2001 VS INTERSTELLAR

which is the better film & why?

Attached: 2001_interstellar.jpg (620x412, 60K)

i havent seen either of them where should I start

kys for making this thread

interstellar obviously, 2001 ripped literally all of it off

Only numales think 2001 is better.

2001 was objectively better

2001 dcause im a retard boomer faggot

I have always liked how pre 70s space aesthetics was mostly colorful but starting from the mid 70s and post 70s it started to go on the grey and utilitarian color palette.
Odd.

2001 was full of 70s style futuristic bullshit. It's the cringiest shit in existence. Only boomers like this

2001. Fucking hell I love interstellar but it doesn't even come close to Space Odyssey.

they both involve space, that's where the similarities end. i bet you think every film with a socially isolated protagonist is just like taxi driver, too.

interstellar sucked

If I want to be a virtue signaling boomer cuck: 2001

The truth: interstellar

Moon

>THIS

Attached: 1516239402675.gif (231x255, 1.46M)

Saw 2001 in a theater the other week. Those last 30 minutes were a true experience.
Interstellar is also a great theater experience, but it's great only in moments, while 2001 is great all around.

2001 is the more technically impressive considering the era but none of the characters have any goals that evoke emotions from the audience, they're just doing their job and struggling to survive and the mystery they're investigating doesn't really get a payoff, Interstellar spends a lot of time setting up the characters and the stakes and as such is incredibly moving.

one of these is realistic and the other is garbage

>muh power of love Nolan bullshit vs 2001 A Space Odyssey
Gee i wonder, Nolan is overrated and Interstellar is one of his worst movies

Garbage movie

Attached: 1540537441270.jpg (1916x714, 425K)

>giant space baby
>realistic

whats wrong with her face

>Dude practical special effects.
2001 is trash and wastes the time of the audience. At least Interstellar had the smarts to make space travel look entertaining.

Blame that on Shit Wars.

2001 is better for many reasons but mostly because It doesn't have the half asleep Dylan Thomas recital by Michael Caine. It's fucking annoying and Nolan did it twice

Interstellar is also largely practical special effects my dude

Attached: endurance.jpg (4416x3312, 1.2M)

Interestellar because it actually had a coherent plot

It's kinda hilarious how both movies unraveled at the end. One was pretentious while the other was kinda nonsensical. Although I guess it makes sense if Cooper just wants to hang out in the planet to fast-forward time so he could see what shenanigans humans would get up to.

I didn't say that practical special effect is bad. My problem with 2001 is it's excessive large amount of demonstration with said practical effects. Every docking scene and every centrifuge set is shown off excessively like it's hitting me with a baseball bat and telling me to be amazed. It does look amazing but do we really have to have another overly long docking sequence while the score blares into your ears?

2001 is literally one of the most boring films ever made so interstellar by default

It's not just a soulless technical piece, I see it almost as a dance of sorts. The point is not "look how great my effects are" at all.

It's one of the most engaging films for me. Saw it about 12 times, two of those in theater rescreenings.

Interstellar is a film made by and for women.

Potato

t. tranny

You'll never be a woman.

Why would I ever want to be a woman, tranny?

I didn't get the memo from my supervisor so I can't comment.

That doesn't make any sense. All the fighters wore red suits. That's not the only reason it doesn't make any sense.

Are people trying to meme Interstellar into a good movie?
I turned it off after a scientist explained to an astronaught how black holes work with a pencil and a piece of folded paper. While they were in space. Fucking garbage movie that was for idiots.

t. plot point mental midget

2001 is objectively the better film, but Interstellar has more emotional resonance with me.

Interstellar is utter shit.

It was stupid in the context of the movie. An ex-astronaut would know how black holes work. He doesn't need to be explained by someone to fill the diversity quotas.
Especially not when they've already taken off and are floating towards the black hole that is their objective.

i would say interstellar is better if it wasn't for two moments in 2001

when hal commits his first cold blooded murder

and "my mind is going. i can feel it..."

its too bad about the ending.

2001.

Interstellar was really good though, up until it completely SHIT ITSELF at the end with that "love is a dimension" BULLSHIT.

