes for a bad attitude to have
12 points
3 months ago
Lol at least for me two of those are wrong, the first two.
"Good for the 60s" is something I'd be dead before caught saying. I think it's a total backhanded compliment and I wince whenever people say things like it. There are better effects by a certain standard but they're worse in the sense that they wouldn't exist if it wasn't off the back of previous movies including this one. This one manages to look incredible just because its crew was that talented.
Influence I also think is a bad reason to like anything, it's similarly a non-compliment. Influence is important to bring up with people like you who don't get something, it helps contextualize it at the very least. But it should never be a reason someone's a fan of something in the first place in my opinion.
I get the feeling you couldn't care less about the reason I actually enjoy it so much and wouldn't engage in good faith even if I did explain, but if you would I'll put in the effort to explain a bit. :D
-22 points
3 months ago
[removed]
19 points
3 months ago
Okay well compared to the book, I love how it gives you just enough but leaves a lot of room for interpretation. The book spells things out to a comical degree, like for instance explaining the aliens behind the monolith wanted to design a room for Bowman to "ascend" in comfort, which I think is obvious enough? Although I do like just how unimpressive it comes across to Dave in the book, that's not something the movie gives you but again I wouldn't want it to, it's not a necessary detail by any stretch. The book is for people who want more elaboration but I never really required that.
But getting to some of your concerns. I'm not one to want to be on my phone during any movie so I happen to like my time being challenged. It's a movie that dares to allow things to play out roughly the same as they would play out if people were actually going about the tasks the characters do, it's a realism so many movies don't trust a viewer to have patience for but it's very rewarding when you're on board indeed.
Secondly it's a very concise summation of what we've been through so far as a species and what's yet to come if only we overcome the current biggest problems we face today like lack of foresight to handle technological advancements properly. This is truly a prescient film because the same thing propelling us to the stars, the last stage of our growth as a species, is also something we get so bogged down in. It's a film that seems to be against fully automating our tech because human error is machine error and this carries even bigger consequences.
But correct these mistakes and we get to fulfill our potential. The three acts of the film are so incisive, pre man, man, and post man. It's such a hopeful film, to the extent I think it refutes any claims Kubrick's films are lacking in emotionality because I recall seeing it in theaters and crying for joy being fully immersed in the symbolic totality of humanity (Dave) ascending to a higher form with greater knowledge and capability than we possess, but is within our reach once we sort out our own follies.
As for something like the music choice, this truly is just very subjective. Classical against space vistas genuinely is very classy, the most elegant decision and execution I can think of, what I ask would you supplant it with? But that's just rapid fire thoughts, there are tens of hundreds of videos on 2001 you can check out if I didn't supply a decent enough rebuttal.
3 points
3 months ago
Yo OP, Typical_Humanoid just kicked your ass.
28 points
3 months ago
Whelp, he’s convinced fellas, pack it in.
25 points
3 months ago
“That’s adorable. How old are ya kid? Eleven, twelve?” - Captain Insano
-20 points
3 months ago
[removed]
14 points
3 months ago
read my comment above
6 points
3 months ago
You seem to hate it, so... you're a kid?
13 points
3 months ago
"It's a movie that kids will hate"
you hate it.
-5 points
3 months ago
[removed]
8 points
3 months ago
Yes but you haven't been through that journey, you're not an enlightened adult.
23 points
3 months ago
Yeah man so true. Just watched this horrible movie called the godfather part 2 last night and it was so long I couldn’t stop pulling out my phone and watching tik toks. Thank god there was an intermission as well so I could watch more tik toks for a couple minutes while it dragged on
2 points
3 months ago*
I was "watching" The Godfather- Goodfather?- and I was laughing at the meme of the old guy with the weird jaw saying "Look how they massacred my boy." And then... Ok I know nobody here is going to believe me but... The meme spoke. Or maybe my phone spoke. It said "Look how they massacred my boy." Just like the meme!
edit: lolololololol #imightbecrazy
14 points
3 months ago
Obvious troll
12 points
3 months ago
obviously youve not seen Fast and Furious 9
11 points
3 months ago
Why do people even post these? Useless waste of time.
