2001: A Space Odyssey

2010 is such a depressingly literal-minded movie

It's telling that the plot hinges on the recording of Bowman saying "My god, it's full of stars" which was only in Clarke's book, not in Kubrick's film.

Many many xp to all the chess talk, but when the Kubricks first came back to the US after "Paths of Glory" and he was between jobs, he paid their bills by winning at poker against their showbiz friends. Apparently he could have been a pro at that, too.

Pink all along, nerds across the world wipe their brows and pick another argument.

https://filmandfurniture.com/2018/08/exclusive-original-2001-djinn-chair-from-kubricks-film-set-has-emerged-and-settles-a-debate/

I think '2010' is a good sequel because it doesn't try to be like '2001'. It fits 1984 the same way the original fits 1968.

I’ve literally never heard anyone suggest those magenta chairs were red xp

v important thread

How children reacted to "2001: A Space Odyssey," according to a 1968 Howard Johnson's menu. https://t.co/NtYCUYfSFk pic.twitter.com/KCnmzAtV4r

— Robert Loerzel (@robertloerzel) October 23, 2017

now i'm wondering how many of those giant cereal boxes in The Shining were product placement

the shining was conceived solely as a means to showcase the big wheel tricycle iirc

Where can buy that cute bear costume?

probably the place Cruise bought his costume in EWS

Saw it again for the first time in more than a decade, still unmoved.

were you supposed to be moved, tho? or was your mind blown?

By the second hour my mind was blown alright

You and KJB should talk about it some snowy night in front of the fire.

probably the place Cruise bought his costume in EWS

― a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, August 8, 2018 10:18 AM (forty minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Now you made me go look up what the heck ever happened to Leelee Sobieski.

She had a career path set up as younger/flashback Helen Hunt, did a fairly good Joan of Arc miniseries, and then a bunch of bit roles.

The look on the faces of the punters in the background.. much like the aeroplane pics of passengers 'as calm as Hindi cows' in Fight Club.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DeOTGd9XcAACNsr.jpg

I miss hand-lettering in comics (though I bet the letterers don't).

The computer in Demon Seed >>> HAL

I don't miss hand-lettering in comics, because I avoid comics with computer lettering as much as possible.

Alfred, I get the feeling you're not much of a Kubrick fan in general. How accurate am I?

Correct! One of the few cases when I think of his fans (mostly guys who blather about his depths). I like most of his films through Lolita and love Barry Lyndon.

Finally going to watch “2001,” the way Kubrick intended. pic.twitter.com/G8Pd6LBZLD

— Chris Regan (@ChrisRRegan) August 7, 2018

lol

"through Lolita"! which SK admitted was made too soon...

I'm rewriting the dialogue in 2001: A Space Odyssey to more accurately reflect the period it's set in pic.twitter.com/ChAdhtgTQf

— How do i get the rose in my name (@i_zzzzzz) April 25, 2016

when should kubrick have made lolita, if not in 62?

Yeah. Lolita as novel is such a product of its time and its constraints that I cringe at the thought of a Ken Russell bacchanal or Phil Kaugman intellectual thriller.

well, there was the Adrian Lyne version (which i liked)

*Kaufmann

I tried forgetting about the Lyne version.

JD if he'd made it, say, right after 2001 it could have been explicit enough due to the fall of the Production Code.

Kubrick:

I would fault myself in one area of the film, however; because of all the pressure over the Production Code and the Catholic Legion of Decency at the time, I believe I didn’t sufficiently dramatize the erotic aspect of Humbert’s relationship with Lolita, and because his sexual obsession was only barely hinted at, many people guessed too quickly that Humbert was in love with Lolita. Whereas in the novel this comes as a discovery at the end, when she is no longer a nymphet but a dowdy, pregnant suburban housewife; and it’s this encounter, and his sudden realization of his love, that is one of the most poignant elements of the story. If I could do the film over again, I would have stressed the erotic component of their relationship with the same weight Nabokov did. But that is the only major area where I believe the film is susceptible to valid criticism.

But that is the only major area where I believe the film is susceptible to valid criticism is a line more directors should try.

> *Kaufmann

A Charlie Kaufman adaptation could be fun.

I'm sure lots of you already knew this, but in my eye-rolling outrage at discovering the new 4K release is based on Nolan's piss-yellow "unrestoration" version, I checked and ...
https://www.quora.com/Is-Christopher-Nolan-color-blind
OMFG

hahaha the internet is amazing

lol

i must be too, cuz i didnt see any piss yellow

e.g. here

Seeing as there's a restored 4k transfer already doing the rounds in cinemas it seems far more likely to me that the home video release will be based on that than on Christopher Nolan's 'unrestored' print. The trailer means nothing, it's very possible the production house didn't have any access to the actual new transfer.

The people on home theatre forums seem fairly reassured at this point and there would certainly be wailing and gnashing of teeth over there if it was actually confirmed that there would be piss.

MK, i wouldn't believe Jeff Wells if he said the sun is going to set tonight

gdi that's not how colour deficiency works ugh

I’m probably getting this wrong, but I read somewhere (can’t remember where) a theory that it was maybe a film/projector compatibility thing, with the film stock of the day designed to be shown using a particular type of film projection (tungsten-halogen?) which de-emphasizes yellow, so the theory is that the “restored” print isn’t how it would necessarily have actually looked to people in theaters at the time.

I'm not sure I believe that but what they’re calling the restored print really does look yellow-orange to my eyes in those youtube comparisons (assuming they’re accurate). It gives more warmth but it doesn’t look as pleasing to me…it eliminates the cold whites/grays and really flattens out some of the deep blues/greens

*"restored" should read unrestored

FGTI I do know how r/g colour blindness works in general terms, it was more the idiocy of having someone with known colour perception deficits make decisions about colour timing on such a cinema landmark. Particularly one made by a filmmaker whose signature directorial style was obsession with technical detail.
Does anyone REALLY think that they painted the sets blinding white and lit them meticulously, to achieve this look?
https://s1-ssl.dmcdn.net/qByxw/x1080-png/NQU.jpg

cf. set photo:
https://media.wired.com/photos/59548b4ebe605811a2fdd5c6/191:100/pass/Getty_2001Space.jpg

cf. every fucking set photo

i saw the print 3 weeks ago; it didn't look like that first photo, sorry

That's a little reassuring - I have heard that there is a new 4K DCI in cinemas as well as the film-based Nolan print, or did you definitely see the latter?
And there is obviously a digital scan of the Nolan version, used for the 4K trailer which is the same as the re-release trailer; it's been compared to the 2007 bluray here (corridor compared at 0:47, less yellow than above but still yellow):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1JIkK7-fUI&t=47