Attached: IMG_3909.png (1018x728, 1.11M)

drink your soi champ, big day tomorrow, that superfantastic piece of media is gunna be so good when it drops.

t. person that doesn't know this is exactly wormhole theory

kys

I bet you got this from Cinemasins. Coop wasn't an astronaut.

>An ex-astronaut
You're dumb

Underrated

Interstellar is much better. It has emotions unlike 2001. I love the 'love' part of Interstellar (I won't spoil it but you know what I'm talking about if you've seen it ;-) ).

I know what wormhole theory is. My gripe is that Coop should have known too. Therefore not needing it explained by a scientist while in space travelling towards a black hole. If he didn't know how they work before the movie started then he should have been briefed while on the ground as it is his main objective. But I fail to see how he wouldn't have known how they work before the movie.
Sorry. He was an ex-NASA pilot. I guess there's a massive difference there.

t. woman

Interstellar is a movie made by an autist pretending he knows how emotions and relationships work
2001 is a movie made by an autist who doesn't care about all that gay stuff

Attached: pathetic.jpg (660x843, 114K)

>but none of the characters have any goals that evoke emotions from the audience, they're just doing their job and struggling to survive and the mystery they're investigating doesn't really get a payoff, Interstellar spends a lot of time setting up the characters and the stakes and as such is incredibly moving.
Cringe

one is a visual masterpiece

the other is the exact same thing except it spoon feeds you a bunch of questions, spoon feeds you the answers then says JK ITS LOVE BABY

>Cringe
oof

>oof
yikes

seething

Interstellar improved nothing from 2001 and made inferior choices that 2001 avoided so 2001 is better
>Unnecessary voiceovers
>Unnecessary exposition
>Collapsing the mystery for an easy to digest and unsatisfying ending
These are first things that come to mind but there could be more.

Quickest way to deem someone's opinion on Yea Forums irrelevant is if they have 2001 in their top 10.
Pretentious shit that looked good at the time but isn't even a coherent film.

Which part you don't find coherent?

TARS/CASE ≥>>> HAL

The giant baby at the end for one.
>hurr just interpret it

>apes
>...fuck that we're in space now
It just doesn't make sense.

Because of Alien completely blowing the top off the genre, no mystery there

2001 was kinda boring but beautifully shot and is more deep. So for kino purists, it's probably better.

Interstellar has a better first 2/3. 2001 has a better last third. If interstellar had the balls to do an ending like 2001 it would have been the best space movie ever. Instead they went with some kind of Love Conquers All edit and it was mostly trash.

2001 is unwatchable now because the soundtrack has been memed so hard in parodies and comedy movies.

Attached: e9d.jpg (600x600, 18K)

Answer to both is literally evolution. I mean it's literally directly told over and over again, the bone to spaceship cut is the best example

>70s style futuristic bullshit
Seeing what people envisioned as the future back in those days was pretty cool. They really weren't that far off. As far as I remember, they even had ipads. As for the muted aesthetic, it seems fitting that they were going for a more sterile environment.

Yeah that's not a response. You're basically admitting it's an incoherent mess.

>the bone to spaceship cut is the best example
I'd argue the opposite. Rather than evolution, it implies direct continuation rather than a change.

>apes
>...fuck that we're in space now
>It just doesn't make sense.
wait, THAT is the bit you were hung up on? not the obelisk or the computer going crazy or the psychadelic ending?

Why is evolution a giant baby in space next to earth?

Which retard are you?

I care about characters in interstellar.
2001 is good but also dull.
Interstellar is nolan's only good film.
I dont care if its cheesy, shit with fathers/daughters/sons gets me.

2001 is about the transcendence of mankind and is actual, legitimate kino on par with Winter Light and Seven Samurai, Interstellar is a sappy long-distance romance plot where the power of love saves the day

>2001's a victim of the casablanca effect
yeah, I can agree with that somewhat. the soundtrack and a lot of the specific scenes as well. Like HAL refusing to open the door kinda plays like a joke now.

