Added: 2 years ago
From: EnduranceProductions
Views: 4,217
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (148)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • great review subbed :)

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • @Transformers2themax That seems like yours hey.

  • Comment removed

  • @Transformers2themax You may be using better grammar on "Youtube" but your lack of knowledge is completely evident.

  • @Bundyrumowns Lack of knowledge? LOL! How many times have you contradicted yourself in one entire sentence and I've pointed it out?--seven or so? No, that statement makes it eight..."Lack of knowledge" - seeing as how you obviously JUST saw this film at the age you are at and haven't any knowledge of it's history whatsoever, seems like you and your little boyfriend are the ones that lack knowledge.

  • @Transformers2themax Shut up you sound like a retard. You say people like me are holding films back... well people like you created the dark ages which held us back 1000 years you do not have a open mind so this is the last thing I will say to you... Go fuck yourself you stupid cunt.

  • i could make a movie like this one. Will call it 2012: a Tree's odyssey. I'll have trees in it, it starts with the growing of a tree, then more trees, then a stick thrown between the trees..a dog.. it barks then dies. a man walking through the trees. sunshine breaking through the trees.

    The End.. yeah that about has the same amount of content as a space odyssey and i can promise i can find as much meaning in that random shit then anyone could with this movie

  • people who get a meaning from this film can turn around after taking a shit and be like "ahh i see, the ridges of that crap represent lifes stuggles and inability for time to go smoothly, the colour represents the dullness of this bourgeoisie government" then a normal person would come up and see it for what it really is... shit.

  • Comment removed

  • @Transformers2themax even the creators of the film have no idea what's going on in the film, that's why they tell people to find their own meaning in it. It's because their isn't any. All it is is random imagery based around the same concept to get a response. People have to start seeing this film for what is truly is; a terrible film

  • @shadedgreyART Yeah, because you know so much about cinema. You are so magnificently educated on the subject...I'll bet you haven't even seen, much less heard of, the original Scarface. They let others speculate about the film because it's art. If you knew anything about the history of art and artists, folks like Da Vinci, Raphael, Van Gogh, and Salvador Dali, you'd know they did the exact same thing with their artwork...Again, you are incredibly uneducated on the subject.

  • @Transformers2themax this is all coming from someone who's name is Transformers to the max.... oh a very good movie... not really. And i am an artist, i know a lot about art and i hate it when people see stupid unskillful abstract shit and think there's deeper meaning to it

  • Comment removed

  • @shadedgreyART And you, being taken into the digital and 3D era, must know so much about what is a film and what isn't...I'd like to hear a response without you looking anything up on the internet and looking like a complete pedant.

  • @Transformers2themax If you have to start throwing out film names do one that can actually be compared to this load a boring crap. The movie The tree of life is very close to the style of this film and that film did it with actual skill, plot, and substance.

  • @shadedgreyART Oh, reeeally...Who's telling you all this nonsense?--your older brother?

  • @Transformers2themax what nonsense? Have you even seen the film?

  • @shadedgreyART I'm sorry, I don't pay attention to mindless modern fast food.

  • @Transformers2themax i have been made speechless by the sheer stupidity of the way you think. people who can interpret anything from nothing are not intelligent, they are just the artist stuck up ignorant people who think they are above everything because they believe they can see hidden meanings in nothing

  • @shadedgreyART So explain to me, Mr. Alfred Hitchcock, how is it that something has an artistic meaning? Raphael's work must have had a five-paragraph personally written trivia underneath each painting to explain it for all the average-minded folks like you.

  • @Transformers2themax really you need to stop comparing people with skill to the creators of this film. As i mentioned before not even the creators of this film can explain the movie. thats why they have morons like you who believe in a meaning behind everything paying them money for a movie that involved no thought process behind it except for good camera work

  • @shadedgreyART "the creators of this film can explain the movie" - Uh, from your perspective, I would assume you meant "cannot explain the movie"? Well, actually, they can, and they did. Kubrick had Arthur C. Clarke, the writer of the short-story 2001 is based on as well as co-writer of the film's screenplay, write a novel somewhat explaining parts of the film...No thought process? You clearly are too young to have seen this. Explosions and CGI make sense but this doesn't to your age group.

  • @Transformers2themax No, its just your country getting more stupid.

  • @Bundyrumowns My country "getting more stupid". Wow, nice vocabulary, kid. I am obviously trying to stop that. Unfortunately, pedantic douchebags like you don't make the job any easier. I am not "better than everyone". That's incredibly narcissistic and egotistical...However, I am "better" than your average "person" in reference to intelligence and in the respect that I'm trying to actually do something for my country and the world. You're just an unripe apple that fell off the tree.

