2008 Apr 3 - 2001 aftermath

[Ghostduckie]

I much preferred the books over the movies. I actually liked the technical/math parts of the book whereas the movie was just visual thrills. "Ooh, look at the big dinosaur!" The book makes you think about the dangers in bringing back dinosaurs and how would we react if such a thing happened? Would we have a Dr. Alan Grant to save the day or would we end up being lunch for T-Rex?

As for 2001, I had been hearing for years it was one of the all time classic moveis ever made, blah blah. So I finally rented it to find out for myself. It put me to sleep, it was so boring. I'm struggling to find the plot and keep up with it but maybe I just didn't get it? I'll admit the visuals were impressive considering it was made back in the 60s. But give us a clue. What was the deal with the monolith? What was the big secret? Does it give more details in the book, which I haven't read yet.

[Mae Dean]

...I'll admit the visuals were impressive considering it was made back in the 60s. But give us a clue. What was the deal with the monolith? What was the big secret? Does it give more details in the book, which I haven't read yet.

This is why it helps to either read the books, or have someone nearby who HAS.

The monolith is, if you will, the swiss army knife of an ancient race that we never see. In fact, it's a possibly extinct race, because if I remember correctly, the monolith acts of its own volition, and the race that set them into motion is long gone.

Basically, its purpose is to guide the evolution of the species. The significance of the monolith in the opening scene is that IT is what directed these apes to learn to use tools. And as you see in 2010, the monolith turns Juipiter into a second sun to give the life that was budding on Europa a chance to thrive - which you see the effects of in the book 3001. And essentially, HAL's consciousness merges with that of the Monolith, so HAL lives on. Poor, misunderstood HAL.

[JermCool]

The monolith is, if you will, the swiss army knife of an ancient race that we never see. In fact, it's a possibly extinct race, because if I remember correctly, the monolith acts of its own volition, and the race that set them into motion is long gone.

Basically, its purpose is to guide the evolution of the species. The significance of the monolith in the opening scene is that IT is what directed these apes to learn to use tools. And as you see in 2010, the monolith turns Juipiter into a second sun to give the life that was budding on Europa a chance to thrive - which you see the effects of in the book 3001. And essentially, HAL's consciousness merges with that of the Monolith, so HAL lives on. Poor, misunderstood HAL.

Don't forget Dave, since they became a joined consciousness in 2010! Poor 'I'm stuck as a starchild' Dave.

[Jedit]

I haven't even heard of Enemy Mine. What was it about?

It's a semi-decent sci-fi remake of Hell in the Pacific.

[Wrench]

All this talk about Robert Jordan finally prompted me to buy the WoT Box Set #1 from Amazon. My understanding is the first three books (which is what the set contains) are pretty much the best in the series, and it kind of runs downhill after that. We'll see.

If you like J.R.R. Tolkien's writing style , then you might enjoy Jordan. Personally, I found it drier than chewing on cardboard-flavored rice cakes; it kind of had the same mental effect as swimming in molasses. After about 40 pages, I just gave up; no story is worth that kind of mental abuse.

[Chirping Cricket]

All this talk about Robert Jordan finally prompted me to buy the WoT Box Set #1 from Amazon. My understanding is the first three books (which is what the set contains) are pretty much the best in the series, and it kind of runs downhill after that. We'll see.

If you like J.R.R. Tolkien's writing style , then you might enjoy Jordan. Personally, I found it drier than chewing on cardboard-flavored rice cakes; it kind of had the same mental effect as swimming in molasses. After about 40 pages, I just gave up; no story is worth that kind of mental abuse.

Jordan has his good moments and his bad. I personally don't like most of his work, but he's a better author than I could ever hope to be. The Wheel of Time series was an excellent library rental. I might even buy it in dribs and drabs at the local Half-Priced Books. I couldn't justify buying it new though. George R.R. Martin is the same way. He creates thick tomes of insanely complicated stories, some of which are riveting and others are akin to cardboard-flavored rice cakes.

As for sci-fi: Clarke, Heinlein, Asimov and Card for the win.

