Pop Arena and QuantumJoker Vs. Confused Matthew's "2001: A Space Odyssey" Review (Part 4)

Greg of "Pop Arena" and Youtube's QuantumJoker discuss Stanley Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey" and try to break down Confused Matthew's review of the film.

Parts 1 through 4 will be on this channel, parts 5 through 9 will be on QuantumJoker's channel:

http://www.youtube.com/user/QUANTUMJOKER

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• Confused
• Matthew
• 2001:
• Space
• Odyssey
• Stanley
• Kubrick
• discussion
• review

[damanhl]

I didn't take Matthews review as seriously as you do. I just saw it more as comedy. Not voluntary comedy but comedy.

That's especially true for his Minority report review.

Your review was just fine so far BUT PLEASE! script it or at least edit it a bit! For the sake of mankind!

[poparena]

Yeah, this was as much a test run of this kind of conversation as it is an CM analysis. Future ones should be a lot tighter. :P

[straker2]

A lot of films these days are just talk, talk, talk, talk and I think this is because basically it's the easy option. It's become "standard" to have talking heads all the time. 2001 does something much more creative and conceptual, but basically we get a journey to a space station and a journey to the Moon (before Star Wars and before music videos) in which the visuals and music combine to convey that journey so we can feel charmed and transported by it. Grip shoes/zero G toilet add humor, too!

[Bassbait]

@Kylon99 Ya. I agree. Narrative has three important things: plot, characters, and settings. In other words, verb, subject, and surroundings. 2001 has subjects: HAL9000, Dave Bowman, Heywood Floyd, Frank Poole, and the monkeys. Actions: floating in space, touching a monolith, killing HAL, etc. Surroundings: Space, desolate wasteland, ambiguous structure. That's enough to completely disagree with CM. At that point, he's completely missing the point of a film.

[Franc28]

@damanhl Yea, they are comedy, you got that right.

[Kylon99]

I don't know why Matthew missed this point but a lot of what he calls nothing was the film showing a 1968 audience how 'living in space' works... Recall that this 1968 audience hasn't even seen a man land on the moon yet. So when he says it's nothing, I see the first concepts of a space station, a reusable ship, docking, artificial gravity, travel to the moon, lighter versions of space suits, walking in zero-g with velcro...

He might as well say to Metropolis, "Yah, dystopia... boring."

[QUANTUMJOKER]

@damanhl

I'd have to agree; I felt myself rambling and/or stammering in many parts of this review.

I hope you don't mind, and trust it didn't get in the way of our discussion.