Junkyard Review- 2001: A Space Odyssey

[kaewonf8]

Only watched half your review. It bored me

[pavelzolnaj]

i wacht it hwen i was 7 you fagot matherfucker fuck you

[degree7]

I think the special effects in this movie are fantastic, and the film looks like it could have been made today. That's one area of the film I disagree with you on, Junkyard.

But overall, I find Kubrick's films to be very SLOW, PONDEROUS, and have CARDBOARD characters.

[Leatherbubba]

Anybody who dislikes 2001 should be boiled with his own pudding and buried with a stake of holly through his heart!

[ads1093]

YOU'RE BORING AND PRETENTIOUS!!!!!!!!

[u57]

I applaud you for being honest. Truth is some films have reached a level of "enlightenment" so to speak where you'll be burned at the stake for saying you don't like it. This movie is one of them.

My problems with this movie is that it simply isn't engaging. As you said, characters are lifeless. Pacing? What's that? And seems to be nothing more than an arthouse film.

Also just to reference, I've seen Kubrick's other films and this is probably the only one of his I don't like.

[Clesarie]

Totally agree with you. I absolutely think this movie sucks.

[joker9494949494]

@OneDeviousBastard well of course they are different, but the ships design(inside wise) was heavily alien style in pandorum. but i think that was a horrible movie. hah to be honest. i mean it was decent but the whole people turned into orcs kind of thing was a silly idea. and poorly executed. pitch black was a fun movie, but still not as great as movies like predator, alien, terminator, evil dead and the list goes on.

[DevilMayhem666]

@joker9494949494 How was it poorly executed?

[joker9494949494]

@OneDeviousBastard Alien didnt copy all of it. there is a reason why Alien is better known than it. and there is a reason it has 4 films plus two shitty ones and has spawned comicbooks, toys and novels. not to mention brought weaver to the big screen and sent Ridley into history as one of the greatest directors.

[joker9494949494]

@OneDeviousBastard where have you seen an alien so original? :p now plot wise, it happens with over 10 billion films world wide some of them will have the same plot structure :p at least Alien had a plot. the begining in this was good, and it built up to what could have been an engaging plot about the object, but it cut off into the whole robot saga which ruined it for me. yes HAL was cool but he should have stuck with one plot line and with with that.

[joker9494949494]

art films can be good, Alien is a good one :) at least shit happens and it looks great :D

[LynnJynh9315]

I honestly don't care if you hate Superman Returns... what really pisses me off is when people say that the other four movies were any better.

[TheCoolieyo]

you sir, are a fucking retard

[hallowedbeeddie]

superman returns is a pile of shit. 2001 is amazing

[M0VIES4U2]

I also dislike this film. I don't think it is terrible; I just wish that Kubrick could have put some diolouge in during the space scenes.

[Gorshkin111]

I know you're going to claim that I am only "pretentious" as you claim this film is...but I just watched this movie again for the first time in about 3 years, and I was literally GLUED to the screen. Could not turn away. Could not fast forward. It's simply grippling, and if you missed out on that, I feel sorry. And I don't mean that in a condescending way, I just can't believe you don't see or feel how much there is to see and feel here.

[Shard18]

this movie realy did suck

[Sasuk3xxx]

"peoples" hahahaha I doubt you can understand the movie.

[sleepinspring]

its really that hard to understand the ending? do you not really like to think? ohhhh, youre one of those people who like to be told what to think? quickly and simply? i see. there is probably a reason why the library of congress has deemed it culturally and historically significant while you are waiting for some green screen explosions and tits to pop out. anti art and anti thinking, the american way of life. glad no one looks at your chanel.

[JunkyardBreadfruit]

@sleepinspring

Funny how all these people who like to think for themselves all come up with essentially the same response to this video, right down to suggesting I want titsplosions in every film I see.

Also,

[urkhai666]

i just saw this and this is officially the most fucked up movie i have ever seen. sometimes you just have to watch a black scream for 3-4 min with scary fucking music. and the ending is just wtf, i just didnt get it why the fuck do you have to see some fucking old dudes and then a fucking baby, i mean i hoped for some kind of explanation but i wasn't even surprised that the credits started rolling do you just assume that i got it a fucking baby flying at earth! i just dont get it

[Shard18]

@urkhai666 the sequil ansers some but not all questions and was way faster. thow it kinda rases more questions. at lest theres no acid trip in that 1

[thecolorunknown]

For anyone who doesn't believe my last comment, you can actually look that info up if you want. The original beginning of 2001 was a series if interviews with scientists talking about how they think the most likely scenario for making contact with aliens to be. They said they would build robots to send across the universe, land on moons, and wait for an intelligent species to find it so they could contact them. That was what the monolith was and that is the point of the film..cheers.

