RATE or REVIEW The Last Movie You Watched.

[VintijDroidGutzz]

2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) - 8.5/10

First time watching it in High Definition. A lot of the visuals hold up better than the original Star Wars. Pretty amazing what Kubrick accomplished almost a full decade before the existence of ILM. HAL is still creepy, the end is still trippy as hell, and the music still makes me want to stand up and cheer when the giant fetus looks at the Earth though I have no idea why.

It was on TV here in AUS last night.

Certainly a landmark film in many ways - one of my all time faves, & a chilling prediction of the future in terms of our relationship with technology & A.I.

 

[Khev]

Gaspar we disagree about the repercussions of the monoliths but I wasn't aware that Clarke's short story spelled things out like that. Kind of diminishes the magic of the monoliths to have them definitively explained so I'm glad Kubrick kept them a mystery. I do like the omnipresence of the Star Child explained though. I actually like the idea that he was perceiving the Earth from across the galaxy or from another dimension outside of space and time. That's pretty cool.

 

[GasparZizou]

Gaspar we disagree about the repercussions of the monoliths but I wasn't aware that Clarke's short story spelled things out like that. Kind of diminishes the magic of the monoliths to have them definitively explained so I'm glad Kubrick kept them a mystery. I do like the omnipresence of the Star Child explained though. I actually like the idea that he was perceiving the Earth from across the galaxy or from another dimension outside of space and time. That's pretty cool.

It appears that Clarke and Kubrick themselves were in that same "opposition", I guess. Kubrick got more ambiguity since it's a visual medium, but you can take the movie version by his words.

I just like Clarke's side of the vision better myself.

The fact that there is such a thing as "human nature" is one of Clarke's usual themes, in some of his stories it's our downfall, in others, like 2001, it can be overcome, which is why I think it's ok that it's inherent to humans and independent from the monoliths.

I like the explanation of the monoliths myself, not so often can a direct explanation be more fascinating than imagination, and Clarke often achieves that in his stories, because that "intelligence is rare" theme actually has more repercussions in other Odyssey stories by Clarke.

 

[Khev]

I agree that as far as explaining the unexplainable Clarke did a pretty good job with the monoliths. Lightyears better than midichlorians, that's for sure. I just think that Kubrick made the right call.

I never bothered to see 2010 The Year We Make Contact. Was that based on anything penned by Clarke as well?

 

[GasparZizou]

I haven't seen it either, I've just read the books.

Well, 2010 also has its own novel, there's the novels; 2001, 2010, 2061, 3001 and the Time Odyssey trilogy.

The 2001 movie and book were written by Clarke simultaneously, with the movie version having changes for technical and budget reasons like the monolith orbiting Jupiter in the movie, in the book it's on one of Saturn's moons (Iapetus). For the most part it's the same story, but the 2010 book (and movie) and the rest of the book sequels follow the events of the 2001 movie, not the events of the first book.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

La Strada 8/10

The Night of the Hunter 9/10

 

[Khev]

I read some time ago that Kubrick and Clarke toyed with the idea of showing the aliens who sent the monoliths but decided against it at the last minute. Are they described in the books?

 

[GasparZizou]

I read some time ago that Kubrick and Clarke toyed with the idea of showing the aliens who sent the monoliths but decided against it at the last minute. Are they described in the books?

They are described as once being flesh like us, although I don't think their look is ever described, that's apparently the stage in their evolution when they built the monoliths, which is implied to be countless eons ago (first intelligent beings in the universe after all)...

Then they learnt to transfer their consciousness to machines, while Bowman was travelling through the monolith he saw what it appeared to be one of their cities, abandoned, later in their development at some point they learnt to store their very being in space itself, like the star-child, but they are apparently still interested in evolution of lesser species, so they are incorporeal.

If you ask me I don't think it's important how they looked.

If you want a story where it does matter, I recommend Childhood's End, also written by Clarke, there's a decent SyFy 3 episode miniseries adaptation if you're ever interested, starring Charles Dance, just DO NOT google it or look for images, it will spoil you right away

I love that story too.

 

[rushmore223]

As far as the 2001 discussion goes relating to the monolith and the apes, I just thought I'd briefly chime in, though I haven't seen the movie in years and im no expert. The monolith was brought about to heighten or accelerate intelligence/evolution (whichever your more comfortable with) but by doing so gave the now tool using apes the upper hand over the rest. Anytime in nature or history when that happens, it inevitably leads to violence and subjugation, which is probably part of our nature the Aliens either didn't consider or didn't care about, only considering the end outcome. As the famous saying goes "Power Corrupts...". Especially in this case, I think the destruction/killing of the lower intelligence apes actually assists in accelerating evolution, by removing the only real rival from the picture, it allows those tool using apes to breed and pass on their traits more quickly and successfully.


I had another point I wanted to make, but it got away from me.

Anyway, reading this discussion has piqued my interest in reading 2001, and it's sequels.

 

[GasparZizou]

As far as the 2001 discussion goes relating to the monolith and the apes, I just thought I'd briefly chime in, though I haven't seen the movie in years and im no expert. The monolith was brought about to heighten or accelerate intelligence/evolution (whichever your more comfortable with) but by doing so gave the now tool using apes the upper hand over the rest. Anytime in nature or history when that happens, it inevitably leads to violence and subjugation, which is probably part of our nature the Aliens either didn't consider or didn't care about, only considering the end outcome. As the famous saying goes "Power Corrupts...". Especially in this case, I think the destruction/killing of the lower intelligence apes actually assists in accelerating evolution, by removing the only real rival from the picture, it allows those tool using apes to breed and pass on their traits more quickly and successfully.


I had another point I wanted to make, but it got away from me.

Anyway, reading this discussion has piqued my interest in reading 2001, and it's sequels.

I agree, human nature was unaccounted for and unmonitored until the monolith was discovered in the moon, at the end it's good ol' Darwinism if with a little help, most animals are territorial and conflictive though, and we're nothing but animals.

Human nature does play a part later on in the series...

The sequels are not as hailed as 2001, but imo they're great if 2001 left you wanting more. They're slower and somewhat smaller than 2001 though, so be warned.

 

[rushmore223]

I agree, human nature was unaccounted for and unmonitored until the monolith was discovered in the moon, at the end it's good ol' Darwinism if with a little help, most animals are territorial and conflictive though, and we're nothing but animals.

Human nature does play a part later on in the series...

The sequels are not as hailed as 2001, but imo they're great if 2001 left you wanting more. They're slower and somewhat smaller than 2001 though, so be warned.

That doesn't bother me, I look forward to reading them.

 

[GasparZizou]

Slow burn is best burn.

 

[rushmore223]

Slow burn is best burn.

I agree. Gets under your skin that way.

 

[Mnl_actionfigures]

12 Angry Men (1957) - 10/10


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RIDDICK]

G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra - 5/10
G.I. Joe: Retaliation -------- 5/10

 

[Snake Plissken]

Saving Private Ryan - 10/10

 

[Mnl_actionfigures]

Saving Private Ryan - 10/10

One of Spielberg's top 3

 

[Centurion]

One of Spielberg's top 3

Interesting!
What would the other two be on that list?

For me, I can come up with my favorite 10, but I'll try and narrow it down to 3.

1. Schindler's List
2. Jaws
3. Raiders of the Lost Ark

That #1 spot will most likely always stay right there. Schindler's List will always be my favorite of his work.
However, depending on how I'm feeling, I might change #2 and #3 with any of the following:

Saving Private Ryan
Jurassic Park
E.T.
Goonies (he wrote the story but did not direct)

 

[Mnl_actionfigures]

Interesting!
What would the other two be on that list?

For me, I can come up with my favorite 10, but I'll try and narrow it down to 3.

1. Schindler's List
2. Jaws
3. Raiders of the Lost Ark

That #1 spot will most likely always stay right there. Schindler's List will always be my favorite of his work.
However, depending on how I'm feeling, I might change #2 and #3 with any of the following:

Saving Private Ryan
Jurassic Park
E.T.
Goonies (he wrote the story but did not direct)

I cannot definitely rank in order, but Saving Private Ryan, Raiders, and Jaws, are my top 3 favorites of his.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

Die Hard- 7/10

Die Hard 2- 5/10

Die Hard 3- 7/10