>her
that's micheal sheen in drag

Interstellar because of that based ORGAN

I know this is obvious bait, but 2001 is objectively the greatest sci-fi film ever made.
The fact that 2001 came out a year before humans landed on the moon is nuts

>40 second shot of the moon or some shit
>classical music in the background
>repeat dozens of times over the course of 3 hours
2001 was fucking boring. The only scene worth watching was the HAL scene. At least Interstellar was entertaining.

>an ex-military pilot who had never been in space would know how black holes work
interesting take

Based. 2001 is highly overrated as the greatest Sci fi film. Sheep mentality

Ex-NASA pilot. He worked for NASA. He isn't just some guy who wandered into modern NASA and became their guy. He had a history with the people working in the bunker because he worked for NASA.
Ask anyone in NASA if they know how a black hole works. I guarantee they'll all say yes as not only is it their job but also their main interest in life. You don't go work for NASA if you aren't interested in space.

Solaris

Literally no one knows how black holes work.
You're immensely dumb.

Fucking rainbows.

Cope

Yep. The titles of each of the acts shows a progression of technology. The first act was called "The Dawn of Man," if I remember correctly.

The final act was kind of difficult to understand but Kubrick did show Bowman seeing himself rapidly aging in the environment where he stayed after entering the monolith. The final scene of Bowman was as an old, decrepit man on his deathbed reaching out to the monolith. It was perhaps meant to invoke Michaelangelo's painting where Adam reaches out to God. Calling back to the first chapter, the apes evolved after touching the monolith (they learned to kill and eat the tapirs and then learned the use of tools) so Bowman reaching out and touching the monolith evolved him into the Star Child.

If you evolved, would you stay a rickety old man or would you choose to be a baby that can publicly fly around naked with his penis flopping around?

>>>leddit

>Ask anyone in NASA if they know how a black hole works. I guarantee they'll all say yes as not only is it their job but also their main interest in life.
Eh, sorta. I can see both sides of this. Yes, it is absolutely dumbed down in the movie for the sake of exposition, no argument there. But the type of interactions they have with the black hole in the movie in a lot of cases are really not fundamental stuff. Even conceptually, the time dilation they experience when they go to the water planet is a couple steps beyond "I read a brief history of time and I thought it was pretty neat" level of interest. And grasping the actual math involved would be straining the abilities of even most astronauts and engineers.

apples and oranges bro

INTERSTELLAR CAUSE IT'S NOT FUCKN BORING LMAOOOOO

Attached: xgr9wgec95b11.jpg (1024x645, 94K)

The only true answer.

Solaris

dude it's just to get the point across to the audience. they were the only characters around. maybe not the best way to convey that information but it's not really worth getting upset about, or tossing the movie into the trash heap.

Both suck ass, but at least interstellar had some entertaining parts

'we are become have... interstellar' is only good because murphff cunny

interstellar

I refuse to believe that anyone that says Interstellar isn't trolling.
Even the most cinematically illiterate retards can't be THAT stupid

2001

Interstellar because I went into places 2001 didn't dare back then. Like physics interacting with love.

Attached: 1556216984122.png (678x680, 609K)

Interstellar and 2001 are kino of the highest order

fuck off with your Intershitllar garbage

Attached: 1540931844633.jpg (497x427, 49K)

Not going to lie that's a pretty fucking plebian take

> entertaining
retarded rather

Yeh I'm not arguing against them having to grasp the concept of time dilation. Although they should already have been 100% prepared for that happening, I am prepared to accept the emotional effect takes its toll.

I am just annoyed about the pencil though paper explanation by a scientist to an astronaut.

2001 is art; Interstellar is entertainment.

It is completely worth that. You dumb down your film, you dumb down your audience. Interstellar is for idiots.

pic related for interstellar. plebs need not reply

Attached: interstellar.png (601x441, 7K)

>I am just annoyed about the pencil though paper explanation by a scientist to an astronaut.
Sure. There's a lot of things that annoy me about interstellar. The power of love nonsense annoys the hell out of me. Coop magically teleporting out at the end annoys me to no end. The writing is pretty weak across the board. But even for all that I like the movie. The water planet segment all by itself would be enough to make me a fanboy. Hell, the render of the black hole would've been enough.