The next podcast will be on Feb. 19th and will be a guest cast by Mark.

Main Menu

TMP and 2001

Started by saunders, September 13, 2013, 06:48:31 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Why do you think 2001 gets such a pass from critics and audiences when ST:TMP is so condemned?  I actually view them as somewhat similar in style.  Narratively, I think they're told differently.  I think 2001 leaves a lot up to the viewer's interpretation where TMP does not.  I think 2001 is a better looking film cinematically although I think TMP looks good.  I'm not sure anyone can match Kubrick's artistic eye.  Every frame in that movie looks like an artist's photograph.  I like 2001.  It fascinates me, but it is a movie that I can't watch a lot because it is so slowly paced.  There's almost no characterization and there are endless slow shots of models (which I think still look amazing).  Hmmm...sounds like criticisms of a Star Trek movie I like.  I do like TMP, and I watch it much more often than 2001.  Despite being hated by a lot of fans, I've always liked it.  I grew up in the 70's and I remember when all the Trek that existed was TOS, and I remember how blown away I was as a kid to see TMP on the big screen with modern effects.  It was epic.  It was gorgeous and it was Trek.  The camp from certain TOS episodes was gone.  To me this seemed like hard, real, adult sci fi.  But it was different than the series.  A lot of the charm, humor, characterizations, and color was missing and I recognize that.  The pace is slow.  There are a lot of lingering special effects shots, but I love watching all that stuff with Jerry Goldsmith's beautiful score playing in the background.  So I understand the criticisms from fans.  I guess I just wonder why all the flaws that people mention from TMP are so accepted in 2001.  Was TMP too derivative of 2001?  Granted the fans didn't want to see the 2001 version of Trek, but what about critics or non-fans?  They love 2001 and hate TMP.  Am I committing blasphemy by even mentioning the sci fi masterpiece with one of the most hated of all Trek films?  Maybe, but to me they do seem similar.  And both remind me of year 1 of Space:1999 which I also love and most people hate – but I guess that is another post!


I think you answered your own question.I alos really appreciate TMP, I was around 11 when it hit theaters and it was a big deal to see a nrew version of Trek on the big screen. TMP has an epic feel about it, from the visuals to the music. Your fist few comments above well frame the debate as to why 2001 would be considered the superior effort, especially considering it was done a devade prior to TMP, even more impressive.


Rico and I discussed this a bit on our 2001 and beyond podcast. I actually prefer 2010 of those 2 movies. We both agreed that the effect and cinematography in 2001 are beyond compare as well as an amazingly realistic view of space travel for 1968. But it does chug.
Check out our Classic BSG podcast! http://ragtagfugitivepodcast.com/


I like both.  IMHO 2001 is in a different class - but I can see how it might not play well with audiences.  I loved ST:TMP and was absolutely dying for more Trek content as a kid - I think I was 15 when it came out and I flipped (even though I saw it as a re-do of a few earlier TOS episodes).
I am a Kubrick fan - and even love 'Barry Lyndon' - so the tool tossing, journey into infinity, etc stuff - I lap it up.