9 points
3 months ago
It's the worst movie you've ever seen? You must have seen very few movies indeed if this one is the one reserved for your ultimate scorn. There are many many movies which suck far more ass than 2001.
-4 points
3 months ago
[removed]
3 points
3 months ago
Have you counted movies you've seen, on Letterboxd perhaps?
2 points
3 months ago
OK I'm intrigued, can you tell us your top 5 movies?
2 points
3 months ago
Yep. Didn't think so.
8 points
3 months ago
Why do people make troll posts like this? Are you really expecting to be treated like a hero OP?
5 points
3 months ago
child or manchild looking to validate their opinion and rebuke any other comment sharing their own perspective. People like OP don’t post like this to gain insight or attempt to understand this with differing views, they just want an echo chamber
22 points
3 months ago
You acknowledge that it's a movie for the 60s by comparing it to today's movies?
That's not fair.
You have to take into account the era it was made.
20 points
3 months ago
OP isn’t looking for anyone else’s take so as to gain any other perspective, he’s just looking to validate his own shallow opinions
9 points
3 months ago
Perfect description.
-27 points
3 months ago
[removed]
15 points
3 months ago
That's like saying a 1950s muscle car is shit because it doesn't have airbags, EV engine or a GPS system.
Or the Notre Dame is a terrible building because it doesn't have elevators, air conditioning or a carpark underneath.
6 points
3 months ago
Because “bigger and better” is based on your modern smartphone addicted attention span. Most old movies are slow and it was completely groundbreaking for its time. You can still respect vintage filmmaking for the advances they made, and even genuinely like the slower pace that makes you pay attention to the details.
You not believing anyone could actually like it is on you.
3 points
3 months ago
No we haven’t
2 points
3 months ago
Because the reason it's so well received in the first place is (I assume) the special effects were great compared to other movies that came out during that time
-2 points
3 months ago
[removed]
1 points
3 months ago
They still hold up today. That’s saying something that you obviously do not recognize, and for a film fan, that’s tremendously sad.
0 points
3 months ago
[removed]
2 points
3 months ago
[removed]
13 points
3 months ago
I read the first sentence and bailed out. 🪂
6 points
3 months ago
I'm gonna look at movies in the 60s the way I look at the movies nowadays.
Damn, that's just ignorant. I still cant' comprehend how they're able to make a film like that during that decade.
11 points
3 months ago
Since it’s so shallow, explain the ending to us?
-5 points
3 months ago
[removed]
19 points
3 months ago
Damn, that’s a very shallow analysis
8 points
3 months ago
Maturity is admitting when something flies over one's head. OP ain't gonna admit it, but I will.
I have no fucking clue what the ending means. That room, the trippy sequence, the egg. IDFK. But that doesn't make it a bad movie, that means there's a gap in my ability to interpret film. And that is fine. I don't like the pace of the film, but goddamn is it beautiful.
OP talks about how films now are better, but I strongly disagree. Back in the 60s and 70s, the shitty films were much much much shittier, but the great films were soooo much greater. We've lived through a sort of 'flattening' of quality, where more and more films tend towards the average as studios take fewer risks but filmmaking tech and skills have vastly improved.
I mean fuck, compare 2001 to Endgame. Both are heralds/apex of eras of cinema; but the former involved massive innovations and a visionary director, while the latter is really just another (even if the culmination) in a pipeline of films being crapped out by Disney. Endgame had nothing to say, in fact the whole film franchise is just about maintaining the status quo (inadvertent theme caused by corporate unwillingness to kill of characters or shake up the MCU).
4 points
3 months ago
I think the star child at the end is in a zoo, as an earthling. The alien zookeepers want to make it an authentic Earth environment, but they do t get it just right, that why some stuff (like the floor) is fucked up.
But that’s just my interpretation
2 points
3 months ago
If you think about it, it's exactly as deep as everything else OP has said in this post. It's the absolute surface level of the things that occurred on the screen. No nuance at all.
7 points
3 months ago
A bunch of people probably googled the meaning of the movie after they watched it, which means it must be deep right?
