What are your 5 UN-favorite movies

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Green_Manelishi:
Except that I thought full-metal-jacket was grade-a dopey and that 2001 was a better book than movie, no.

If I recall, 2001 was never a book, at least not before the movie, in that the film was based on a short story by Arthur C. Clarke, The Sentinel (a rather standard sci fi story about an alarm clock planted on the moon by superior beings as a means to detect when humans were smart enough for space travel).

Kubrick expanded this story into an evolutionary tale a la Nietszche, divided into three parts (ape/man/superman). We never know who or what drives the transition between the ape and man, man and superman, that is symbolized by a black monolith. Kubrick's use of Also Spoke Zarathustra is also illuminating, as Strauss's theme was overtly designed to represent ape/man/superman. Strauss phrased the "world question" (why are we here and what does it all mean?) as a rising G-C-G and puts it first to ape (clueless) with tympanic drum beats signifying time passage, then to man (a glimmer of undertstanding), drums again, then to superman (who so clearly knows the answer than he laughs at how simple it all is ---hear the French horns laughing at the end).

Thus, the choice of music was no accident, but reflects the transition from ape to superman...

One hitch in whoever was driving this process in the movie, God or Aliens, occurred when the Discovery II was voyaging to Jupiter. Two intelligences were on board...which to chose for the final elevation to ultimate being? Simple, do what evolution always does: make them fight it out. HAL's failure was deliberate and meant to pit machine versus man in the final survival of the fittest.

These subtleties were Kubrick's. Clarke's story, by comparison, was lame. (As was the sequel 2010).

A 2001 book may have appeared, but it postdated the movie...
 
http://www.amazon.com/2001-Odyssey-...5027300?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1179029334&sr=8-4

Both book and movie came out in the same year.

From everything I've heard, Clarke and Kubrick worked in fairly close collaboration.

From Wikipedia:
2001: A Space Odyssey is a science-fiction narrative, produced in 1968 as both a film (directed by Stanley Kubrick) and a novel (written by Arthur C. Clarke). Both projects are based on a screenplay developed by Clarke and Kubrick in collaboration, which was loosely based on Clarke's 1950 short story "The Sentinel" and incorporated elements from various other Clarke stories. Although the film has become more famous due to its groundbreaking visual effects and ambiguous, abstract nature, the movie and book were meant to complement each other and are equal in importance.
 
How could anyone hate Lord of the Rings??? :11:

The WORST movie I have ever seen...Magnolia...I'll never get that time back.

Close second would be Rushmore, Swingers and Envy
 
bdshort:
http://www.amazon.com/2001-Odyssey-Arthur-C-Clarke/dp/0451457994/ref=pd_bbs_4/102-7009662-5027300?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1179029334&sr=8-4

Both book and movie came out in the same year.

From everything I've heard, Clarke and Kubrick worked in fairly close collaboration.

From Wikipedia:

True, but in my younger days I read most of what Clarke wrote and have seen everything Kubrick has done (except Eyes Wide Shut), and whould have to say that Kubrick's influence on this project was probably greater. Clarke was an excellent "meat and potatoes" sci fi writer, but no mystic. If Clarke had made this movie alone, it would have looked more like a "First men on the Moon" sci fi movie and less like an acid trip.

2001 was groundbreaking in that it was the first realistic sci fi movie with big budget effects. Many of the criticisms here, including mine of Tron, neglect the role that these movies had at the time of their release. Visionary movies create a genre that will inevitably surpass them in quality, such that we look at those first pioneering movies in retrospect, they look lame in comparison. In fact, I think 2001 still looks passable even by today's standards.

The Poseiden Adventure was the genesis of disaster movies, Blade Runner set the tone for the 1980s, Star Wars made CGI a hit, etc, but these movies, if viewed now for the first time, seem corny and formulaic.
 
No one has mentioned "Ace Ventura"
 

Back
Top Bottom