What the fuck?
beautiful music, beautiful visuals and concept, too abstract, way too long
3/5
>>69976620
Ryan Gosling in a space flick sweet!
>>69976922
>way too long
I'll never understand this. Many films need great length to truly portray the events and message desired.
Do people just have really shitty attention spans?
>>69977140
>watching paint dry is witnessing art.
>>69976620
Kubrick's best movie.
3/5
>>69976620
>that expression indicates Dave is looking at God
>he's actually just pulling out memory chips from the computer
that psoter is so misleading, why is this shit considered good again?
>>69977188
technically you're witnessing art if it's paint drying off on a canvas...
>>69976620
No, its:
"My god, its full of stars" -Dave Bowman.
wtf i hate computers now !!
>>69977248
He's watching Floyd telling him the true nature of the mission, idiot
>>69977188
>i post on tv because i love movies so much!
>civil war is the best movie this year!
>>69977248
The cinematic mastery and abstract concepts is why it's heralded. It's like Kid A or LYSFLAtH. You don't understand it, it make you feel uncomfortable, but something about it is genius. Something you know you will never truly comprehend.
>>69977280
Here's your (You).
>>69977411
fuck off there's a 20 minute segment of colours
only pretentious cunts think that makes for good cinema, you're the same as people who stare at a pollock painting and pretend they see things
>>69977902
It's more like five minutes.
Are you a child? Do you have ADD? You belong in the children's section of Netflix. You clearly have absolutely no attention span or maturity to enjoy something longer than an hour.
>>69977879
What do you mean by this?
(You)
>>69977983
A slow film can't afford to have literally nothing going on for 5 minutes, I enjoyed the rest of the film but the colourgasm was just unnecessary
>>69978493
The original complaint was the length of the entire film.
When I target your lack of attention span and inability to accept the director's desires for the film you then try to compromise by narrowing the target.
You choose to complain about the stargate, over blowing the time table for it in hopes that you don't lose all stance in the original argument.
When your exaggeration is noted and debunked you compromose yet again hoping that you are not exposed as someone who does not truly appreciate or understand film as an art, and only enjoys the entertainment value.
As I said, go to where you belong. Cars is always a nice watch.
>>69977188
Honestly everytime I read posts like this it reminds me of my retarded friend who considers himself an "expert film critic" but didn't understand the spinning in the graveyard or the stare down scenes in The Good the Bad and the Ugly and thought the movie would have been better without them.
>>69979060
Most modern film critics and enthusiasts are absolutely "plebeian." They only see films as entertainment and judge them based on how much they enjoyed them, not their objective qualities.
For instance, I subjectively prefer Inglorious Basterds to Resevior Dogs and consider it my favorite Tarantino, while I know Resevior Dogs is objectively better.
Most people are inable to view objective qualities and can only judge things emotionally.
