Films/DVD Asylum

Posted by Audiophilander (A) on January 04, 2007 at 13:36:45

In Reply to: Well, the 2001 is not just another sci-fi movie, it is a one with agruably high aspirations posted by Victor Khomenko on January 4, 2007 at 12:44:52:

>>> "As I am sure you notice, I do not comment on things like Star Troopers Part 17 and other such films - but the 2001 was made by one of the greatest directors to ever walk this Earth, and is believed by many to have crossed the line between mindless entertainment and serious thinking movies, so it is a legit target (not that there is anything illegitimate with commenting on your run-off-the-mill sci-fi)." <<<

LOL! Ummm, maybe you have Starship Troopers confused with Stalag 17. Hey, you really should cut back on the Stolli, dude! ;^)

As for great Directors, yes Kubrick was a master, but Paul Verhooven is no slouch either, but of course, YMMV. Conversely, I'd rather avoid the spin employed by your rodent-powered "run-off-the-mill" grey poupon.

>>> "Regarding the opera, I am not sure what your familiarity with it is, but I have certainly seen many, many sci-fi films - I do not always watch what I like. I had even watched some of those Star Troopers, or whatever that name is." <<<

Your ego is such that you can't even get straight which film you are referencing or bring yourself to use the real name as if embarrassed to admit seeing Paul Verhooven's magnificent SF film. Yes, there was a sequel by a lesser director; it was almost straight to video. While the sequel is not bad, it bears no resemblance to Verhooven's high-powered tongue 'n cheek pastiche of militarism, propaganda and the uncomfortable balance between patriotism and fascism. BTW, this film is not without it's critics, mainly because it strayed afield of Heinlein's deeper themes, many of which probably proved as uncinematic as that now infamous endless tunnel sequence in Tarkovsky's Solaris.

>>> "Nobody would put the 2001 in the same bin as ST" <<<

I don't know, doesn't "T" (spelling out 2001) come just after "S" in the SF section? ;^)

>>> "...I just don't see it close to that of the Solaris." <<<

Thank goodness!

>>> "The two represent two different extremes of sci-fi genre, ir you will - one purely visual and mechanical, the other one lacking severely in that department, but concentrating on the effect of all that technical mumbo-jumbo on humans." <<<

Not to take away anything from Lem's written work, the filmed versions of Solaris (both of them) are BORING, albeit for different reasons. The U.S. version is claustrophobic, talky and slow, and the Russian version would make Eric Von Stroheim's original director's cut of Greed seem of shorter duration.

Heck, you cannot find a more Sominex inducing formula for film watching than the Tarkovsky's Solaris. SF movies, scratch that ...genre movies in general, don't have to be solely about action, but they should at least MOVE! In other words, a GOOD genre movie should be involving and paced well enough to move the story forward plot-wise, something sorely lacking in Snorelaris.

AuPh

• Starship Troopers   (Open in New Window)