[thecolorunknown]

2001 for those who were wondering was about a Type 3 civilization making contact with a Type 1 civilization (future humans).. The monolith was put there by advanced aliens so that when humans were advanced enough to discover it, they would be able to make contact...which is what happens in the movie.

Kubrick actually shot footage explaining this but cut it out at the last minute to make it more mysterious. It is VERY accurate to how scientists actually think contact would happen. :)

[Shard18]

@thecolorunknown realy? so whats with the scairy star baby?

[analwartchicks]

nice review, brief to the point, i don't necessarily agree, but its boring movie that I find so Incredible (yeah I know, a total contradiction).

Also, this was much better than lousy "confused matthews" review :P

[Bassbait]

2001 is a great film that you don't seem to completely grasp. I've read that surreal films with deconstructed narratives actually help people's brains progress. 2001 is an enigma. You either get it or you don't get it. You don't get it. That's fine. Maybe you need to invest more time into learning the things surrounding it. I suggest Robag88's analysis on the film. If that doesn't get you thinking, there's no hope for you with this film, at least from my viewpoint.

[Shard18]

@Bassbait or maybe the darecter should invest in a 5th grade grasp of the naritive proses. if u have to to high, drunk, crazy or so pratenches u can convince urself that u get it, then the movie sucks. like he said. reed the book. its way better then this theatical mind fuck

[Bassbait]

@Shard18 Sorry, but did you SERIOUSLY just tell Kubrick to get a 5th grade concept of narrative...

WHEN YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE A 5th GRADE CONCEPT OF SPELLING?

Sorry, but are you an idiot? Because you just really proved your own point to be useless - if you can't even say "pretentious", or "read", or "you", then you shouldn't be talking crap on ANYONE, let alone a genius like Kubrick. P.S, the book is far worse than the movie.

[Shard18]

@Bassbait im dislexic u ass. and no i dont have spellcheck on this computer. and if this guys a gines then this shore dusent show it. i get what he was trying to do but he failed. if i had seen this in a theator id leve and asck for my mony back. if hes doing it for art than say its art. u say ur making a movie than make a movie. this was miss labaled as a movie.

[Bassbait]

@Shard18

1.Who ever said films couldn't be art? Film-makers like Kubrick are above that kind of "criticism". So, because the film doesn't make sense to YOU personally, then it has somehow failed to be a movie? Because you obviously missed the point of the movie.

2.His genius is DEFINITELY shown in this film. But you deny his genius because you are too stubborn to watch the film for it's full potential. It's an amazing film that a lot of people dislike for being too lazy to understand.

[Bassbait]

@Shard18

3.What's even worse is that the film isn't THAT HARD to understand and enjoy. So what if a collection of establishing shots takes 1 minute to be over with? It's called pacing. This isn't an action movie, so the slow pacing is appropriate. The film is straight-forward except for in a few choice places, and those places aren't out of place. The ending, for example, actually makes sense with the context of the film. The film isn't about spelling it out so you feel good about yourself.

[catherinefan32]

Well i would agree those who can get very impatient cant stand this film. Also i tried to show it to my 13 year old cousin and after the first 15 into the film he was like its boring lets watch iron man. But i was able to enjoy the most of the film cause i like scfi films and love kubrick's works.But one scene i found boring about this film was the overturne.6 mins of black screen and a musical overture......AHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!­!!!!!!!!

[0137H4]

you are my bro now.

[rdecredico]

It's ok that you don't get it all all. Shawshank Redemption is more up your alley.

[BunionMann]

Pretentious is being used to often as a blanket statement for "I don't like this but cannot come up with any logical/legitimate/intelligent reason as to why." I can understand why people don't like the movie: yes, it is very slow and does require a lot of patience. However, the movie's slow pace in combination with the music works so effectively and the ending is so abstract that multiple anyalyses of the film could easily be backed up. At the end of the day, it is, just like you say, art.

[Hal9000ize]

I can understand why you didn't enjoy it... Your milage may vary...

[buminater94]

u r so fuckin stupid stfu u pioece of shit

[buckdapimp]

i totally agree... THIS MOVIE SUCKS DONKEY DICK FOR QUARTERS!!!!!!!!!

honestly, i wish i had never sat down to watch it... as soon as i did, i had to see how it ended, i found myself fast forwarding through the slow moving spaceship parts just to get to the next dialog! and even in fast forward, they were still SLOW!!!!!

