@Harkat: Why? The 90's are poop. I was born 1990, and while I had fun when I was younger, if I think back at what happened in the 90's, it's very uninteresting.
OK, so what I mean is, when you go into the past, and let’s say you’re 35, you don’t go 35 years into the past from now to when you were born, but 35 years into the past from when you were born. Or would you rather go into the future 35 years from now? So would you rather visit 1942, or 2047? Anyways, you get what I’m asking now I hope. Also, you can come back any time you’d like, but once you choose either the past or future, you can only go into the future, or the past, you can't go to one, then come back and try the other. I'd personally rather go to the future.
@WalkerD: It's probably on their list that they never made, ha ha. After all, they do do top 100 lists, and I'm sure it'd be on there if they had one, probably even top 50, maybe top 20. There are a lot of good sci-fi films, and even if this is one of the greatest, it doesn't necessarily have to be in the top ten. Also, I don't have netflix anymore, and the way you describe it sounds horrible anyways. If there's a blu-ray version, that'd be the way to go I think.
@MooseyMcMan: Yeah, I just thought I'd mention it, it's not really necessary though, and it won't really help you understand what you didn't originally get. I mean, I think what you described before, like the HAL becoming part of Bowman and stuff like that was the sequel, and while I thought it was quite a fine film on its own, you could just take it as non-canonical and think of what happened yourself with whatever help you can get from sources elsewhere.
@killacam: I read that a lot of people when this film was in theaters had gone into the theater just to watch it because of the ending as they had smoked marijuana.
@MooseyMcMan: Have you seen the sequel? Not that it really matters, just wondering.
@WalkerD: That's one of the few sci-fi's I haven't seen, but would love to, and in the past have tried looking into. You do know it is considered one of the greatest sci-fi's though right? So this doesn't really matter.
@Tylea002: @stinky: @AlexanderSheen: Actually, it's both science fiction and fantasy. It's called "science fantasy"; it's a cross-genre, like action comedy, or comedy drama. I think there are good reasons as to why it is a sci-fi, and I think to the mainstream audience, if you said "Alright, give me a quick answer, what genre is Star Wars?" Most would say sci-fi, and that's not a wrong answer. While it is a fantasy, I don't think fantasy really jumps to people's minds when they think Star Wars, they probably really have to think about it for a minute. When someone says "fantasy", I think most would think of dragons and swords or something.
@MooseyMcMan: Well if some of it didn't make sense, why didn't you actively search the internet or ask questions to find out what it could all mean? Maybe then you'd say to yourself "Well fuck... that was actually genius!" I think the word you're trying to look for though, is uninterested. The pacing wasn't really a problem, it was just, like I said, it's kind of a weird movie. Some of it seemed like an ordinary sci-fi film, but then there are other aspects that aren't so much. If I may ask, what parts did you find confusing?
Log in to comment