Forum Overview :: Star Trek: A Final Unity :: 2001 is not boring. It is slow.

[quote name="motherfuckerfoodeater"]It is true that many movies that are slow are also boring, but there isn't a 1-to-1 equivalence (see also: "Once Upon a Time in the West.") The slowness of 2001 brings out the isolation and paranoia of the situation and actually ends up making the film pretty exciting. Also, the cinematography (especially the composition) is amazing, and creates (and switches) moods really effectively. Here is my response to other things that have been said at various places in this thread: * I watched "Barry Lyndon" at 30 or so, and still found it boring. I think that what happened is that Kubrick was so enamored of the character that he couldn't focus on making a good movie about him. * I think "The Killing" is a little sub-par too. The whole thing felt like a series of comedy sketches with only the thinnest connecting tissue. Also, except for Sterling Hayden (who Kubrick always got awesome performances out of) the actors all stumbled around looking retarded. * All right-thinking people can agree that "Doctor Strangelove" is Kubrick's best film because its nature emphasized his strengths and downplays his one important weakness (total deafness to his character's internal states.) [/quote]