  • @Bundyrumowns Except, now we rely more on technology and "the tool" than we did in the prehistoric age. It depicts how evolution starts and how it begins. How we develop the use of the tool, how we end up relying on the use of the tool for everything, and how the use of the tool fails us...Because we rely so much on the tool, when it fails us, we have nothing else to look back on...Bowman is a symbol for this. He is reborn, similarly to Christ. That's why the glass breaks--Last Supper anyone?

  • @Transformers2themax That is just another theory though. Lets say your theory is correct it still does not make a good movie. It's over 1 hour of watching a ship float in space. A movie can have the best story ever told but if over 1 hour of the movie is say watching a ship float on the sea or watching someone walk through a forest saying nothing that does not make a good movie.

  • @Bundyrumowns It is more than an hour of a spaceship floating in space. You clearly didn't pay ANY attention to it. Haven't you any knowledge about the 1960s? It is amazing how they were able to pull off what they did. It is incredibly original how they filmed it...Do you not understand how perfectly it all goes with the music? The film is an opera. It is art, I repeat, it is art. You wouldn't understand...All you've seen is C.G.I. and mindless fast food explosions.

  • @Transformers2themax I just said it had amazing visuals for its time >.> and no I was around before CGI movies. Seriously stop thinking your better than everyone it makes you look like a stuck up prick.

  • @Bundyrumowns Seems like mommy and daddy need to turn your NetNanny back on. Your up way past your bedtime, kiddo.

  • @Transformers2themax Its 4pm fool. Not everyone lives in the same country.

  • @Bundyrumowns Again, way past your bedtime, son.

  • @Transformers2themax How old are you?

  • @Bundyrumowns Actually, no my grammar is perfectly fine. I paid attention in English class in school. I am a writer--an aspiring screenwriter. I write everyday and it' gotten to be more than just a hobby for me...The film, had you paid any attention to it (you having the attention span of a hummingbird), is obviously about evolution. It depicts how prehistoric man developed the tool...then it goes into space and depicts thousands of years later of man now doing the same thing....

  • @Transformers2themax Some theories say evolution some theories say god some theories say aliens ect. My point is nobody knows so how can you claim to understand?

  • @Bundyrumowns Yeah, it totally doesn't make any sense. I'll bet that you walked out of Watchmen (or would if you saw it) thinking the same thing. Yeah, just a bunch of monkeys touching a block that randomly floats around...Yeah, a glass of wine breaks, but it reappears...It's called 'symbolism'. What do you not get about it? Do you not read? Do you just like running around bashing your head into walls all day long? Seems very likely.

  • @Transformers2themax I own Watchmen on DVD I like that movie dumb ass. You just keep calling me stupid but you still have not said anything to do with the actual movie Space Odyssey... I'm waiting for your wise words.

  • @Transformers2themax Answer me this you clever human. I just did a google search of what the meaning of this movie is and it comes up with about 50 diff theories. Theories = Nobody knows what it really means because it means nothing.

  • @Transformers2themax The problem is you think you understand something and try to act like you are superior. In reality you are understanding something which is not there.

  • Comment removed

  • Oh the word police are here now. Look at your own grammar before talking about someone else. Anyway yes I do have a problem with people like you who think there a genius because they watched a movie made by some guy who was.probably stoned at the time of production.

  • @Transformers2themax Floating fetus... Brilliant!

  • @Bundyrumowns Fine, live in ignorance. If you're an aspiring filmmaker, which I highly doubt it, it's gonna be a hard life for you, especially since you clearly don't pay too much attention in English class. No, I'm sorry, you are not a complete idiot. That'd be too complimentary to describe you in such a way--you're an imbecile. You're nothing but a simplistically-minded sheep of the herd known as the general public, and you will never understand the brilliance of 2001 because of the fact.

  • Thank you for this review... Never seen it before just heard it mentioned before. You made me wanna watch it.

  • I just watched this movie it sucked I ended up fast forwarding through half the damn movie especially at the end when that flashy crap was happening for about 10 minutes! HOW the hell can anyone think this is good, yes it has a good premise but the guy who made it obviously completely sucks at telling a story. Yeah the only thought provoke I had was why the hell am I still watching this?... I'm gonna go watch a universe doc those things are way more thought provoking.

  • @Bundyrumowns By your poor grammar and immature misunderstanding of the film, you're obviously too young to have seen it in the first place. Completely sucks at telling a story? Visuals can tell a story too, nimrod. You mustn't know too much about the 1960s; the film is amazing for the time period in which it was conceived. I strongly doubt you have any form of an artistic mindset, so it's not a surprise you were too much of an impatient simpleton too watch it.

