 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: Re: 2001 -- A space Odyssey returns to DC posted by john dem on November 03, 2001 at 14:02:15:
Plot -- the pre-occupation of simpletons and children not blessed with the gift of perception of the transcendantCharacter -- a distracting irrelevance. Humans are so boring and predictabale. A superfluity. . .
What we have here, ladies and gentlemen, is a window on the transcendant -- a dynamic canvas of color, motion, sound that reaches directly to the intellect, bypassing the limiting media of language and the conventional exposition of drama.
Not mere sci-fi, but A NEW ART FORM!!!
Sorry I'm such a dolt.
Follow Ups:
.
None of Kubrick's later films deserve that.Such hostility for a work that abandons the traditional narrative- why the sheer impudence of the man.
Like I said, he should have gone for the lowest common denominator and put in some explosions and stuff.
what is the name for a person who read this: 'my considered view is more in the p-o-s direction than in the "timeless classic classic" direction' as the same as calling the film a p-o-s?"Dolt," indeed.
I said "Not liking 2001 doesn't make you a dolt- calling it a "P.O.S" does."But since your original post put the film, in your considered view, towards a piece of shit, that would put your view towards doltishness. Just as your view would put my opinion towards liking a piece of shit.
Clearly, you are not a dolt, neither am I. I would hope that discussions about film would not lead to films being characterzed as pieces of shit or not pieces of shit, or even approaching pieces of shit, for that clearly is the domain of dolts.
I doubt that a search of the archives here would uncover a musical work being described as a piece of shit.
I doubt a search of the web would uncover much in the way of "pieces of shit" describing anything but pieces of shit.
Why 2001 is singled out for this wonderful phrase is insulting- it's an interesting film to some, unremarkable to others.
Jeez, this is so much fun -- being teamed up with 'Phlounder; arguing with you -- I can't help myself.Fair enough, John. We will excise p-o-s from my vocabulary.
And if we keep talking about this movie, pretty soon I'll have to walk the three blocks from my house to the theatre that's showing it and have a look at the damn thing . . . again.
"I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave."
Have a good evening.
..we can discuss why Clockwork Orange is one of Kubrick's worst films.Along with Eyes Wide Shut.
It's been a very long time since I've seen "Clockwork."With respect to "Eyes" I don't think we'll have much to discuss. I agree with you.
"What we have here, ladies and gentlemen, is a window on the transcendant -- a dynamic canvas of color, motion, sound that reaches directly to the intellect, bypassing the limiting media of language and the conventional exposition of drama.Not mere sci-fi, but A NEW ART FORM!!!"
However it essentially sums up quite well my true feelings for this movie. Perhaps with the substitution of "subconscious" for "intellect." I think you hit the nail on the head.
as the say, " de gustibius non disputandum est "Seriously, though, "2K+1ASO" is a sufficiently audacious and differentiated film that it is worth watching, whether one likes it or not or whether one finds its successful or not.
In my case, after several viewings over a period of years, I find it a failed attempt. But others find it otherwise -- and I'm not going to call them names for doing so.
I do wonder, however, if some of these professional writers who unleash a torrent of florid prose don't sometimes cringe when they read what they've written, years later.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
