30 Day Movie Challenge...

[shadowkat]

Found this on the internet.

Day #1 of The 30 Day Movie Challenge.

The list is




The first film that I remember watching...it was re-released in the 1970s..but premiered in 1941.

Watch on YouTube

I think I saw it when I was five or six years of age.

Comments

[shadowkat]

Well, I saw 2001 on a box television screen that was maybe 20 inches if that, and 2010 on the big screen. So that may have made a difference?

2001 never did much for me. It's one of those films, along with Citizan Kane, and Malik's films...that people quote as being amazing, the best ever, and top of the game - and I'm thinking...eh. Okay. I was bored. But okay.

Hitchcock was more into characterization, dialogue and plot than Kubrick. His characters have a bit more depth, and he didn't do as many takes. He may have been a bit of an ass, but he had nothing on Kubrick in regards to torture of actors - Kubrick was in a class all his own. Kubrick cared most about the look of the film, with theme second, plot, character last. Often Kubrick's characters are one-dimensional - objects to push forward a theme or visual. Both Stephen King and Anthony Burgess hated Kubrick's adaptations because they felt Kubrick didn't care about the characters and lost the point of their stories as a result.

That said, I appreciate Kubrick's visionary abilities. (I admittedly prefer Kubrick's Shining to King's and his Clockwork Orange is amazing, and in my opinion his best film). His visuals are amazing, but often repetitive and kind of redundant - "Eyes Wide Shut" is a good example of self-indulgence, as is the ending of The Shining, which is a brilliant film but a flawed one. 2001 similar issues - lots of style over substance, lots of self-indulgence, allowing the audience to bring their own interpretation. And the special effects are awesome - if you are seeing that film first on the big screen. It's ground-breaking, mind-blowing, and awesome if you are seeing it for the first time in the 1960s. Not so much in the 1980s.

You're reaction to 2001, was mine to Star Wars - I was about 9 or 10 years of age when I saw Star Wars, prior to that, I saw sci-fi as horror films with scary monsters. And few strong women. Star Wars blew my mind.

(I didn't see 2001 until four years later and on TV. I was underwhelmed.)

[cjlasky7]

How I wish I saw Star Wars at age 9. I saw it at 17.

My reaction at 17 was "Nice! Nostalgic fun, like the old Flash Gordon movie serials."

My reaction at 9 would have been:

"Whoa! COOOOL!"

[shadowkat]

Particularly if all you have to compare it to is 1950s and 60s Japanese monster films, Star Trek reruns, King Kong, and Space 1999.

Princess Leia amazed me. It was the first time we had a female heroine who could shoot a gun. Usually they were damsels. Also, no monsters. It was basically a space western with a bit of WWII movies thrown in.

So much is timing.