[teddy]

This is why it helps to either read the books, or have someone nearby who HAS.

The monolith is, if you will, the swiss army knife of an ancient race that we never see. In fact, it's a possibly extinct race, because if I remember correctly, the monolith acts of its own volition, and the race that set them into motion is long gone.

Basically, its purpose is to guide the evolution of the species. The significance of the monolith in the opening scene is that IT is what directed these apes to learn to use tools. And as you see in 2010, the monolith turns Juipiter into a second sun to give the life that was budding on Europa a chance to thrive - which you see the effects of in the book 3001. And essentially, HAL's consciousness merges with that of the Monolith, so HAL lives on. Poor, misunderstood HAL.

That does make alot more sense now that I have an inkling as to the purpose of the monolith. But I will have to defend the people that don't understand 2001 here, a movie shouldn't need a secret club of devout followers to be good. Please don't take this as a slight against the movie (the middle part was extraordinary, and makes the rest of the movie worth it), but I think Kubricks adaptation could have been more accessible if it wasn't so elite.

[Mae Dean]

Agreed. I'm the first to say that Kubrick was a batshit crazy director. That said, what I DO appreciate 2001 for is how vastly far ahead of its time it was. The movie was made in 1968, for chrissakes. All the special effects had to be done the old-school way - photographically. Which should make you stop and think how AWESOME the scenes with them walking around the ring really are.

That, and I just love HAL to bits. *laughs*

[Jedit]

All the special effects had to be done the old-school way - photographically. Which should make you stop and think how AWESOME the scenes with them walking around the ring really are.

All they did was mount the set on a spindle and rotate it, you know. Not exactly rocket science.

[Wrench]

All this talk about Robert Jordan finally prompted me to buy the WoT Box Set #1 from Amazon. My understanding is the first three books (which is what the set contains) are pretty much the best in the series, and it kind of runs downhill after that. We'll see.

If you like J.R.R. Tolkien's writing style , then you might enjoy Jordan. Personally, I found it drier than chewing on cardboard-flavored rice cakes; it kind of had the same mental effect as swimming in molasses. After about 40 pages, I just gave up; no story is worth that kind of mental abuse.

Jordan has his good moments and his bad. I personally don't like most of his work, but he's a better author than I could ever hope to be. The Wheel of Time series was an excellent library rental. I might even buy it in dribs and drabs at the local Half-Priced Books. I couldn't justify buying it new though. George R.R. Martin is the same way. He creates thick tomes of insanely complicated stories, some of which are riveting and others are akin to cardboard-flavored rice cakes.

As for sci-fi: Clarke, Heinlein, Asimov and Card for the win.

Classic sci-fi, I'll give you. Modern? Peter F Hamilton, Melanie Rawn, and Neal Stephenson. Oh yeah.

[StruckingFuggle]

Stephenson is good (Snow Crash ftmfw), he just needs to learn how to END a story.

And wait, how can you mention modern sci-fi, and Stephenson, but not William Gibson?

[teddy]

All they did was mount the set on a spindle and rotate it, you know. Not exactly rocket science.

You must have never worked with film/video on a professional scale. keeping the camera steady, keeping the lighting constant, keeping the subject from being crushed by the mechanisms you're using, all very hard to do. And just because you can do it technically doesn't mean you can do it artfully. Fucking wow that movie is incredible.

[Mae Dean]

Not only that, but you have to consider that one of the guys is sitting at a table eating while Bowman is walking around it - they had to strap him in for the ride, and he had to remain still enough to make it look like the set wasn't moving.

Not rocket science, but this is 1968, for chrissakes.

[Wrench]

Stephenson is good (Snow Crash ftmfw), he just needs to learn how to END a story.

And wait, how can you mention modern sci-fi, and Stephenson, but not William Gibson?

Eh... my husband has a few Gibson books, but I've never really looked into them. Does that officially make me a heathen -- am I breaking some geek bylaw or something?

[StruckingFuggle]

I dunno. On the one hand, he's a founding father, on the other, he's kind of (borderline?) anti-tech, so ... *shrug*