Arthur Anderson49 said:Man, the only thing it changes is my perspective on my own ego! It isn't deep at all. Honestly? It’s just a gorgeous picture book built on a few Sci-Fi ideas that had already been totally exhausted in literature by then. In terms of the genre, this movie didn't bring anything new to the table. As a cinematic experience, sure, it captured that naive sense of wonder regarding space travel. But in books? You couldn't sell that anymore because it had been done and dusted for thirty years prior. The only reason it felt fresh was the technology—finally, we had the tools to make it look spectacular on screen.
While 2001: A Space Odyssey is beautifully made, its intellectual substance is pretty thin. The "challenge" it offers is really only for people who get off on pretty space vistas or folks experiencing Sci-Fi for the very first time.
So, it’s an incredible film for people who know nothing about Sci-Fi. For anyone who actually knows their stuff, it’s just a flashy coffee table book.
Now, Blade Runner? That is much heavier, more layered, and way more complex. I truly believe it will remain relevant as art for much longer. It introduced an entirely new paradigm to Sci-Fi, which eventually paved the way for the whole cyberpunk movement. It delivered one of those rare subgenres that actually still makes sense in the 21st century. It was a straight-up revolutionary film.
Just look at the massive footprint it left on the genre. Meanwhile, the Odyssey barely left a trace. It stands alone as what it always was—visually striking, but artistically and conceptually pretty empty.
:)))
"artistically and conceptually empty" haha :)) wow, you really cracked me up there :)
it'll get better...
my vote goes to Blade Runner