Movie Review: 2001: A Space Odyssey
Tania says:
Oh no. I am dreading writing this. I am suppose to love this movie and be super smart and make it whatever I want it to be. But – I don’t love it. I am not super smart and I want this movie to TELL me what it wants to be. I mean, I love science fiction and I should love this – this movie that is somehow an influence to all science fiction after it.
Again, as with M, I totally get the groundbreaking aspect of this film. The special effects hold up today which is saying a lot with all the CGI and computers that are used nowadays. But – as for the majority of the story – boring. I’m sorry! I really am.
The beginning of the movie is okay. First monkeys find this monolith – then thousands of years later astronauts find it again on the moon. Okay. Intriguing.
The middle of the movie actually rocks. HAL is creepy and super cool which is saying a lot for the computer. Give me a whole movie of HAL owning those astronaut bitches and I am all about it. The movie managed to make a computer sinister and a genuine bad guy. I like this and I get this.
The end of the movie after Dave disconnects HAL. Huh? This is where I just got mad. First we have to see Dave fly through space like he is in some Led Zeppelin laser show at the planetarium. Then he is an old man? Then the monolith is back? Then he is born again as a star child? I don’t get it and I wanted to. So I looked online to see what I was missing and it all said the same thing – it is what you want it to be. I want it explained to me dammit!
So, although I was with the movie through most of it Kubrick ruined it at the end by pissing me off. And yes, I have seen other Kubrick films and I do like them – just not this one. I’m sorry!
Josh says:
I really really wanted to like this movie. If for no other reason, than to save face with the geeky Sci Fi crowd for despising Star Wars (oops, future blog spoiler again).
I tried soooo hard too. There were moments where I was hopeful, where I thought, "Oh yeah, I get it now, this is where it's starting to get good!'.
Then they killed off Hal.
Basically, this movie should shave 30 minutes off of the beginning, 30 minutes off of the end and it should be called Hal. Then I'm pretty sure I'd like it.
2 comments:
I agree with both of you on this movie. I wanted to like this movie an awful lot, but the ending just killed it for me. It’s Kubrick, it’s deliberate. I get it. But does it have to move thaaat slooooooow?. I’ve seen this movie (and sadly this ending), about 5 times now. It never gets better for me, I always hate the ending despite the fact that visuals are cool. I know in the 60’s they debated endlessly what the ending of the movie was about. I really don’t care that much. HAL is incredible. It’s amazing what great writing and a great voice actor can do. Simply astonishing that HAL is the most interesting character in the movie. Overall I like it, but the ending just…no.
Ever seen 2010? Interesting, much more watchable 1980’s sci-fi film I suppose. I don’t know if it’s better, but it’s different. Certainly much more conventional movie making. They answer questions that I’m sure Kubrick never wanted answered, but then it’s thought that the author Arthur C. Clarke wasn’t totally enthralled with Kubrick’s vision and needed 2010 to explain things his way.
I love Kubrick. I don't think there's a bad Kubrick movie out there. Kubrick has a special affinity for set-up and lighting that I love.
Also, every single Kubrick movie is a comedy. Detached irony at its finest.
2001 is all about where we as a species are at, and where we could be. It's not coincidence that the big killer in the middle section was created by man. In man's image in fact. That's why the ending works so well. We have to evolve past our human foibles if we ever hope to achieve anything. The monolith helps Dave achieve this. He becomes something "other". Not human, but still attached to humanity.
I apologize if I'm rambling. But I felt someone should try to stick up for this amazing film.
Post a Comment