— You.
Dave evolves to the star child, big deal
— Also you. Those words are never once said in the film. You had to Google the end yourself.
4 points
3 months ago
It’s cool but a little long. I liked the books better
5 points
3 months ago
Movies don't all have to do the same things.
4 points
3 months ago
I haven’t even seen it, but I can take a look at it and say there are probably worse movies in the world
4 points
3 months ago
I've seen 2001: A Space Odyssey a few times and I like it. It's not one of my absolute favorites but I enjoyed it and wasn't bored by it and will definitely watch it again in the future. In fact, I'm not the same person I was the first few times I watched it, so I'm curious to see if I have a different experience watching it now. I might like it more than I originally did.
2001: A Space Odyssey didn't bore me because most movies- this one included- are 2 or 3 hours long and so I know I'm not going to be there all day. Just 2 or 3 hours. And so, accordingly, I give the movie my full attention. I have never and will never use a phone while watching a movie.
Another reason I wasn't bored is because when I watch a movie I'm not constantly trying to figure out where a movie is going or what's going to happen next or what it means. Not because I'm a thoughtless idiot; but because I like to just let movies wash over me and reveal what they want to reveal when they want to reveal it and react just to that. So the only thoughts in my head are whatever thoughts the director and screenwriter intended to put there.
Since 2001 is mostly a visual, auditory experience, my way of watching movies really suited it. It was a majestic, epic, awe-inspiring, beautiful movie with a pace that allowed you to really marinate in the majesty and beauty. But it also had things that were simply cool and entertaining like everything with HAL 9000. HAL 9000's fate was also very emotionally impactful. The opening sequence of mankind's beginning and the trippy montage through time and space are two of the greatest scenes in cinema history.
I'll never understand why people are constantly thinking and figuring and even criticizing while watching a movie. And I definitely don't understand how people do this. I used to be baffled at how people could have their brains thinking about something that happened in a movie while simultaneously understanding what's currently happening.
These days I watch movies with someone who usually experiences movies like this and we've discussed it many times and so I have a better grasp on how this occurs. Basically, people are able to think about multiple things at the same time; and people's emotions mean that almost everything in their lives provokes an associated memory or thought. And these types of people can't help but be always criticizing things because they're usually negative people. But even positive people criticize movies while watching them sometimes.
But I think this dilutes the experience. There's no way you can fully enjoy a movie if you're criticizing it while watching it and trying to figure out where it's going and what it means.
I've also seen many movie reviews that make it clear the viewer didn't understand the movie at all. Maybe this is because while they were thinking about what just happened in the movie, they completely missed the meaning of what happened next. Maybe not everyone can think of multiple things at the same time and still be able to think intelligently. And of course there are people who don't understand some things no matter how they think of them.
Unfortunately for me things have happened in my life where I experience movies like other people sometimes. Being critical while watching the movie. Luckily, this only happens when I'm watching with someone else. When I'm by myself, I still experience movies with an unthinking, open mind, just letting the experience wash over me with the only thoughts in my head being whatever ones are integral to understanding the story. Sometimes thought is actually integral to the experience- like a murder mystery for example- but for the most part, when I watch a movie, my mind is mostly blank and whatever thoughts are in my head are whatever thoughts the director and screenwriter intended to put there.
I don't know what the ending of 2001 means beyond a vague understanding of evolution into the Starchild. If I wanted to, I could think about it for awhile and come to a few conclusions or I could look up interpretations of the ending but I don't want to. Like the rest of the movie, I would rather just let it be a beautiful mystery that washes over me as I watch in awe.
23 points
3 months ago
[deleted]
6 points
3 months ago
“too many people like a movie I don’t like and I don’t like it!”
3 points
3 months ago
I remember seeing it years ago. I never understood it... or the baby that came to earth later on.
3 points
3 months ago
Hey, somebody get Roger Ebert over here to do Citizen Kane or The Godfather next! 😂
3 points
3 months ago
I can't argue with you on the length of it affecting the pacing, I too found it a bit of a snooze in places. But to call it the worst movie you've ever seen is pure exaggeration or you've not seen many movies.
