This could have been a 30 minute short
This movie drags so much making it a tedious watch. It could have easily made it's point in 30 minutes just as effectively.
shareIt couldn't have made its point in 30 minutes, because the slow, reflective pace that immerses the viewer & conveys the overwhelming vastness & mystery of the Universe is one of its points. I'll grant you that it's not a film for everyone, not even in 1968 & certainly not now. It demands more of its viewers than many are either willing or trained to give. Yet if you give yourself over to it, it has rich rewards to offer. Of essence & necessity, the experience must be a slower, lengthier one, in order to enwrap & enrapt the viewer.
And of course not everyone will respond to that—not because "they don't get it" or "they're just too dumb" or anything like that, but simply because not everyone shares the same personality type, worldview, or philosophical/aesthetic perspective. Not every film is for every viewer, just as not every painting or every piece of music is for everyone. It's a matter of taste & what you, personally, want from a film. Or don't want.
It's art and not a Fast and Furious movie. Some people don't know the difference.
shareSadly true.
shareArt movies don't have rules to abide by while Hollywood movie follow a basic structure which gives the movie a chance to make money. Art movies generally don't make money, because a majority of the moviegoing audience reject them due to the fact that they aren't for mass audiences. 2001 is an experience, while Fast and Furious is a live action video game.
share2001 is a sublimely immersive aesthetic experience! :)
shareYes, and many don't feel the way we do. That's OK, but the OP shouldn't complain about it when the movie wasn't made for him. To us, the movie is perfect and many feel that way. The problem with the OP is that he thinks his opinion is gospel.
shareI agree. If someone doesn't like 2001, I'm not going to disparage them, I'll just recognize that what moves me deeply leaves them cold. And nothing wrong with that. A well-made film that they love might well leave me cold.
But yes, 2001 is perfect for those of us who love it. :)
There is a neurological difference in audiences from the 1960's and audiences in the 2020's. It really does drag. I remember seeing this something like 12 times maybe up through the 80's. I never got tired of it. But over time we get used to seeing the the spaceships and starscapes, more and more of them, Star Wars, Star Trek, Starship Troopers all more intense faster, more detailed, digitally computer generated, and it doesn't take as long to process the stark beauty of the technology in 2001. We don't need to admire it so much because we practically almost live with it today. Much as I love this movie, it is out of date today. Also, people today talk different and they talk much faster and looser, and more commercially. Actually I prefer the slower more deliberate professional talk of people from the 1960's. Today people are too glib, and they lie and manipulate way too much. The movies of today have to be packed every few seconds with something that will appeal to the different audiences excepted to be watching. Movies of today are on the whole pretty awful, but that doesn't make all the movies of yesterday perfect. My favorites are the old movies, pre-code up to WWII era.
share"My favorites are the old movies, pre-code up to WWII era."
Difficult to go wrong with that rich vein of cinematic gold! :)
We do have that faster, more technological world ... but we don't seem to have the complex, contemplative, aesthetic aspects of 2001, and that's what I really wish we had more of today.
The closest we got was "Interstellar" which I called the 2001 of the 21st Century, and it showed all the differences I was talking about, but Interstellar still got to that seed of mystery even though to spark an idea. But as many times as I have seen it I'd still watch 2001 over Interstellar again.
shareSame here. :)
The old movies used to try to capture and show stories of humanity, today movie are trying to program people into some new line of consumer robots.
shareAnd they're succeeding at it, too. It's accompanied by an active, encouraged disdain for quality, depth, humane values. In a time when people are told to become "brands" so they can sell themselves, how much of their humanity do they give up for that dubious "privilege" of becoming a flesh-&-blood commodity?
shareI agree
shareThank you. And, transforming that book into a movie...actually impossible. (And yes, I know it was a joint effort but Clarke was a genius)
share