  • I saw this film back in 2002 and i was 16 at the time. I really must say that this movie is the most thought provoking viewing experiences i have ever had. Star wars are good entertainment, but 2001 really gets your brain going and the whole thing just feels like something bigger. It seems though, that this is a case where you either got it, or you didn't. But if this film hits you, man you won't forget about it.For me, this is the most important movie i have ever seen. Amazing special effects

  • i think the reason a lot of kids don't like this movie is because their so use to seeing shit blow up, shit blow up, and shit blow up

  • Holy shit how much money have you spent on DVDs ???

  • It was not adapted from the Arthur C Clarke novel. The screenplay was written first by Clarke and Kubrick and the novel was written after.

  • This is a great review. I'm glad i came across it :) 

  • It is not adapted from the book, they were written at the same time and are based on Arthur C. Clarke's short story "The Sentinel". They both collaborated on the story and the movie was released a few months before the book.

  • if you want to know what was going on in kubricks movies. listen and watch the Jay weidner material. he has a new doc. out called kubrick's oddyssey. he explains how he filmed the moon landings.

  • Hal's the man!

  • 2001 has an amazing story...Well, too bad that none of the story was shown in the movie itself. How many people figured out what Kubrick meant without reading his analysis?

  • Pretty funny that this film was released in 1968 one year before the moon landing.

  • @DOOMRPG ok

  • Yes, it was slow I still thought the action was pretty involving.

  • this movie was extremely boring i felt like jumping off a building caus of the pace and the dialogue could fit on one page. if you want a good sci fi movie watch alien or blade runner. at least things actually happen. the whole movie was a scientist going to it and you dont even know what happened to him, then a robot that malfuctions and thats it. i am so disapointed that i paid 6$ for it. yes its a pretty movie but it has 0 story and sure you could say its all symbolic but its not entertaining

  • @joker9494949494 I get the feeling you don't watch much Kubrick, all over his movies have kind of wonky dialouge, but his movies are more about the message of the work

  • @joker9494949494 Word. It's meaningless and boring. Might as well be a special effect demo. Which it is.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Heywood Floyd was using a Newspad/iPad!

  • A very fundamental flaw in the beginning of your review is saying the film was adapted from the book by Arthur C. Clarke. In fact, the screenplay and book were written simultaneously - with Kubrick either accepting, rejecting, or blending Clarkes specific ideas with his own on the *screenplay*. At some point, a type of agreement was made that the book would be published only *after* the film was released (a "deal" that Clarke would later have a problem with).

  • It wasn't adapted from the novel, they were developed together. Basically, they are based off one another. Yeah though, its my favorite film ever.

  • @funrizwan Your lack of capitalization and punctuation tells me you aren't very educated.

  • @funrizwan Oh right, just as your lack of grammar and intelligent arguments tells me that your incredibly thick.

  • Very good review, thanks for uploading this. :)

    

  • Thought-provoking? I always figured you had to turn your brain off to watch this film....

  • the movie is about the expansion of the human consciousness. The monoliths found is actually the wide screen angled sideways.

  • @electronicmedium According to the symbolism in the movie. After reading the books I'm not sure which to believe.

  • Sci-Fi is my favorite genre and to see the origin of the modern sci-fi movie era is amazing... I guess I'm going to have to edit my favorite movies list... AGAIN! Great review

  • how can they not understand you? i understand man im from Alabama

  • to be honest, I thought this was one of the worst movies I've ever seen. The only good things about this movie were the apes and the homocidal computer.

  • sorry mate i have no idea what your saying through your accent

  • Hey by any chance did you like the sequel 2010 with Roy Schneider,John Lithgow and Helen Mirren?

  • the monolith tought the man-apes to use tools. killing happened after the monolith was gone. this means killing was purely a human invention.

  • Does no one else think this film should of been an hour long.

  • Okay. This made me laugh. I see some people are mentioning Confused Matthew’s review. His overall point that, objectively, 2001 is about nothing and subjectively it can be about anything you want it to be. The fact that this guy here rambles on about NOTHING for a good 8 minuets (some at the beginning some toward the end) says a lot about Matthew's points. Then he stumbles along trying to say something about the nothing that happened. The ONLY exception is HAL. HAL was awesome.

  • @Warblade118 Yeah, I definately would've liked to see more of Hal...

  • loved the sequel 2010: the year we we make contact, both epic films

  • Great review man. What a shame there is a link in "related videos" to confused matthew's total BS "review" if you can even call it that.

  • 2001 a Space Odyssey is the best movie ever!

