Tuesday, September 29, 2015

2001: A Space Odyssey

I have so much to say about this movie and no idea where to begin. A good place to start is probably the rating I'd give it.

Yep, ten out of ten. If the rating scale was based on how many times a movie made my brain shut down from having no idea what was going on. If I had to rate it on how much I enjoyed this movie, I'd give it a 2 out of ten. And that is due to something I like to call "The Sienfeld Effect." 
So, The Sienfeld Effect is as follows: I once tried to watch the show and found it extremely boring and not funny in the slightest. Why? Because everyone else had taken Sienfeld's jokes and used them over and over again in more interesting situations, leaving the stand up comedian feeling rather boring and dull.

So for when it was released, the slow cuts letting people drink in every rich, well shot detail of space was amazing!
 Kubrik was like "Space!" and everyone else was like:

But to us the movie's agonizing attention to detail in a rather dull setting is just... boring. I can see that it set some standards back in 1968 (DATS AN OLD MOVIE)
but when we have movies like star wars and alien, with these rich, well developed universes that provoke so much thought and side stories, 2001 just made me question who slipped Acid into my soda at dinner.

Physics wise: I had a few questions really. So we mentioned that yeah, it's great that the ship is spinning to give artificial gravity. But when I thought about it, I noticed something: The ship isn't spinning whenever we look at it. Or at least, we can't tell that it is. One could argue that only the center of the ship is spinning, and that the outer ball shape is just a shell around the inner rotating core. But in the pod bay (whatever you want to call the area with the space ping pong balls) there was clearly gravity in that room, but it wasn't spinning! Also, the glass falling from the table when he was an old man? Great physics, glass broke. All is well in the world.

From a cinema view (and I'm no cinematographer), the movie's pacing is painful. I get that he was trying to give every single movement in space great magnitude, but when you're character is just trying to press a button in his space ball, it's unnecessary that he spends 5 minutes leading up to him pressing the button. JUST PRESS THE BUTTON. If we cut down on the amount of cuts and time just wasted with all these unnecessarily long and awkward scenes, we could get this movie down to under an hour and a half, I bet. 

Also the characters: Maybe they're not a big part of the movie, but we spent an awful lot of time getting to know the doctor that we would never see again after he found the obelisk on the moon. Lets look at all this information they fed us about him: He has a wife and a daughter, it's his daughter's birthday, his daughter wants a bush baby for her birthday, she also wants a telephone, the name of her baby sitter, the fact that his wife isn't home, AND HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE FOR A WOMAN TO WALK AROUND A CIRCULAR ROOM?! TAKE STEPS LARGER THAN TWO INCHES PLEASE!

I'm just going to end with this:
you probably made mistakes when the most emotionally developed character in your movie
is a robot that's not supposed to feel emotion.

1 comment:

  1. Seriously? You're going to put Star Wars and Alien up against 2001: A Space Odyssey? That's like comparing a day at Six Flags to a day at The Louvre. Sure, Six Flags is fun, but it's a cheap, meaningless fun, compared to the cultural experience of visiting The Louvre. Personally, I'd contend they both have their place.