It’s a slightly click-baity title, but as we’re still generating more content for our magazines, this one included, why not?

My Sci-fi unpopular opinion is that 2001: A Space Odyssey is nothing but pretentious, LSD fueled nonsense. I’ve tried watching it multiple times and each time I have absolutely no patience for the pointless little scenes which contain little to no depth or meaningful plot, all coalescing towards that 15 minute “journey” through space and series of hallucinations or whatever that are supposed to be deep, shake you to your foundations, and make you re-think the whole human condition.

But it doesn’t. Because it’s just pretentious, LSD fueled nonsense. Planet of the Apes was released in the same year and is, on every level, a better Sci-fi movie. It offers mystery, a consistent and engaging plot, relatable characters you actually care about, and asks a lot more questions about the world and our place in it.

It insists upon itself, Lois.

  • Kevlarrelic
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think context is very important when judging 2001: A Space Odyssey. It came out before we landed on the moon and got a lot about space travel and the moon scientifically correct. (Space being silent, weightlessness, artificial gravity, etc…) Kubrick even consulted with Carl Sagan about what alien life would be like: initially he wanted to go with a Star Trek style humanoid alien, and Sagan said it would probably be incomprehensible to us, hence the LSD ending. The special effects were absolutely groundbreaking for the time and still hold up today. If it seems boring now, it’s because it has had such a huge influence on everything that came after it.

    • Kevlarrelic
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      My sci-fi unpopular opinion is that Primer wasn’t a very good movie. Didn’t do anything very interesting or new imo, but maybe I missed something? It’s just an out of order time travel situation, right?