[ilikeyoutubing]

I love this film , but , as seen in your review , it's not for everybody : )

[bladerunner951]

His (and my) biggest problem about it was that it took too fucking long. That problem could be solved if you cut half of the movie away because every scene is twice as long as needed

[haagendazcock]

Film IS ART. The 2 are not seperate and shouldn't be treated as such. 2001 was a marvel of its time: technologically, thematically, and poignantly dazzling. It's effects are still decent today, and it's about evolution and the desire to protect one's own existence. The atmosphere created by the long drawn out shots and the general lack of dialogue are a refreshing departure from what everbody seems to expect from a film. It was more than groundbreaking. It was a cultural milestone

[Fapsamup]

Blame Hollywood and there Fastfood movie industry. If you eat your whole life Mc Crap, the day you eat healthy vegetables you puke. This is how Hollywood has intoxicated us with there way of telling stories. This review guy should try healthy movies once in a while.

[LeonSKennedy828]

@Fapsamup That analogy is...questionable at best. The downsides to junk food are not subjective, they're objective, movie tastes are SUBJECTIVE, not objective.

[buc555]

I agree that the book is better but I liked the film also.

[Fapsamup]

People have forgot how to watch. This movie demands from the viewer to participate in watching. People have gotten lazy due to fastfood movie industry called Hollywood. If you concider Hollywood the only way to make movies well you're going to be disapointed, Hollywood is not even 10% of the whole movie history. So, start educate yourself about the real history of moviemaking if you really are passionated with movies.

[JunkyardBreadfruit]

Yeah, Hollywood's focus on coherent storytelling and pacing just have a stranglehold on the film industry. I should definitely look at all those great overlooked films that consist of 90% near- static exterior shots.

Oh, and thanks for suggesting I'm uneducated. That didn't make you sound like an arrogant prick at all.

[shootme243]

almost the whole movie is without dialog! hahaha what a joke

[rickydick4805379]

GREAT REVIEW!!!!

[stoveman831]

are you going to review 2010?

[shedininja001]

space lazer!

[matthewmch]

very poor review. the point of the film is to keep you guessing. you make you're own interpretation. if you find it boring you're not the person to review it. i feel the slow parts are necessary for capturing the vastness of the universe and the feeling of loneliness. read john eberts review to the right.

[JunkyardBreadfruit]

So I shouldn't review a movie if I didn't like it? Or does that only apply to movies that Ebert likes?

(I normally wouldn't even comment, but there's something irksome about having a review called "very poor" just because the viewer disagreed with me. I know why I SHOULD like it- I just don't.)

[vistaphyte]

Because poor reviews are reviews you disagree with. Reviews that just give a rating, and compliment it or bash it without establishing what is objectively good or bad about it respectively are perfectly fine!

<.<

[matthewmch]

@JunkyardBreadfruit i think the question of whether or not you will like 2001 comes down to how you want your story told. its a spectrum-- cheesy blockbusters on the right, pretentious art house to the left. Spielberg is just to the right, coens just to the left. you, i assume prefer the archetypal way of storytelling and the right. i've found the arch plot tiresome after seeing it over and over and over. there's no shame either way.

personally, i think 2001 is the greatest film ever, ever.

[yachtrockman]

@matthewmch That's exactly like throwing paint on a canvas and asking someone what it means to them. It can mean many things. Manos the Hands of Fate can be seen as terrible or a gold mine of unintentional comedy a la rifftrax/MST3K. It's still a terrible movie. If JBF's interpretation is that it is boring, and mine is that ice cream is yummy and the merit of the film is that it lets everyone judge whatever they want, then our interpretations are as valid as all others. Nothing special there.

[GoblinXXX]

I love 2001, but really, you're probably right in that it could easily lose at least a half hour with judicious editing and be a much better movie. (You could pretty much get the whole hominid part at the beginning across in 5 minutes, for instance.)

[pauly7917]

all about sight and sound with hidden meanings....A MASTERPIECE!!!!

:EVOLUTION:

[sg15z]

I totally agree! It was waaaayyyyyy too slow and bored me to death! And that 10 minutes acid hallucination did not age well at all. The special effects did though, and I was impressed. But really this movie's only something pretty to look at.

[olgapate94]

agree with you.

[texpeare]

Pearls thrown before swine.

[SLagonia]

You're absolutely right... No one agrees with you!

Sorry, I liked your commentary, and I suppose I understand your reasons, but this truely was a great movie, and even at age 14 (when I first watched this movie, long before the internet could tell you what it meant) I understood the philosophical journey it took us on. Yes, the first and last 20 minutes don't have any diologue, but it still captured my interest throughout.

[shedininja001]

its a werid movie

[thewewguy8t88]

i agree its slow and well i never understood the ending :( and well they dont explain much :(

[FuzzyNecromancer]

I don't disagree with your review. It seems pretty good, and it justifies its points. The only thing I'd counter is that the special effects do age pretty well, but then again, I haven't seen it since I was a kid.

[JunkyardBreadfruit]

The actual, "ships and monoliths in space" effects did look good and still do, but the glittery "abstract effects" like the infinity tunnel sequence are what I'm not impressed with. And unfortunately, more than a few movie makers decided to add those effects to their own films.