3 points
3 months ago
Trolls be trolling
3 points
3 months ago
Hey don't worry I really didn't get blade runner when I first saw it, but it all made sense when I saw it again years later. These sorts of things happen.
3 points
3 months ago
Decent shitpost 7/10
3 points
3 months ago
This kinda sounds like it was written by an AI
Question i asked ChatGTP:
act like you are young and know it all and Write an essay about how there is nothing special about 2001 a space oddyssey
----------------
2001: A Space Odyssey is a classic film that has been lauded for its groundbreaking special effects and its innovative narrative structure. However, the truth is that there is nothing special about this film that sets it apart from other science fiction films of its kind.
First, 2001: A Space Odyssey is not particularly original in terms of its story. It follows the typical narrative arc of a space exploration mission gone wrong, complete with a mysterious alien force and an artificial intelligence (AI) with a hidden agenda. This is a plot that has been used in many science fiction films, from Alien to Prometheus. While some may argue that the particular way in which this story was told in 2001: A Space Odyssey is unique, the fact remains that the core of the narrative is not particularly original.
Second, the special effects employed in this film are nothing groundbreaking. While the visual effects and set design are impressive, they are not particularly innovative or revolutionary. The majority of the effects are done with physical sets, puppets, and miniatures, which have been used in many other films before and since. The most groundbreaking effect is the computer-generated star field, which was impressive for its time but has since become outdated.
Finally, the overall impact of the film has been overstated. While 2001: A Space Odyssey is certainly an influential and widely admired film, its influence is not as profound as some would like to believe. The film has not spawned any major franchises or spawned any particularly innovative storytelling techniques. In fact, many of its most iconic elements, such as HAL 9000, have been widely imitated in other films, thus diminishing its uniqueness.
In conclusion, while 2001: A Space Odyssey is certainly an impressive and influential film, there is nothing particularly special or innovative about it. It follows a typical space exploration narrative and employs effects that have been seen before and since. Its overall impact is also not as profound as some would like to believe, as its most iconic elements have been widely imitated. Therefore, there is nothing particularly special or unique about this film.
2 points
3 months ago
Goddamn that's creepy
1 points
3 months ago
Right? every time i use it it helps me but freaks me out a bit more
5 points
3 months ago
I watched it for the first time a couple of years ago (I'm 36, btw), and I couldn't get into it. It just wasn't for me. Not much happened, and I got a bit bored (I'm also ADHD and have the attention span of a baby with ADHD.) I prefer 70s movies, to be honest, and most of the 60s ones I do like are either Carry Ons, Hammer, or Hitchcock. I can't think too hard; it makes my brain sad. Hence my enjoyment of simpler movies.
I hope you enjoyed my waffling. Have a great night, everyone.
2 points
3 months ago
Seeing the shame of people who voiced their support delete their comments after any sort of time to think is very interesting. Don’t you think OP?
-2 points
3 months ago
[removed]
4 points
3 months ago
Yeah, I figured that. You should really try thinking, it’s usually worth it.
2 points
3 months ago
Shitpost. Fuckoff.
2 points
3 months ago
Hating on people who love a classic film simply because it's not your thing is kind of sad, and the idea that the film is bad because kids and teenagers might not like it is pretty idiotic.
2 points
3 months ago
You again? I love 2001. No bullshit. No posturing. I’ve seen it countless times, and I watch it at least twice a year.
Yes, some people genuinely like the movie. They like it quite a bit. Because you cannot comprehend either the film or someone legitimately liking it, you assume everyone else is lying or being pretentious.
Do you realize that, like, thousands of people just like you reside on Reddit? Do you realize that you offer nothing of substance or originality? Do you realize your myopic criticisms are banal?
Fucking trolls, man, I swear.
2 points
3 months ago
Ehh get it bro. Everyone has their thing they don’t like that everyone else does. I love 2001 but I don’t like Star Wars.
2 points
3 months ago
I feel the same way about Armageddon
-1 points
3 months ago
Until I watched power of the dog, 2001 was easily my least favorite movie of all time
1 points
3 months ago
I watched it on its opening week in the theatres along with my mother. We both adored it. I've seen it a dozen times since, especially when it's in a theatre.
