Films/DVD Asylum

I'd even argue that every "field" has many competitors. Except for sci-fi.

4.235.204.185

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread: Display All Email ] [ Films/DVD Asylum ]

tinear

(A)

In Reply to: Best movie ever?--------------- posted by patrickU on January 3, 2007 at 12:27:02:

2001 has no peers.
Solaris is second, not far back, but clearly not the cinematic equivalent.

Follow Ups:

Re: I'd even argue that every "field" has many competitors. Except for sci-fi. - patrickU 01:01:05 01/04/07 (4)
I would argue with you-not.
But 2001...I never like this film, considering it a child of the seventies, a pop up for the eyes, a pseudo mysterious intellectual LSD trip.
All my freinds, back then, loved it.
I kinda felt frustrated to be the only one not to do so.
Lately I catch a big part of it on TV...And it even unpleased me more than before.
So my case is close on this one.
- Re: I'd even argue that every "field" has many competitors. Except for sci-fi. - rico 08:26:34 01/04/07 (3)
  Interesting that a film shot betwen 1965 and 1967 could be considered "a child of the seventies".
  - Re: I'd even argue that every "field" has many competitors. Except for sci-fi. - patrickU 09:07:32 01/04/07 (2)
    Ok. Mid /Late Sixties.
    I mixe up with the date when I saw it, in France, as at the time SU production would arrive at least one year later.
    - I couldn't help but notice how that totally changed the argument... - Victor Khomenko 11:20:16 01/04/07 (1)
      Well... not really.
      - Re: I couldn't help but notice how that totally changed the argument... - patrickU 13:14:17 01/04/07 (0)
        
        In Reply to: I couldn't help but notice how that totally changed the argument... posted by Victor Khomenko on January 4, 2007 at 11:20:16:
        
        Ha!
2001 - 4season 21:46:40 01/03/07 (0)
I'm not sure where I'd put "2001" on my list, but it's certainly a standout IMO: A sort of icy beauty of a movie, and I think it's fundamental optimism still resonates.
"but clearly not the cinematic equivalent. " Wasn't meant to be. It is a thinker. - Victor Khomenko 17:42:53 01/03/07 (3)
I never get excited over the 2001... maybe forty years ago it would have been different. There is not much to think about there. The Solaris concentrates on people, it is petite Bergman set - accidentally - in a strange place.
- Well, since you're anti-evolution... I can see your problem :-(. - tinear 04:53:15 01/04/07 (1)
  But Analog is right; in fact, 2001 gives the thoughtful viewer as great a smorgasboard of thought as any film: the origin of man, violence. The Pandora's Box of technology and science. The alienation of modern society. The threat of AI. The metaphysical sine qua non: Is there a God? What is the future of Man?
  I am astonished you'd criticize it in this regard.
  - Sorry, but the film does not go beyond a child asking some primitive questions - Victor Khomenko 05:55:37 01/04/07 (0)
    Both the book and film are incredibly shallow in that regard, not giving much to chew on. The mere fact those issues may be mentioned does not mean anything in itself. Their treatment is superficial, and the movie is indeed NOT about them, it is, as Patrick correctly stated, just an eye candy for the sixties crowd.
    The Solaris, OTOH, is about what makes us human, and the study is deep and tortuous, placing the film into an entirely different category.
    I stopped being fascinated with machinery in books and on screen when I left my teenage years, and instead slowly developed an appreciation for human emotions, sufferings, feelings, etc... all the things that are absent in the 2001.
- Not much to think about? - Analog Scott 18:40:53 01/03/07 (0)
  I have to disagree with you there. arguably one of the most demanding movies of all time in that regard.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Parts Connexion

You can not post to an archived thread.