Ulukai on 15/4/2009 at 17:31
Holy Thread Necromancy Batman.
It's touch and go whether Solaris was even in theatres when this thread was started. I thought it was ok on the first viewing and fucking awesome on the second. But it's not a Kubrick Flick and I don't quite get how it in any way relates to the Shining.
My vote is with short-dicking every cannibal in the Congo.
snauty on 15/4/2009 at 17:50
Quote Posted by dethtoll
You are the
last person to tell anyone they didn't get something. I
did understand the whole "next step in evolution" bit- the problem is that it's
not that obvious until after you've stepped away from the movie, examined it, and perhaps looked it up on the internet. And anyway, they could've portrayed it in a way that wasn't a fucking stupid waste of my time. So no, fuck 2001's ending.
Gee, an internet troll. Cute. Have a cracker.
2001's stargate sequence struck me as clear and obvious the first time I saw it. The next segment wasn't all that clear, yes. Non-linearity is often kinda confusing. Then the starchild set it all into light again.
Then again, how can someone who's into Tarkovsky have a problem with that? Except for the fact that obscure soviet movies are waaay more cooler in the first place.
And btw, there is no Alien trilogy and no, not because I don't think you can't count to four. There simply was a fantastic movie once. Then the industry had to do sequels. An abysmal marines action fucked up flick, an interesting 3rd film by talented Mr Fincher (especially the long version) against the odds and a mixed bag of a fourth one who crashed under its desperate aim for being so very special and different. I liked Jeunet's other films, though.
Debating about Kubrick is pointless. He's the man. Hands down. Nicholson made it clear. Who's anyone to argue? And still he never got an oscar (OH YEAH? AS IF THAT DOES MEAN ANYTHING OR WHAT?)
snauty on 15/4/2009 at 17:53
I never got how Solaris shall relate to 2001 except in the heads of TV magazine writers.
Stalker is a pain to watch and I loved the book. Soderbergh's Solaris remake was a nice surprise. Still watch it now and then. Very tasteful and atmospheric.
demagogue on 15/4/2009 at 17:53
Quote Posted by dethtoll
Solaris is okay.
Just watched it a week or so ago (I love that YouTube is keeping up a lot of classics, just so I can see them), and in the long driving scene, something kept looking really familiar until finally I saw one of the road-signs was in Japanese and thought "It's Tokyo." Wasn't expecting a Russian scientist to take a long drive through Tokyo to get to the ship. But I guess they wanted a "modern" looking city to drive through that was alien-looking enough to be the far future.
snauty on 15/4/2009 at 17:58
Quote Posted by Angel Dust
Hey I said I probably forgot tons! Although my love of Alien and Bladerunner aside I personally wouldn't put Ridley Scott on a top directors list. He has fairly strong visual style but not really much else as pretty much the rest of his work illustrates. That said I am keeping an eye out for his apparent return to sci-fi.
amen to that.
snauty on 15/4/2009 at 18:05
Quote Posted by Rogue Keeper
Pretty much every director had his weak pieces... maybe with exception of Stan, hehe.
Also, if you put such an overgrown kid like Spielberg into the list of the greatest filmmakers, then Scott deserves his share of the pie, too!
Stan sure hadn't. He knew when a project was weak enough to trash it. I can't think of a weak Spielberg movie either... Oh wait the last Indy movie was BAD (insert a chris rock expression).
june gloom on 15/4/2009 at 18:16
Quote Posted by snauty
Gee, an internet troll. Cute. Have a cracker.
Disagreeing with you does not make me a troll, buddy.
Quote Posted by snauty
2001's stargate sequence struck me as clear and obvious the first time I saw it. The next segment wasn't all that clear, yes. Non-linearity is often kinda confusing. Then the starchild set it all into light again.
Except that the entire last sequence in the bedroom was 100% bullshit. The next evolution of mankind does not take place in an allegorical palatial mansion.
Quote Posted by snauty
And btw, there is no Alien trilogy and no, not because I don't think you can't count to four. There simply was a fantastic movie once. Then the industry had to do sequels. An abysmal marines action fucked up flick, an interesting 3rd film by talented Mr Fincher (especially the long version) against the odds and a mixed bag of a fourth one who crashed under its desperate aim for being so very special and different. I liked Jeunet's other films, though.
With apologies to Slim Pickens, I've been to the Steam forums, Youtube and IGN and this is the stupidest thing I've ever read over a monitor.
Quote Posted by snauty
I never got how Solaris shall relate to 2001 except in the heads of TV magazine writers.
Does the average TV magazine writer even know the movie exists?
Quote Posted by Ulukai
It's touch and go whether Solaris was even in theatres when this thread was started. I thought it was ok on the first viewing and fucking awesome on the second. But it's not a Kubrick Flick and I don't quite get how it in any way relates to the Shining.
Just FYI I'm referring to the original Russian 1970s version, not the shitbag remake with George Clooney.
Matthew on 15/4/2009 at 18:18
Quote Posted by snauty
An abysmal marines action fucked up flick
Oh bad
luck old boy, you were doing
so well up until that point.
Jason Moyer on 15/4/2009 at 18:36
The Alien trilogy was great aside from the 2nd and 3rd films.
242 on 15/4/2009 at 19:54
Quote Posted by dethtoll
Does this pass muster or am I an unintelligent hick who wouldn't know a good movie if it bit him in the ass?
(just FYI I refuse to watch Tetsuo alone)
Judging by the list you're quite a mainstream guy who likes mainly films that
entertain by action, strange you like Stalker to the degree it's one of your favorites. It's what I wanted to know. I have nothing against mainstream movies, but we were talking about apples and oranges here, no wonder Kubrick works aren't interesting to you.
