untitled wrote: 1. 2001: A Space Odyssey is as mainstream as you can get.
OK, I'll bite. How exactly is a piece of art's popularity a valid criticism of it's content?
Does something unpopular/"underground" automatically have more artistic merit?
It isn't. It was a reply to this:
fujee wrote:Its funny, I was talking film with two friends on my course today, who are pretty clued up on cult and alternative cinema/cinema outside the mainstream... I mentioned this was being screened, immediately after a discussion of how great Tarkovsky is... and neither of them seemed bothered? I was flabbergasted.
I got a chance to see it in a 70mm/Cinerama/Whatever print about 20 years ago at the Uptown in Washington, D.C. (same theater where it had its world premiere in 1968) with the original Overture (which I hadn't and haven't seen anywhere else).
Saw 2001 last night in the cinema. Incredible on the big screen, really brought home the attention to detail, the perfection of the sets that no CGI could possibly replicate, the huge soundtrack as it was meant to be heard, combined with the sheer poetry of the cinematography. Despite all the great Sci-fi over the years, I still think it's the only film that manages to replicate what I imagine the otherworldliness of space to be.
Saw it earlier today and was not let down. I've seen the film on TV several times over the years but it is amazing on the big screen. I was concerned that the cinema I chose to see the film at might affect my viewing experience but the local VUE turned out to be fine. My first choice (a well known independent cinema) would have been further away and I couldn't spare the time, so the local multiplex it was.
I'm pretty excited to check this movie out.
