New movies that will live on forever - Page 3

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO


IT SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

don't bother to waste 2-cents on that POS "Bachler's Party".

I saw it in 85 - came out in 82?.........

crap crap crap!!!

just don't blame me when you waste at hard earned nickel on that POS movie.

ok?

OK.saw this and could not let it go.

first to get it out of the way - some here think AI is Kubricks' work. The Sacarin levels are ten orders of magintude too high. Watch the first 1/3 that is Kubricks. the rest starting with the "carnival" is pure Speilburg unleashed (good for some bad for others (me included).

the level of forced sentimentality literally made me hurl on AI. you can tell the exact frame where Kubrick died and Mr Sentimentality took over (seen where the mommy left Pinochio in the woods).

Classic? watch the original and not the knockoff. Disney's version is the original.

- the main point. "monotony is the point" in 2001? huh? you honestly think the director thought. "gee lets make thei movie of mine as monotonous as possible - that will make it worth while"....LOL!!

2001 may be monotonous to some, but that was never the intent.

2001 is all about "man and his place in the universe".

that simple quote above covers many themes:

1. nature of "life" - was Hal alive? he seems more so than the men who tried to shut him off (or was that kill him?).

2. Monolith and what it represents: alien intelligence? or God? - or is there a difference when we are talking about such a gulf (one as we would find between man and the ant).

2001 is a movie about thoughts/ideas - nature of life (can a machine be alive or only look to be (the definition of AI)), man's place in the universe (did an alien (or God) presence tranform man from an animal (ape) into modern man via the monolith, and letter do the same thing at the end of the film (into superman). i.e. Evolution (via alien or God - does it matter really?).

monotony!!

hogwash.

OK.saw this and could not let it go.

I'll get back to this later.

While Star Wars has a special place in most people's hearts, many (including myself) would argue that Empire was a better movie. It has a much deeper emotional impact yet still has all the excitement and action of the first one.

I'm not sure how this came up though... the OP established new movies as 1990+. I stand by my list on page 1 that any classics from the 90s era will come from them.

first to get it out of the way - some here think AI is Kubricks' work.

Though I do not find everything Kubrick came up with as holy writ, these links (hope they work) indicate that he was involved with more that just the first third:

http://djfilms.com/AI.html

http://www.frc.ri.cmu.edu/~hpm/proje...ubrick.AI.html

I recall hearing somewhere, and it may have been on the Spielberg interview broadcast on TCM, that the Flesh Fair was virtually all Kubrick.

2001 is a movie about thoughts/ideas - nature of life (can a machine be alive or only look to be (the definition of AI)), man's place in the universe (did an alien (or God) presence tranform man from an animal (ape) into modern man via the monolith, and letter do the same thing at the end of the film (into superman). i.e. Evolution (via alien or God - does it matter really?).

Well, sure 2001 is about all of this. Note my contention "monotony is part of its point." Kubrick didn't seem to like people very much, and much of his output concerns the dehumanization of humanity in the modern world. Many have noted that HAL is the most human of all the characters in the movie.

And much of the movie concerns the sterility of existence and the monotony of space travel. He even recut the film during the road show engagement (and if you saw it early in its release in the theater you probably saw the original cut), removing about 20 minutes. The scene most memorably cut was right after intermission, where Gary Lockwood goes back out, preceding his murder. When he goes out the first time there is a very long sequence showing him leaving the ship and then leaving the pod, and then the second time he goes out, these shots are repeated, with one difference: the first time, after he leaves the pod just sits there, but the second time, the pod comes after the astronaut. This was a long setup for an obscure payoff, and it made for an even slower film. Kubrick radically cut the second trip out of the main spaceship.

2001 is an immensely important film and a beautiful viewing experience in 70mm. But I would argue it is not without problems.

What he said ^^^^

I also read (but don't know the source now) that Kubrick had always had another director in mind for A.I. and his first choice was Spielberg, precisely because he had envisioned the film's sentimental aspects from the start and thought someone else would handle it better. Kubrick intended to produce. Whether anyone could direct with a personality like Stanley looking over their shoulder "producing" is anyone's guess. But I think the final film of A.I. is probably much along the lines that Kubrick intended, ending and all.

And as a die hard 2001 apologist I cannot really defend its perceived flaws from detractors. You just love it or you don't. It's like a 2 1/2 hour inkblot test. I myself will be wearing my diaper Tuesday night when the HD-DVD version comes out.

First, 2001 is an amazing movie. The ending, in the white rooms, is probably one of the greatest sequences ever filmed. I certainly didn't get it when I was a teenager and now at 50 I only think I get it. Maybe in another 20 years I just might get it!

Now, to the point of my posting. Here we are trying to select future classics. Well, just today, in the Sunday paper, I read that the International Documentary Association (3,000 members) just selected "Hoop Dreams" as the best documentary in movie history. The kicker is that Hoop Dreams was not even nominated for an academy award as best feature documentary that year (1994). Kinda puts it all in perspective, huh?

Doug

...And the monumental Eyes on the Prize was nominated for the Academy Award for best documentary but lost to a charming but much less ambitious documentary called The Ten-Year Lunch. And now, because the rights to all that footage of the Civil Rights struggle were not properly worked out, it's very difficult to see, let alone get on video or DVD.

It's always been hard for films by or with African-Americans to get Oscars.

"Hoop Dreams" was a great documentary. And it was actually a documentary! That word has lost its meaning over the last few years.

Planet Earth is the best documentary I have ever seen.

I'm checking that out on HD-DVD. Looks spectacular.

I very much enjoyed both the beginning and the end of 2001, but could have done without much of what came in-between.
I thought that Clockwork Orange was Kubrick's best movie by a large margin.
Eyes Wide Shut was so hideous that I can't believe his name was even associated with it.
AI could have been a masterpiece with the right editing.

Eyes Wide Shut was so hideous that I can't believe his name was even associated with it.

I wonder if worry over that film helped to bring on his death.

The whole idea of taking this strange novel set in Vienna in the time of Freud and Klimt and then updating it to a modern setting is weird enough. Then he decides that the production design of the silly Manhattan apartments was not right and forced new sets to be built and scenes reshot. He reportedly didn't like Jennifer Jason Leigh's performance and completely reshot all of her scenes after Harvey Keitel left because the shoot went on for 13 months. Surely this must have tested the patience of the producers. He submitted his final cut to Warners days before his death. Could he have realized his film had major problems and he had squandered his ability to fix them by being his usual anal self?

I'd be hard pressed to figure what his best film was. Possibly Dr. Strangelove. The one I keep returning to is The Shining, which I tend to watch yearly or at least every other year. Barry Lyndon, though overlooked, is one of his finest films as well, one where it seemed to me all of his experiments in structure and cutting succeeded.

I find him hard to love, but he is so different and his films so meticulously done that he simply cannot be ignored.