Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

Chase explains 2001 to Confused Matthew because somebody really needs to - part 4 of 9

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
4,880
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Jan 6, 2010

This is part 4 of my epic 9 part response / rebuttal to Confused Matthew's "review" of Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. I decided to explain 2001 and just how truly "confused" Confused Matthew really is because somebody needs to. IF you are a fan of 2001 and on the fence or not a fan at all of Mr. Confused then this may be for you but be advised, it's long and i may not make too much sense if you haven't seen 2001 or Confused Matthew's review of it.

Watch Full Playlist here - http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=A92A639CBA3CBD66

part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WvrQ6h_GWE
part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Su8vPlZHJw
part 3 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PSsmkzGJPE
part 4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbgTAMNbqNE
part 5 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnEYZxvyzzo
part 6 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cutpLn2_DN4
part 7 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GsMidV6MzA
part 8 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xs4DprRR6k
part 9 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HF_xfD9i7PI

Here is a link to Matthew's review of 2001 (heads up if you like the movie, it's hard to get through) - http://www.confusedmatthew.com/2001%3A-A-Space-Odyssey.php

  • likes, 58 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Top Comments

  • I love how the majority of the rating of these videos slowly move towards your side of the argument. You provide such great arguments for CM review of 2001.

  • @Ceesec He is fighting fire with fire. Some people deserve being insulted and looked down upon and CM is one of them.

see all

All Comments (245)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • So really, the movie between the Ape Intro (and CM did say "with the exclusion of the intro" when talking about how "useless" the movie has been up to this point) and HAL9000 is really more like a prequel, or backstory, as far as necessity are concerned.

    The same canNOT be said about "any other movie"!

    6:58 How so?

    8:45 Gattaca is more closely related to "movie".

    9:13 Shutter Island leaves "questions" open.

    What "questions" does 2001 "leave open"?

    "WTF was that" doesn't count.

  • So really, the movie between the Ape Intro (and CM did say "with the exclusion of the intro" when talking about how "useless" the movie has been up to this point) and HAL9000 is really more like a prequel, or backstory, as far as necessity are concerned.

    The same canNOT be said about "any other movie"!

    6:58 How so?

    8:45 Gattaca is more closely related to "movie".

    9:13 Shutter Island leaves "questions" open.

    What "questions" does 2001 "leave open"?

    "WTF was that" doesn't count.

  • 6:43 No.

    Very few things happen before the Jupiter mission, and they're all mentioned in the later dialogue.

    The only exception being the revelation of the Monolith at the very end - but here's the funny thing, it just sent a radio signal, it didn't boost the astronauts' intelligence, or anything of the sorts - so it could've just as well been some kind of radio transmitter, and then mentioned as "the sign of intelligent life" on that message video.

  • 4:57 I'm sure advancing all the space travel technology was "difficult" as usual, but where in the film does it say that reaching Clavius was somehow exceptionally difficult?

    But that's just a minor detail. "Something important on a moon" is just a barebone on the script, and CM's silly exaggerations aside, the point really is that 2001 consists of few plot points and lots of "experience" and "style" inbetween.

    5:20 SPACE REEL!! What does this have to do with Kubrick's writing skills?

  • ... eating scenes from 2001 would JUST ruin the experience (and possibly the "symbolism"), not the plot.

    Kevin Smith's quote was just facetious - since when is death a prerequisite for an arc? And if they HAD died, you could cut everything out until their death scene.

    Why was this nonsense argument included??

    3:55 Camera effect = category: style.

    4:22 Historical influence =/= actual movie.

    What if it had been a silent reel showing people work in space? It still could've had the same influence

  • 3:00-3:30

    Um, what? 2001 (90% of the film, the HAL chapter excluded, consisting of routine activities and space shots) doesn't consist of fat, but LOTR is "nothing but fat" (sure, with dialogue, character development, a plot, actually actively discussed subjects)??

    Sorry, no - all of those things constitute the SUBSTANCE of a movie, the fat is all the REST.

    Cutting all of it out wouldn't just ruin "the experience", it would, for starters, cut out the PLOT. Cutting the endless space shots and...

  • @muticere I think he's in over his head. He understands how to analyze certain basic film elements, but then refuses to analyze those SAME elements when dealing with other kinds of films. With 2001, it's like he watched it once 10 years ago. Rented it again, and WITHOUT WATCHING IT, uploaded it to his computer to get footage for the review. Then he skipped to the parts he needed to make his terrible point, and ignored the most pivotal dialogue moments in the entire film.

  • @rutgerhauer666 CM doesn't really care for The Matrix. And The Matrix is actually a very highly intelligent film even though there are errors. 2001, however, is the greatest film ever made, so there's no competition. But The Matrix is the deepest movie non-Kubrick for a long time, along with Mulholland Drive, Primer, and a few others. Inferior to 2001, respectable in it's own right.

  • @TheNapoleonnerd That's weird, because I remember there being quite a lot of dialogue in 2001. And I remember there being quite a lot of plot. Something about monoliths placed on earth, the moon, and orbiting jupiter at least 40 million years ago, deliberately buried, found by apes and humans, and something about a machine trying to kill some people? Huh, I guess the film was just a blank screen though, there wasn't any dialogue or plot, despite all evidence to the contrary.

  • No. silent films did have dialogue, you idiot. Just watch one and something significant to the plot will happen, unlike 2001.

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