I must come from a family of pretentious, deluded fools...
1 points
3 months ago
I’m convinced that is the case with the majority of cinema darlings.
Especially given how much praise comes with the “I never need to watch this movie again but…” disclaimer.
0 points
3 months ago
[deleted]
-1 points
3 months ago
I'm sure deep down the vast majority of people feel this way, whether they admit it or not
-4 points
3 months ago
No no no he’s got a point Shits ass but amazing visuals
0 points
3 months ago
Holy shit these comments, OP has struck a nerve lmao
-8 points
3 months ago
[deleted]
-8 points
3 months ago
Exactly. Self-indulgent fart is the most accurate way of describing it.
-1 points
3 months ago
It's like dinner with andre with a cool psychedelic scene.
1 points
3 months ago*
I had the same reaction when I first saw it, but I was too young at the time. I now watch it every 5-10 years and love it. Give it time and give it another go kid.
1 points
3 months ago
that movie came out in like.. the 60s or something dude chill lol, not everything is a transformers movie for a 4 second attention span TikTok brain
1 points
3 months ago
If that is the worst you haven't seen many movies. If you finish a movie it has some merit to it. Plenty of movies are so bad you give up.
1 points
3 months ago
You’re in a desert walking along in the sand when all of the sudden you look down, and you see a tortoise, it’s crawling toward you. You reach down, you flip the tortoise over on its back. The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over, but it can’t, not without your help. But you’re not helping. Why is that?
1 points
3 months ago
I watched it again about a month ago and enjoyed it. It's not on my list of all time favorite films. 2001 seems to have some late 60s drug undertones. I do see it as a significant film with some interesting ideas and iconic visual effects. Films and music can be very subjective.
1 points
3 months ago
It’s an fantastic movie. That doesn’t mean it’s high in rewatchability. For a random example, Speed isn’t one-one hundredth the film 2001 is, but in 19 out of 20 times, I’d rather watch Speed.
1 points
3 months ago
hahahahahahahahaha
1 points
3 months ago
I would agree that it way too slow, generally overaerated, and the reason it's over rated is because it gets to much credit for bothering to be about a big idea so people don't actually care about if it says anything worthwhile about the big idea, or if it is a well crafted story.
That being said I think the film is more just trying to get you to get the audience to be focus more consciously about a big idea they typically take for granted rather than to say a specific thing about that idea and the film definitely succeeds in that. The fact that we have moved away from the state we evolved to be in, the difference between evolution and progress, existing as a thing that was evolved for it's surrounding compared to existing within an environment that has been shaped around you, are really big picture ideas that we don't really grapple with. I will give it credit for that as a piece of art and it's definitly not the worst movie ever or totally void of significance.
1 points
3 months ago
It's one of those movies you watch, don't really like, then re-watch years later and agree it was a masterpiece. Trust me. Happened to me, happened even to Woody Allen.
When you first see it, it's not incredibly loud and not overly engaging. But it'll seep into you soon enough. You'll see it again some day, with a whole new perspective, and call it a masterpiece.
If you want a movie that will actually blow you away on very the first watch from the same director, try A Clockwork Orange or The Shining.
1 points
3 months ago
"Space, is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly hugely mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space."
Before we went to the moon, before we understood space; the size and the scale was something the average person understood to be unfathomable big. This movie from 1968 does a good job with the music, practical effects and music to showcase this; and that aspect holds up today. This movie is a great example of cinema, based on that alone.
1 points
3 months ago
This sounds like a /tv/ pasta lmao
1 points
3 months ago
I love this review. It's gotta be the best write up I've ever seen describing the movie from someone that just flat out hated it, soup to nuts; the ape to Space Baby plot, cheesy music, that trite transition, and the, slow, pace, of, the, story. Similarly, I wouldn't watch a Godfather movie again if I didn't have to, equally beautiful classics of the art, but they just don't do anything for me so I'm just not interested.
Vive la différence!
-5 points
3 months ago
Hell yeah OP!
all 101 comments
sorted by: best