This Film Needs To Be Put In Its Place

Rating: 8/10 (27 March 2005)

This Might Have Spoilers in it, depending on what you consider spoilers, i think that any review is by definition a spoiler because it effects your viewing experience by placing bias on your thoughts pertaining to the film before you see it. Anyways. Basically, people either say:
A) this movie sucks its boring, has no plot, the visuals are well composed, but look fake by modern comparison, the acting is terrible, etc.....
or B) this is the greatest film of all time, it explores such amazing depths of human existence, the visuals are brilliant and unmatched, incredible, intelligent, etc......
The truth is they are both right, and both wrong. The problem arises in the fact that Film does everything film can do, but does it in non film ways. This film IS boring, it has no plot, it has no "acting". It ISN'T supposed to! This film shouldn't be on the shelf at blockbuster, it should be at the library in the philosophy section, or hanging in the art gallery. You are all looking at this the wrong way, with closed minds. This is just a philosophical text and a painting seen through the camera, it is in no way a "film".
You stuck up people who think they are better than everyone else because they "get it" are all wrong to give this a 10, because a film is made up out of all the aspects, plot, acting, cinematography, meaning, technical achievement, pacing, etc..... so just because you feel the need to make yourselves feel better by claiming this is such a great film only you can appreciate it don't try to tell anyone its truly a 10/10 or the greatest film of all time. It clearly isn't, it might have a 10/10 in a few aspects, but that doesn't make up for all the 0/10 its going to get in the other components of a film.
You dull people who think that a film needs explosions every 6 seconds, a classic story-telling technique, and has to have some big Hollywood star are all wrong as well. Film is an art form, and for a film to actually delve into some philosophical idea is a great thing, and deserves its respect. Just because you can't focus your attention for more then 10 seconds and are too lazy to want to put any effort into watching a movie doesn't meant that filmmakers should cater to your slothfulness and intellectual degradation.
I give it a rating of 3 not because it is awful in its entirety, but these ratings are supposed to rate it as a movie, compared to all other movies in the world, and as a movie, it is awful. If this was the the "Internet ART AND PHILOSOPHY DataBase" then i would rate it a 10/10, but it isn't, this is the "Internet MOVIE DataBase", so, when you consider all the things that make a good FILM, 2001 doesn't match up to truly great films which not only have equally good visuals and meaning, but also have original plots (the 2001 plot is original, i suppose a better word would have been something like....engaging?), intense characters, good pacing, etc.....
So, everyone needs to put away their egos and give this film a fair and just judgment. One of the best 100 FILMS of all time? not even close, A brilliant visual work of art and exploration of man, yes.
One last note, some people like to add that the music is brilliant, but id like to remind you that Kubrick didn't compose it, other musical geniuses did, and trust me, it is not that hard to pick out some famous classical music and put it in a movie, so give the musical credit to where it is due, the composers, and not to Kubrick.