 
|
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 |
221.165.250.250
In Reply to: 201 A Space Odyssey. You get from this movie what you bring to it posted by Analog Scott on January 4, 2007 at 10:57:08:
2001 is one of those films that while it is science fiction really isn't about space - not really -- in fact the lengthy space sequences remind more of Waiting for Godot. The vastness of the unexplainable with the human mind really no better than a monkey playing with a bone.The trick, if there is one to watching this movie, is to watch it NOT for science fiction but for philosophy. Certainly it will work on the levels presented - I have purposely avoided reading any critical essay on the film for the very reason that I may inadvertantly adopt one of the many points of perspective about this classic - I would rather just watch it and garner what it has to offer.
You bring to all great art a perspective - great art asks you to become part of the equation and to generate interpretations of what Kubrick was really talking about.
The problem though with this film is that most people need eveything spoon fed to them.
You take Star Trek which IMO was always a much better television series than it ever was on the big screen, because the ideas on the small screen were traded in for the big special effects and shootem-ups on the big screen. That is with the exception of Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.
Follow Ups:
"great art asks you to become part of the equation and to generate interpretations of what Kubrick was really talking about."Oh, is that what great art does?
Of course you assume that Kubrick was actually talking about something. Maybe you're just jerking off wondering. Now that can be amusing and interesting but I don't pass it off as something profound.
"The problem though with this film is that most people need eveything spoon fed to them."
Ahhh, then you like the picture because you think your enjoyment of it makes you special.
You are a bitter person. You must have, or think you have some sort of physical flaw, or maybe its just a personality disorder. Well, snap out of it so you can actually enjoy some of your life.
Now in film which is really a fairly low form of art IMO a few films tend to rise above it. Still Film is at crosspurposes because they are intended as entertainments first and foremost.A great film SHOULD do both but it must always be entertaining first IMO.
Kubrick clearly has something to say about technology and about humanity. But he lets you interpret it the way you wish -- and you could just interpret as a colossal bore. First time I saw it that is how I felt.
I am not telling anyone they must like it - art is highly subjective - tell me why Jackson Pollack is so great or Andy Warhol because I don't particularly get it.
Art like comedy are two areas that simply rely upon personal taste - I do not find Jim Carey funny but Rowan Atkinso can make me roll of the chair in hysterics (Guess which one makes 20 million per movie) -- Clearly I am in the minority.
Plenty of people rave about the Mona Lisa (big deal ho hum to me) the movie 81/2 is self indulgant meaningless tripe in my opinion - Citizen Kane IMO is trying too hard to be important and the visuals self indulgent making it a good but vastly overrated film.
You don't like 2001 - well hell I compared it a bit to Waiting for Godot -- which is blasted by a large segment of the literary community. 2001 is a classic -- but that word implies that people ought to find it "Good" -- it does not. Lord of the Rings will probably be a "Classic" down the line -- and IMO these three films are 9 hours of pure tedium.
> > "great art asks you to become part of the equation and to generate interpretations of what Kubrick was really talking about."
> Oh, is that what great art does?It often does. You didn't know that?
> Of course you assume that Kubrick was actually talking about something.
It's not an assumption. While the movie poses many questions the premise and the story arc are not so ambiguous that even a novice film goer can figure that much out. You did manage to figure that much out didn't you? But gosh, based on your comment you either didn't figure that much out or you are just being a dick. Which is it?
> Maybe you're just jerking off wondering. Now that can be amusing and interesting but I don't pass it off as something profound.Maybe your'e just pissed off because you didn't get anything out of it and others did. They can't be smarter than you you so you figure they are all just jerking off of course.
> > "The problem though with this film is that most people need eveything spoon fed to them."> Ahhh, then you like the picture because you think your enjoyment of it makes you special.
Ahhh then you don't like the picture because you didn't get that much out of it and it makes you feel ordinary.So Victor, keeping count? I have no patience for dickheads like this.
"Ahhh then you don't like the picture because you didn't get that much out of it and it makes you feel ordinary."Well actually I am a pretty ordinary guy, certainly not as extraordinary a fella as you who uses the terms "dick" and "dickhead" so eloquently, one might think you are a crude lout instead of an intellectual filmlover. Which are you playing at? Both?
In any case any extraordinary things I may have done have nothing to do with my taste in movies.
I used to like 2001 anyway, like I said, back when I smoked pot I thought it was great. Maybe you need a piss test.
I see, calling you a dickhead is crude and unsophisticated but you accusing others of jerking off is completely OK. So that makes you a hypocritical dickhead. Maybe I was just bringing it down to a level you could relate to. I didn't want my post to go over your head like the movie did. Sorry to hear you are at your best when stoned.You don't like the movie. Fine. You disrespect others for seeing things in it you don't. So you get the same disrespect back in your face. Now you whine about it. Pathetic
Jerking off is jerking off. And you're doing it quite well.
Thanks for your time.
You are still being a dickhead. thanks for nothing,,,,,dickhead
So when are you applying for the new Pee Wee Herman opening?
.
How many does it need?
I've seen this film; maybe I'm missing something here, but based on my impressions, it's much adieu about grey poupon. I think Victor "wacks-his" poetic about the flick because he gets a big thrill out of watching Marcello Mastroianni (portraying the director) wearing that cute little Italian cowboy hat! Go figure. ;^)AuPh
Sure, AuPh ripped his fine vinyl pants grabbing hold on every park bench as they dragged him to the viewing, but he saw it!
Good question. As you may or may not know I am very big on seeing these sorts of things in the theater. Here in L.A. we are blessed with an amazing wealth of revival houses and programs at the Director's guild, the Arclight and the Motion Picture Academy. I was going to see it last year but I was wisked away on work out of town. I am waiting for it to come back. So my question is a sincere one. Is this a movie that needs a few veiwings? If so I may just want to prime myself with the DVD before I see it in the theater.
Only someone unfamiliar with Fellini should probably spend some time viewing his other earlier films before seeing this one. To me as soon as the first Nino Rota notes hit my ears I feel relaxed and totally at home. The great Fellini atmosphere always gives me an enormous sense of comfort.I don't know how familiar you are with his works, if not too much then perhaps what you are suggesting - some DVD's, but probably not that one, I think you would want to be hit with it on the big screen... some people get all the luck!
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 © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
