I know everybody has "home theaters" that they think are really good or great, and I do too, but you must pay heed to what he says here: You really have not experienced the film fully without seeing it in 70mm in a large theater. It's a visual symphony.
I watched 2001 for the first time last night, at home. Turned off my phone and didn’t pause it once. I was completely hypnotized by the film. I’m sure seeing it on the big screen is better, but I’m almost positive that I wouldn’t have had that amazing experience in the theater. With people chewing on popcorn, candy wrappers rustling, and people talking. I’d pay a lot of money to see it in theaters without a crowd.
i know this probably isn't at the same level at 2001's 70mm screening, but watching Metropolis in big screen with pianist playing along for 3 hours was marvellous.
The promotion for the film heavily emphasized the meticulously researched futurism and scientific realism of the middle section, and made it seem like a sort of hard-SF travelogue. I can only imagine the bafflement of audiences who came in expecting all that and got an enigmatic visual tone poem starting a million years in the past and ending in a psychedelic transfiguration. I remember seeing the first section of the movie on TV with my father when I was a kid. Near the end of the Dawn of Man sequence, I had to go upstairs and take a bath. When I came back down, my dad said "they dug up another one of those black slabs on the Moon. I guess it's... symbolic?" And then I had to go to bed. But by the time I saw the entire movie, I'd already read the novel and, like Cuaron, I knew the broad outlines of the plot, and at least what Arthur C. Clarke thought it was about (which is not necessarily identical to what Stanley Kubrick thought it was about). That probably kept me from getting too baffled.
hahaha I love it. In Morelia he said the same in spanish to a lady interviewer which was even funnier "Doing Gravity after watching 2001 would be like trying to have sex after being in the shower next to Rocco".
I think that the movie from the 50s that he was talking about was Destination Moon. Robert Heinlien was involved with the film and one of the goals was to portray space travel in a technologically correct way.
I know everybody has "home theaters" that they think are really good or great, and I do too, but you must pay heed to what he says here: You really have not experienced the film fully without seeing it in 70mm in a large theater. It's a visual symphony.
Sadly many people see it in mobile phones in Netflix, and call it the most boring overrated film ever made.
I caught it during a re-release in the early 1980's...It was mind blowing seeing it on the big screen.
Sadly I never got to experience this.
I watched 2001 for the first time last night, at home. Turned off my phone and didn’t pause it once. I was completely hypnotized by the film. I’m sure seeing it on the big screen is better, but I’m almost positive that I wouldn’t have had that amazing experience in the theater. With people chewing on popcorn, candy wrappers rustling, and people talking. I’d pay a lot of money to see it in theaters without a crowd.
i know this probably isn't at the same level at 2001's 70mm screening, but watching Metropolis in big screen with pianist playing along for 3 hours was marvellous.
It's up there
Thank you, Alfonso, for your own special words on 2001: A Space Odyssey. 🖖🏻
The promotion for the film heavily emphasized the meticulously researched futurism and scientific realism of the middle section, and made it seem like a sort of hard-SF travelogue. I can only imagine the bafflement of audiences who came in expecting all that and got an enigmatic visual tone poem starting a million years in the past and ending in a psychedelic transfiguration.
I remember seeing the first section of the movie on TV with my father when I was a kid. Near the end of the Dawn of Man sequence, I had to go upstairs and take a bath. When I came back down, my dad said "they dug up another one of those black slabs on the Moon. I guess it's... symbolic?" And then I had to go to bed.
But by the time I saw the entire movie, I'd already read the novel and, like Cuaron, I knew the broad outlines of the plot, and at least what Arthur C. Clarke thought it was about (which is not necessarily identical to what Stanley Kubrick thought it was about). That probably kept me from getting too baffled.
Rocco Siffredi being mentioned in a debate of 2001 Space Odyssey hahaha
hahaha I love it. In Morelia he said the same in spanish to a lady interviewer which was even funnier "Doing Gravity after watching 2001 would be like trying to have sex after being in the shower next to Rocco".
Italian Stallone meets Mexican tacos
I think that the movie from the 50s that he was talking about was Destination Moon. Robert Heinlien was involved with the film and one of the goals was to portray space travel in a technologically correct way.
the wonder, the fear, the curse that knowledge represents for humanity
"Wrong f' leg" LOL
2:25 exactly it.
subtitleeeee
Alfonso Cuarón is the most overrated director in history.
Lol he himself has go on to record saying that he is a professional bullshitter.