[an0n]

2001's ending, from what I remember, is HAL and Dave merging with the Monolith to become higher life-forms or somesuch.

Donnie Darko is real simple: He's God/Jesus.

[Nuke]

2010 was easyer to understand, they left out the philisophical crap and just turned jupiter into a star. the last part of 2001 that made sence was hal's deactivation. after that it all just goes into oblivion. i cant even remember the end to solaris, i think i got bored and worked on a model. as for the aeon flux movie, having only seen a handfull of episodes, i might go see the movie. it has to be totally bizare or i wont be satisfied.

[Night Hammer]

Guys guys, were looking too deep into this, two words: Charlize Theron

[Rictor]

I really wish I knew and cared enough about the original Aeon Flux cartoon to dismiss the movie as a Hollywood abomination intended to appeal to great unwashed masses. Unfortunately, I've never seen the original, so my sense of ourtrage can only be a very vague and general one.

The odd thing is that they actually dressed Aeon up for the movie. She's much more scantily clad in the cartoon.

[Ford Prefect]

Stanley Kubrick did not intend for people to "understand" 2001. It is a highly visceral work of art, and the closest thing to a theme in it is the primal terror of the human being in the face of the unknown. The best thing you can do is let the sensory experience wash over you.

That film needed no sequels. I sort of pretend that 2010 doesn't exist.

[Jetmech Jr.]

1. Personally, I think this movie looks to be kinda ****ty. Not in regards to the story (what I remember of it) but the style.

2. Solaris lost me about 3 minutes in. The rest of the movie was me wondering what the **** was going on, and who the **** these people moving around on my T.V. were.

3. Sphere scared the **** outta me. Or maybe it was just my inherent fear of the ocean...meh, either way, it struck me as a not bad/fairly good movie.

[an0n]

• Sphere was awesome because it leaves you with about a thousand questions that you don't really want to know the answers to.
• Charlize Theron is ****en smoken hawt - but far too clothed to be Aeon.
• The film seems very Serenity-ish in it's styling, when it should be more Dark City.

[Nix]

I read sphere back in 8th grade, and understood it, way back before the movie was released.  When I saw the movie, I was let down, probably because I interpreted the story a little different than the book. Plus, most of Chricton's movie adaptations from his books leave me with an empty feeling.

Guys guys, were looking too deep into this, two words: Charlize Theron

Now take that pic and put black hair on her.  (no, dont do it in mspaint...)
HOT.  That's about the only reason why I'd see it. 

[ZylonBane]

2001's ending, from what I remember, is HAL and Dave merging with the Monolith to become higher life-forms or somesuch.

Once again, your understanding couldn't be more wrong. HAL was deactivated, and the monolith turns into a stargate which transports Dave off to the Intergalactic Space Baby Transformation Clinic.

The novel (NOT  "novelization") makes this all much more clear.


And the reason they de-skimpified Aeon Flux's costume for the movie is because Charlize Theron doesn't have the body for it. She's horribly miscast.

[ZmaN]

2001's ending, from what I remember, is HAL and Dave merging with the Monolith to become higher life-forms or somesuch.

Once again, your understanding couldn't be more wrong. HAL was deactivated, and the monolith turns into a stargate which transports Dave off to the Intergalactic Space Baby Transformation Clinic.

The novel (NOT  "novelization") makes this all much more clear.


And the reason they de-skimpified Aeon Flux's costume for the movie is because Charlize Theron doesn't have the body for it. She's horribly miscast.

miscast in what way?

shes got some body from what I see!!!

hottie!

EDIT:  And I dont like her with blond hair, black looks SOO much better on her, makes her look emo (i think)...
is it naturally blond on her?  (i know it aint naturally black)

[pyro-manic]

black looks SOO much better on her, makes her look emo (i think)...

Emo is not the word you're looking for. Seriously.

[ZylonBane]

miscast in what way?

shes got some body from what I see!!!

Yeah, woo zMAn, some body. Unfortunately it's the wrong kind of body. Aeon is supposed to have a gymnast's body, for all the running and jumping and contorting she does (gigantic cartoon breasts notwithstanding).

[Martinus]

Once again, your understanding couldn't be more wrong. HAL was deactivated, and the monolith turns into a stargate which transports Dave off to the Intergalactic Space Baby Transformation Clinic.

That's pretty much what happened, good way of describing it.
The movie was more a case of conveying images or sequences in the book, it wasn't meant to make total sense on its own. The movie is more of a visual journey.

As for Solaris; I've read that the original is far superior but I thought that the new version was thought provoking. Why does a movie have to have only one outcome? I prefer movies that leave the interpretation to the viewer.

[an0n]

Wait, they wrote a novel about the 2001 movie?

How in the **** could that be any more of a redundant pursuit?

Oh and Aeon doesn't so much have the body of a gymnast, as the body of a malnourished skeleton (with ginormous cartoon hooters).

[Ford Prefect]

The novel was written as a companion to the film. Kubrick did the film while Clarke wrote the novel. I personally don't see the point of a book for a movie that is based so heavily on images and sounds. That work just can't exist in another form and still be the same piece.

[vyper]

Bleh.

That is all.

[ZylonBane]

Wait, they wrote a novel about the 2001 movie?

How in the **** could that be any more of a redundant pursuit?

Wow anon, you're really missing on all cylinders today. 2001 the movie and the novel were created more-or-less simultaneously, in a collaboration between Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke (the extremely famous science fiction author). As a result, the movie is not based on the novel nor is the novel based on the movie. They're parallel expressions of the same idea. BOTH works are regarded as classics of their respective mediums.

Interestingly, the 2010 novel was written as a sequel to the 2001 movie (the book and movie differed in certain minor factual details).

[an0n]

Meh, I never paid much attention to the whole 2001 series and associated 'stuff'.

The whole 'similar but slightly different parallel universes' thing didn't exactly enamour me to investigate the series.

[NGTM-1R]

Yeah, woo zMAn, some body. Unfortunately it's the wrong kind of body. Aeon is supposed to have a gymnast's body, for all the running and jumping and contorting she does (gigantic cartoon breasts notwithstanding).

The body of a gymnast is, say, Sailor Uranus from Sailor Moon. Not Aeon. That's just the body of someone who's ****ed up.

[ZylonBane]

Nonetheless, it's not the body of Charlize Theron. And get this bull****--

THERON REDESIGNS SKIMPY SUPERHEROINE COSTUME

Hollywood star Charlize Theron forced movie bosses to change her costume
design for forthcoming movie "Aeon Flux" -- after deciding her character's
original outfit was too revealing.

When Theron saw the superheroine's skimpy crime-fighting outfit of a bikini,
thigh-high boots and shoulder pads, she decided to add trousers to the
outfit.

The 29-year-old star admits, "When you're playing with aspects of sexuality,
certain things have to be hidden. That's what my mother always used to tell
me.

"I wanted to stay as true as possible to the original character, but didn't
feel the need to go as far with the costume."

The sci-fi movie, based on the comic book adaptation, is due to be released
in the autumn.

Stupid prima-donna.