  • Actually, it was adapted from a short story by Clarke. The book was written as they were making the movie. This is all time favorite movie--am going to watch it tonight on blu ray :P 5*

  • This has to be my all-time favorite film. Which is ironic since I'm not really into the sci-fi genre.

  • This movie is the worst way to waste 143 minutes of your life.

  • Very nice review. I had the opportunity to watch it in theatres sometime in the 90's, but haven't fully watch it since then. Strangely, I've watched 2010 more often during my teenage years, especially during its run on a pay tv movie channel. around here

  • Whats up b. good review i have never seen this movie going to have to check it out. later dude keep up the good work.

  • dude greatest movie ever!!

  • @JJJ10JJJ oldie but a goodie, gotta love those violent apes and that crazy computer!?!?hahaha

  • dude...its the best movie ever

  • gosu

  • @orc145626 thank you sir!

  • @EnduranceProductions Can you please do a review of Blade Runner if you haven't already? It's always good to hear others' thoughts on artistic works of cinema.

  • my dads got the blu-ray of 2001 a space oddsey and the dvd of the sequel 2010

    and a poster there all his favirate films

  • @jigsawbellic sweet! blu ray is the way to go with this one in my opinion. rock on!

  • 2001 was the one movie that i had to rewatch instantly after first viewing, and i'm not the biggest fan of scifi-adventures. HAL9000 is pretty creepy villain, that segment in the movie is a genius work. That psychedelic "screen-saver" at the end of the film is a little bit dated.

    I have also troubles and lack of interest to watch that Barry Lyndon-stuff and all the other big "costume-dramas".

  • @waegiz37 I have got to parody the HAL computer in a video one day, thanks for viewing sir!

  • 2001 is no Moonraker!

    Just kidding of course

  • @michaelhonscar hahahhaha Mooraker is in the collection too, a bit different taste of film but fun all the same, thanks for viewing sir!

  • i have also been in a Sci Fi mood of late. in fact i just rewatched probably my absolutely favourite, Blade Runner. like 2001, I think it's also been shockingly accurate in its portrayal of the not so distant future.

  • @jetsilveravenger Blade Runner rocks. do you prefer the theatrical or the director's cut of that one? i have got to go with the director's cut myself. rock on!

  • i dont hate the original cut as much as lots of people (i'm mostly ok with the clunky narration except for when it comes in at the end there and ruins the climax). there are SEVEN cuts of the movie. i guess my preferred is the "Final Cut" which came out in 2007. it's the one Scott says is his vision of the film so you can't go wrong with that.

  • @jetsilveravenger 7 cuts, dang dude!?!? I thought Halloween 6 had a lot of cuts, that one takes the taco!hahhaha

  • I personally only know of FIVE cuts of Blade Runner: The Workprint, The Original Theatrical, The International, The Directors, and The Final. If you know what the other TWO are I would love to hear more.

  • the other two are a cut that was a special sneak preview screening shown only once in San Diego in 1982 that is supposedly the same as the original theatrical cut but with 3 additional scenes (i don't know which though). then there was a broadcast version that edited out content to be shown on CBS in 1986 (running time of 114 minutes).

  • so there's only really seven in the extremely technical sense. really, you're basically right about there being five since the other two don't exist on any format you can obtain.

  • Awesome review.

  • @CountDraclecarde Thanks!

  • Such an awesome movie and one of my favorites. HAL is a great villain. Arthur C Clarke has denied several times naming HAL after IBM, stating that IBM has been very helpful to him and would never try to slight the company.

    Excellent review. Enjoyed it thoroughly

  • @YoureWrongImRight I have always wanted to parody the HAL scenes in this one. Maybe have HAL shut off all the toilets in the house, etc!?!?!hahaha

  • I have never seen this, yea I know I am the last one, but after your review,I want to check it out!!!

  • @bdsninja good ol' sci fi stuff from yester-year!

  • love 2001 and stanley kubrick. In fact spent all thanksgiving talking about kubrick (mostly Dr. Strangelove though). 2001 is arguably the best sci-fi movie ever made.

    Great review man.

  • @bigtoe512 yeah, been in a kubrick mood here lately, just got a cheap o copy of Eyes Wide Shut today, gona try it out tonight.

  • I got that blu ray. Worth the money, it looks very good in HD.

  • best review i've seen of this film so far! but i couldn't help thinking of the fact that it was written concurrently with Arthur C. Clarke, who contributed a great deal of the science to accurately portray space and space travel, not to mention the story itself!

  • @0nesandzer0s thank you sir! oldie but a goodie!

  • wh00000 h00000!!! An oldie but a goodie!

  • yes sir, nothing but the best Kubrick around here dudes! rock on!

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more