Movies that aren't as great as they are hyped to be

[ChrisIII]

It's kind of funny how 2010's tone and pace is very different. Kind of like Alien/Aliens in a few ways.

There's a few scenes which kind of try to capture a tone similar to the original, such as the scenes involving the film's spacewalks (The Europa probe, the boarding of Discovery and Max approaching the monolith, which unfortunately decides to send Dave back to Earth at that exact moment)

[Powerboy]

It's kind of funny how 2010's tone and pace is very different. Kind of like Alien/Aliens in a few ways.

There's a few scenes which kind of try to capture a tone similar to the original, such as the scenes involving the film's spacewalks (The Europa probe, the boarding of Discovery and Max approaching the monolith, which unfortunately decides to send Dave back to Earth at that exact moment)

Apparently, Clarke talked with the director and they both agreed 2001 just couldn't work by then. It worked in 1968 because it was novel and because the fascination with astronauts and outer space was at it's height.

There had been some talk of remaking 2001 for the actual year 2001. Tom Hanks is a huge, huge 2001 fan and made it clear that he would be very interested if they did a remake. Arnold Schwarzenegger expressed interest and even was willing to play the secondary role if Hanks was in it.

In spite of this, they decided to not do it mostly because they felt it couldn't work in it's original form but any attempt to turn it into the action movie it would probably have to be to sell would cause endless ridicule.

Hanks has still expressed interest in being in a film version of one of the sequel novels such as 3001.

[stargazer01]

The novel version of 2001. It is correct to say the novel can not be called a novelization of the movie and the movie cannot be said to be based on the novel because they were written concurrently.

I wonder, if you read the book, Is the content very similar to the movie or Is there more material no included in the film?

That is my favorite movie. At least when those pesky two Godfathers aren't bothering me.

Generally, in films the themes take a secondary place to plot and character. For example, one can see Logan and think its a sad action movie. Someone else may say its about family. Themes are secondary to plot and character development. 2001 is however experimental. Plot and character go to the background. And the themes take the center stage. I think the only time when there is a conventional plot is when they try to disconnect HAL. And HAL 2000 is its most memorable character.

I can say that its truly an immersive film. The music. The visuals. The painstakingly created details. And we can use our brains while watching a movie for once. A rare thing. And when i say using brains, its not only the ending. But its throughout the movie. For example the 'space waltz' scene ends with a fade to black, as it moves towards the vast space. The idea conveyed: "Space ships and satellites dance in the heavens. Impressive. But the stars lay beyond."

I don't mind if anyone says, i don't like it. Its not needed. Its a so called 'art' movie whose reputation has grown to be one of the greatest sci-fi films. But its not without reason that it has something of a cult following.

I know 2001 is an experimental arthouse film. I just don't enjoy it much. Cool for those that do.

[ChrisIII]

There's been rumors of a Syfy 2001 series for a while involving Hanks. I could see Hanks as Heywood Floyd; he does have a resemblance to the original version of the character played by William Sylvestor IMO.

[Cyke]

Harry Potter films, all of them. Could just never get into it and I had read the first 3 books prior to watching any. So it's not the material more the movies and cast. Though what I did watch Alan rickman was always enjoyable to bad he wasnt the star. But I get they are beloved, so clearly it's a me thing.

I don't mean to sound snippy or anything like that, especially given how Harry Potter reignited the passion of books for readers of all ages, but sometimes I'm more impressed with the world-building and the scope of the universe than I am with the actual content of the films.

I remember there were a few times watching some of the films that I was more interested in the lore and the characters than I was in the plot.

[Midvillian1322]

I don't mean to sound snippy or anything like that, especially given how Harry Potter reignited the passion of books for readers of all ages, but sometimes I'm more impressed with the world-building and the scope of the universe than I am with the actual content of the films.

I remember there were a few times watching some of the films that I was more interested in the lore and the characters than I was in the plot.

I found the main 3 kids to be uninteresting in everyway. When I see people suggest Radcliffe for Wolverine i get a migraine.

[Bl00dwerK]

Infinity War, for sure. Several of the latest Marvel films have been middling, imo. IW, Guardians 2, the last Thor. I haven't even seen Antman and Wasp or Black Panther because the MCU seems to be losing it's luster.

[Jekyll]

Definitely Blade Runner. Have never enjoyed it.

[Scott Taylor]

Definitely Blade Runner. Have never enjoyed it.

To the Thunderdome with him! Two men enter, one man leaves!

[Kirby101]

So, let's debate Kirby's Treasury Edition adaptation.

Just kidding, not opening tht can of worms.

[Nate Grey]

The Rocketeer. Dalton made a good villain I guess but beyond that it was just boring to me.

[Darkseid Is]

Okay, I'm gonna be an old man here but Casablanca.

Citizen Kane, Maltese Falcon, The Lady Vanishes blew me away but I may have to watch Casablanca again. I just got nothing out of it and was pretty bored. I'm not giving up on it! I'm gonna watch it again but on first viewing... yeah nothing.