Why I hate 2001 A Space Odyssey

[IceGambit]

Wow, this has become heated.

carl, you do bring up some interesting points. I will give you credit for watching the film that you dislike, and conducting a genuinely thorough study of it.

I personally see the film as a great accomplishment. It settles me to look back on a film so rich in meaning, as you said. When all the crap that comes out today has nothing of value at all.

I imagine that the modern movie-goer would think the movie was confusing and boring, and I think that is sad. But it means something that you understand it and still dislike it, carl.

Thank you for not being ignorant.

[Terraner]

Originally posted by carl
...
As for the other word you mentioned, I admit, I don't have a damn clue what it means.

Well, I won't go into science vs. religion disscusion, becouse I don't belive completly in evolutione either. But still I am trying to have an open mind!

Anyway, you certanly heard about <a href="http://catholicoutlook.com/whatisgeo.html">geocentism</a> or <a href="http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliocentrism">heliocentrism</a>. So, <a href="http://courses.ent.iastate.edu/ent211/stories/storyReader$7">anthropocentrism</a> is of course human centered. This is just short explanations. You can find more about any of three terms on Net (google).
Which leads to the rest of the word, namely "anti". So you can figure it out its exactly oposit of human-centered.

So, what I am trying to say is that we humans in general arn't heliocentric or geocentric (at least most of humanity isn't), but are still preaty anthropocentric or even just europocentric!. And that is what I am searching in Scifi. Proofs that humans arn't the center of the univers, rather we are preaty unsignificant. Most prominent exampels are also 2001, Hichighers Guide Through the Galaxy, all the works of <a href="http://www.cyberiad.info/english/main.htm">Stanislaw Lem</a> (Pilot Pirx Stolies, Invincible /that's a story they should put on screens/, Eden, Fiasco, Solaris, The Star Diars, etc. /in fact almost anything from Lem would be worth filming!/)

[carl]

Originally posted by IceGambit
Wow, this has become heated.

Well a few posts between Deacens and me were heated but all the rest is harmless ribbing.

Thank you for not being ignorant.

No problem. I had to try reaaaaaly hard to understand the film, so at least you didn't try and tell me I'd like it if I understood it. Thanks for that.

Originally posted by Terraner
Anyway, you certanly heard about <a href="http://catholicoutlook.com/whatisgeo.html">geocentism</a> or <a href="http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliocentrism">heliocentrism</a>. So, <a href="http://courses.ent.iastate.edu/ent211/stories/storyReader$7">anthropocentrism</a> is of course human centered. This is just short explanations. You can find more about any of three terms on Net (google).
Which leads to the rest of the word, namely "anti". So you can figure it out its exactly oposit of human-centered.

So, what I am trying to say is that we humans in general arn't heliocentric or geocentric (at least most of humanity isn't), but are still preaty anthropocentric or even just europocentric!. And that is what I am searching in Scifi. Proofs that humans arn't the center of the univers, rather we are preaty unsignificant. Most prominent exampels are also 2001, Hichighers Guide Through the Galaxy, all the works of <a href="http://www.cyberiad.info/english/main.htm">Stanislaw Lem</a> (Pilot Pirx Stolies, Invincible /that's a story they should put on screens/, Eden, Fiasco, Solaris, The Star Diars, etc. /in fact almost anything from Lem would be worth filming!/)

Thanks for the explanation. I agree that it's a good theme for Science Fiction. It's mostly done best in the science fiction novels though, films usually make stories fantasy not sci fi. Fifth Element, Star Wars ect... andc they usually place humans as the saviours of the universe. Damn Clechaes.

[Terraner]

[/b]
Well a few posts between Deacens and me were heated but all the rest is harmless ribbing.
No problem. I had to try reaaaaaly hard to understand the film, so at least you didn't try and tell me I'd like it if I understood it. Thanks for that.


Thanks for the explanation. I agree that it's a good theme for Science Fiction. It's mostly done best in the science fiction novels though, films usually make stories fantasy not sci fi. Fifth Element, Star Wars ect... andc they usually place humans as the saviours of the universe. Damn Clechaes.

It took me a long time to answere that, but I am in the mood today! :big grin:
So, even Fifth Element, Star Wars and such examples are in a way just point on the 'i' (don't know better phrase) on the proof about anthropocentrizm!

[soyguapo9090]

I agree on a lot of this. This was by FAR the worst movie I've ever seen in all my time. WOW. The several minute scenes that are just bad special effects or SLOW MOVEMENT with no audio but BREATHING!!!!!!!!!!!!! I can't describe it. Here's my in-depth google review.

"Please read this - It will educate you on the dumpster fire they call a movie. The only reason you should EVER watch this piece of TRASH is if you are bent on watching the worst movie ever made. There aren't WORDS that can describe the pain and agony of this movie.

7 minutes of black and white noise, followed by a 5 minute clip of the slowest, and I mean PAINFULLY slow music ever composed. Then monkeys screaming for 30 minutes with some interesting points made, that won't make sense unless you thoroughly studied the book. Then there's some talking that doesn't make sense, followed by a whole 10 minute piece of CLASSICAL MUSIC while some paper cutouts move across a screen. LAME. Then they stand in front of a black box. And stare some more. Then... wait... Nope. Just a Box. KACHOW now they're in space. Hal is cool. But then they go out and 5 minutes of LOUD, uncomfortable breathing. Wait is that guy dead? Who would ever know. 5 minutes of breathing, 5 minutes of breathing again while he TURNS KEYS while Hal repeats the same few words time and time again. The huge sabotage part of the book never happens. The whole scene where he opens the airlock (nope) and the biggest part of the book, Iapetus, just doesn't even happen. The whole plot is fake and pointless, and leaves you to fill in the blanks yourself.

How about that 10 minute intermission? Black and weird noise. Not just on the theatrical version, every one you will EVER see. I consider that gross film-making.

But here comes the WORST part. 15-20 minutes of colors waving by and no sound except for weird effects and breathing. Wait, I guess there's a close up of his eye a few times. Then he's old, then he's a space baby. Hmm?

Only watch it to say you've seen the worst movie ever made. Don't try to own this. Waste of time and money. Hear me now, praise me later. You will gauge your eyeballs out before you watch it again. Read the book! I couldn't put it down and finished it in one day. Rather quick read and wildly imaginative."

[soyguapo9090]

What? FAITHFUL ADAPTION? FAITHFUL ADAPTION?!?!?! I read the book. I LOVED the book. Every main point of the book was washed out entirely by the movie. They originally went to SATURN, not Jupiter. They originally had a huge epic scene where they pass by jupiter, and it was beautiful, majestic, and eye opening. Hal originally killed the whole group by forcing open the airlock, which was an awesome scene. That's gone. NOT A FAITHFUL ADAPTION. I love and cherish the book, but this was the worst movie I've ever seen.