• 2001 - A Space Odyssey
    41 replies, posted
[B][I]the ultimate trip[/I][/B] [IMG]http://blog.signalnoise.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/i_2001poster.jpg[/IMG] So its the 60s and we knew jack shit about space. We were hoping to beat them commies by landing on the moon and shit. Stanley Kubrick was able to assure we knew atleast a little about space. He made what is considered one of the most influential/artistic films. [B]what the fuck is this even about[/B] I won't get too much into detail, but its one of the early Sci-Fi gems. Scientists find an alien rock on the moon and found out that it leads to one on Jupiter. A group of cryogenically frozen men, an AI, and two awake men, David and Frank. [B]Why does this even mater the movies like a gazillion years old[/B] The most interesting thing is because the director, Stanley Kubrick filmed it, he wanted it to be watched in the future, to keep it accurate. He filmed it with the most EXPENSIVE Polaroid camera, in 70mm to ensure the quality would be good. Also, hipster teens in 1968 watched it for the stargate sequence where they would be on LSD :smile: [B]Ok, great! I'm gonna go rent it now on ne-[/B] [B]STOP RIGHT THERE CRIMINAL SCUM[/B] Ok, sorry to be a hipster elitist guy but because this movie is such a gem I refuse to watch it in my couch TV. I really recommend playing it on a huge ass screen (Some film festivals show the 70mm print, I believe the Blu-ray is straight from the 70mm, so you could setup a backyard movie theater and gave the effect) with the volume all the way up. The music gets eerie at times, and theres only 88 counts of dialogue (but when there is, its fucking awesome and memorable, why would people remember "Open the pod bay doors HAL"?) it basically enforced the Danube in Space stereotype thing we see in movies. [B]THAT WAS GREAT IS THERE A SEQUEL[/B] Yep, its called 2010: The Year We Make Contact. It's not by Kubrick, and its more full of dialogue, but its probably another mindfuck. It also gives a better explanation on why 2001 was so fucking confusing at times. Anyways lets discuss.
If you have not seen this film yet, do it now. Drop what you're doing, buy this movie and watch it. [editline]4th December 2012[/editline] Not rent. [B][U]BUY.[/U][/B]
There is a reason this is my favorite movie of all time. It's fucking amazing. [editline]3rd December 2012[/editline] Also 2010 wasn't too bad either.
there's actually no real difference between the standard print and the bluray, since it's all 70mm print, the picture is clear as balls across the board, and looks better than a lot of recent films, all made with matte paintings, miniatures and no cgi.
The first time I watched Space Odyssey, it was on Netflix Instant, and at the beginning (~2 mins of black with the eerie music) I thought there was something wrong with the stream, because there was no picture. :v:
one of my favorite movies of all time I saw it for this first time on a MASSIVE screen and it was fuckign amazing
Excellent film. My favorite of Kubrick's work
Pinnacle of film [video=youtube;4fiJ_kcb15c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fiJ_kcb15c[/video]
Hi!Sorry to bother you. Christmas big sale is beginning now. 365airsoftshop is the Largest Retailer in the world for lowest airsoft Gear. You will be sure that you're getting the perfect quality airsoft products or whatever you need here. [URL="http://www.365airsoftshop.com"]www.365airsoftshop.com[/URL]
I highly suggest reading the book as well. It explains all the mindfucking and helps add little details to things, plus it's written by Arthur C. Clarke.
[QUOTE=Zackin5;38701257]I highly suggest reading the book as well. It explains all the mindfucking and helps add little details to things, plus it's written by Arthur C. Clarke.[/QUOTE] I read the book before watching the movie. I'd say it made things so much more enjoyable.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;38701333]I read the book before watching the movie. I'd say it made things so much more enjoyable.[/QUOTE] the book and film were made at the same time, it's almost at the point of viewing two different stories. naturally the book has more dialogue and such, and the film is more focused on the silence of space, not to mention the huge change between jupiter and saturn (while kubrick and clarke made saturn the planet the astronauts were heading to, film technology was not advanced enough to recreate the rings around saturn, and as such it was changed to jupiter for the film (and for 2010), while remaining saturn in the novels). edit: this makes a sweet wallpaper for your comp [img]http://i.imgur.com/yxg71.png[/img]
Film is damn magnificent. I read someone comparing "Tree of Life" to this film's ambition. I'd be inclined to agree actually.
They should make a movie with Halman in it.
"Hey Stan, what's your new space movie about?" "Oh not much, just the very nature of humanity's existence and place in the universe."
[QUOTE=NanoSquid;38717518]"Hey Stan, what's your new space movie about?" "Oh not much, just the very nature of humanity's existence and place in the universe."[/QUOTE] "Sounds pretty lame."
[QUOTE=Chaotic Lord;38718503]"Sounds pretty lame."[/QUOTE] "What if I threw in some monkeys"
i actually enjoyed 2010, nowhere near the same scale and art of the original but the sets and effects were top notch. 2001 stands as one of the all time greatest films, no doubt. Doesn't matter if you enjoy it or not (though how you couldn't i can't understand) it's an amazing achievement that still defines portrayals of space in film.
Call me an impatient prick but I found the movie ( at least the beginning ) frightfully boring. It was just long clips of monkeys doing shit/views of africa/spaceships
The parts of the movie with no soundtrack really make you feel like you're alone in space. Specifically the shot of the guy with his air support cut, writhing around, struggling to breathe. That shot's pretty great because of the lack of sound.
[QUOTE=NanoSquid;38718622]"What if I threw in some monkeys"[/QUOTE] "Nah, bro. I'm working on my own space movies about monkeys. Might call it "Monkey Planet".
[QUOTE=Metashotzo;38721320]The parts of the movie with no soundtrack really make you feel like you're alone in space. Specifically the shot of the guy with his air support cut, writhing around, struggling to breathe. That shot's pretty great because of the lack of sound.[/QUOTE] That's what Kubrick focused on, only wrong part of the movie is that Bowman is shown holding his breath in and not exhaling, and when you're in space you need to decompress your body or you'll pop like a balloon.
the books based on this are the best space sci-fi written by arthur c clarke [editline]6th December 2012[/editline] written at the same time as the script for the first one too [editline]6th December 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Pops;38727239]That's what Kubrick focused on, only wrong part of the movie is that Bowman is shown holding his breath in and not exhaling, and when you're in space you need to decompress your body or you'll pop like a balloon.[/QUOTE] you're skin is strong enough to resist you popping [editline]6th December 2012[/editline] exahaling would evaporate the water quickly and form ice crystals in your mouth
[QUOTE=Eltro102;38730608]the books based on this are the best space sci-fi written by arthur c clarke [editline]6th December 2012[/editline] written at the same time as the script for the first one too [editline]6th December 2012[/editline] you're skin is strong enough to resist you popping [editline]6th December 2012[/editline] exahaling would evaporate the water quickly and form ice crystals in your mouth[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062622/trivia?tab=gf[/url] [quote]Bowman inhales deeply before attempting to re-enter the ship from the pod. Arthur C. Clarke in an interview later noted that this is incorrect. Bowman should have exhaled, as the vacuum of space would have damaged his lungs had they been full of air.[/quote]
so am i the only one to have never watched the entire length of the movie? i usually fall asleep by the time he gets to doing the 2 walls of psychedelics mind-trip, still the discovery is one of my all time favorite sci-fi ships of all time, and the effects of the movie hold up like none other, even star wars looks bad today, but space odyssey still looks good, espeacially since they shot it in very highquality back in the day plus clarke is one of my favorite sci-fi authors of all time
I saw 2001 should I wacth 2010 as well . ?
[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;38835561]I saw 2001 should I wacth 2010 as well . ?[/QUOTE] It's sort of like Apollo 13 with more Cold War intrigue (and also trippy ghost shit). You might not like it as much.
[QUOTE=Metashotzo;38721320]The parts of the movie with no soundtrack really make you feel like you're alone in space. Specifically the shot of the guy with his air support cut, writhing around, struggling to breathe. That shot's pretty great because of the lack of sound.[/QUOTE] The first man to orbit Saturn [editline]14th December 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Krinkels;38835621]It's sort of like Apollo 13 with more Cold War intrigue (and also trippy ghost shit). You might not like it as much.[/QUOTE] Still good, a bit more active than 2001 [editline]14th December 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=DesolateGrun;38835655]The first man to orbit Saturn [editline]14th December 2012[/editline] Still good, a bit more active than 2001[/QUOTE] But don't read anything beyond those 2 the rest are terrible
I skipped 2061, because according to many it's bad. Should probably give it a try. I read 3001 though, it's quite neat.
So, Jack Kirby wrote a bunch of sequel comics [url]http://www.mediafire.com/?zsa5714ylqh14l5[/url] they're.. interesting. edit: found this website, some guy adapted 2061 and 3001 into screenplays in hopes of getting MGM to make them into films [url]http://www.2001exhibit.org/[/url] also, was anyone else creeped out by ligeti's requiem? shit's just got this weird haunting feel to it, and man do i love it. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgqI32JX_jY[/media]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.