What film did you watch last night?

tres said:
2001 - A Space Odyssee

2/10

I watched this after the Interstellar simile comments. I don't know whether I'm too old to appreciate this, having grown up with better visuals, acting, lines and perhaps the basic concepts had been explored by other films I'd seen. But I found the acting terrible, the lines cliche'ingly bad, the storyline far too predictable and the cinematography just too 'dated' to be enjoyed. I can imagine this film would have been incredible and groundbreaking once upon a time - but for me, unfortunately, it was just old and very boring.
Click to expand...

What does "cinematography just too dated to be enjoyed" actually mean?

I know the answer it was rhetorical question.

It means you simply have no clue and use sentences like this to try and sound clever...

You state "I'm too old to appreciate this" Don't you mean to young and thick?

2001 is a masterpiece of cinema this is not up for debate...even if you don't like it.
 
Cleisthenes said:
Clearly you didn't pick up on numerous suggestions and underlying things which made it such a masterpiece. The visuals are also still fantastic, especially the blu ray, my local Vue is showing it at the end of the month which I hope to go and see! If you want an explanation of all the 'hidden' messages, just youtube it, there's a bunch of videos.

Your "2/10" offends me :p:D;)
Click to expand...

I'm just glad I'm not him:eek:
 
Cleisthenes said:
Clearly you didn't pick up on numerous suggestions and underlying things which made it such a masterpiece. The visuals are also still fantastic, especially the blu ray, my local Vue is showing it at the end of the month which I hope to go and see! If you want an explanation of all the 'hidden' messages, just youtube it, there's a bunch of videos.

Your "2/10" offends me :p:D;)
Click to expand...

I'm by no means an idiot when it comes to watching films, but if a film needs accompanying Youtube videos or whatever to explain it, then it has done something wrong.
 
Vonhelmet said:
I'm by no means an idiot when it comes to watching films, but if a film needs accompanying Youtube videos or whatever to explain it, then it has done something wrong.
Click to expand...

2001 doesn't...There just happens to be videos

It was made in 1968 before ipads..before skype and the internet before all of those things that indeed Kubrick predicted.

Samsung actually used 2001 in court when apple tried to sue them for copyright accusing Samsung of ripping off the iphone design

"they argue the idea for the iPad existed back in 1968, when Stanley Kubrick dreamed up his sci fi classic. And in American patent law, if the idea existed before your patent application—what's known as prior art—your patent is null. So essentially, Samsung is pulling a hell of a legal maneuver here, alleging they couldn't possibly have stolen the iPad's design, because Apple took it from an imaginary science fiction movie space station:"
 
Yeah, it was quite far seeing in terms of technology... However, while the cinematography is impressive, I found it really boring and the ending is weird.
 
Not last night, Tuesday actually. InterStellar at the Trafford Centre IMAX.
Honestly, I have never seen a film like it and don't think there will ever be another like it.
And before people say "2001" was like it, x was like it, z was like it. Thats not what I mean. I mean a film that was so beautifully and consistently executed, for nearly 3 hours no less. Sure it takes inspiration from elsewhere, but for me nothing else has come close to this. In an age where the vast majority of films are regurgitated tat and reboots, this was such a breath of fresh air.
Visually stunning, and at the IMAX had me feeling like I was onboard the ship at times. You really felt *In* the movie.

10/10
 
Fury

hmmmmmm

6/10?

Really wanted to like it but a few bits bugged me

1) its just too darn similar to saving private ryan, the crew are too similar to SPR squad memebers, the last stand is again very similar to the bridge defence in SPR
2) all those panzerfausts in the marching SS battalion and then again in the crate and only 1 got fired!
3) two grenades inside the tank took too long to explode and then when he got back in - no damage / blood!
4) house scene dragged on a bit - with eye rolling "OMG shes dead" bit which i saw coming a mile away
5) the way the last battle scene was done made it seem a bit hollywood / naff - when in real life things like this actually happened (Audie murphy etc) but think they didnt do themselves favours (such as brad getting shot 4 times and still able to function) or could have nailed most of them coming down the road at the start of the fight

saying that thought some bits were very good:

1) Tiger scene - very good, my retired cheiftain tank driving father in law thought it was pretty realistic and accurate
2) atmosphere of the house scene, worrying at the start into relief and then back to worry/annoyance when the other crew members arrive and spoil it
3) thought labouf was actually pretty good (OMG)
4) norman dude was pretty good as well
 
Would anyone with knowledge on the subject like to link to a YouTube video they prefer which explains 2001 Space Odyssey?

There's a lot of strange content in the film implying that a hidden message exists, the Monolith and that ending are definitely symbolic.

Videos I've found state themselves that film teachers have taken issue with their view point. So please enlighten us.
 
easyrider said:
What does "cinematography just too dated to be enjoyed" actually mean?

I know the answer it was rhetorical question.

It means you simply have no clue and use sentences like this to try and sound clever...

You state "I'm too old to appreciate this" Don't you mean to young and thick?

2001 is a masterpiece of cinema this is not up for debate...even if you don't like it.
Click to expand...
I can imagine you talking like that to one of your pupils :D
 
There isn't anything that difficult to understand about 2001. The monolith just appears at key moments in human evolution, so humanity is obviously being watched by someone/something and it gives us a "push" to the next step.
 
Vonhelmet said:
I'm by no means an idiot when it comes to watching films, but if a film needs accompanying Youtube videos or whatever to explain it, then it has done something wrong.
Click to expand...

Agree 100%.
A film should be able to stand on its own without the watcher needing to do some background (home) work, to enjoy it, to its fullest.
 
Some films are made more enjoyable by making you think for yourself what's going on. Donnie Darko original and the director's cut is a good example of this, where the explanation in the director's cut removes the very thing that makes the original cut so good.
 
Cleisthenes said:
Clearly you didn't pick up on numerous suggestions and underlying things which made it such a masterpiece. The visuals are also still fantastic, especially the blu ray, my local Vue is showing it at the end of the month which I hope to go and see! If you want an explanation of all the 'hidden' messages, just youtube it, there's a bunch of videos.

Your "2/10" offends me :p:D;)
Click to expand...

I think that the numerous suggestions and underlying things have been left very open for viewer interpretation, which I bet is a reason why it is classed as such a masterpiece (in the same way Donny Darko is notoriously brilliant for the completely open-to-interpretation story) and no doubt there are hundreds of theories because of this - it's a symbolic search for god/monolith, it's a modern frankenstein story, I even read somewhere that the monolith is simply a food critic. I'll definitely watch some of the other 'hidden' messages, but that's the beauty of art - it's viewer subjective, and my 2/10 stands!

easyrider said:
What does "cinematography just too dated to be enjoyed" actually mean?

I know the answer it was rhetorical question.

It means you simply have no clue and use sentences like this to try and sound clever...

You state "I'm too old to appreciate this" Don't you mean to young and thick?

2001 is a masterpiece of cinema this is not up for debate...even if you don't like it.
Click to expand...


I agree with you, I bet it was a masterpiece of cinema, and still is.
I, however, didn't enjoy it. I won't be losing any sleep because you seem so offended by my opinion. If I did, however, I'd simply watch 2001 again, and all would be fine.
 
How I Live Now - Watched this after a recommendation a while back from Vonhelmet. It is a story of a group of young English kids and their American cousin enjoying the great British outdoors when WWIII happens. I liked the film a lot, it was very simple and down to earth showing some fantastic scenery and just a bit of tension. Some of the reviews and comments on IMDb are pretty scathing but hey, I liked it. 4/5
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom