annnnnnd we're done here
>i piss people off by being a faggot on the internet
so fucking cool.
You're right though. The book is way better than the movie and Kubrick changes shit around that doesn't make any sense. After reading the book and hearing how hyped up the movie was, the movie was really disappointing.
I don't care about the book after seeing the movie
Everyone makes this complain about how Kubrick changed shit around, made the film darker and more cynical, gave it a less moral ending, and I jsut couldn't give a shit about any of that. So much of that is what makes me love the film. I like to think Kubrick just did his own shit and made it how he wanted it to be seen. Film is a more meaningful art to me than literature anyway.
fedora radioclassical, e.g the worst part of one of the least good Beethoven symphonies: "Ode of Joy" from the 9th.
Indeed. These plebs doesn't even realize it's _even more_ shitty than Dr. Strangelove and A Clockwork Orange:
Fuck off all of you plebs. If yawn-inducing scenery porn with wooden characterization/acting and inexcusably tedious pacing are your definitions of what makes a movie good you might as well leave to facebook or /tv/ or something.
The Shining is his best movie because it strengthens the only thing Kubrick could (being nasty and deliver terrific directing) while dropping the pretentious high-concept bullshit of 2001 and all of its other flaws already mentioned.
I didn't care much for the novel, but the movie on the other hand was literal dogshit. Ugh.
>hurr it's okay to not make sense and to give it less moral and subtlety because he just did what he wanted
>Film is a more meaningful art to me than literature anyway.
Oh wait you're just an insufferable plebeian.
Wild Beasts - Limbo, Panto
Make sure to read along with the lyrics as you listen.
>book: Beethoven 9th
You may be pushing it a bit there. The book was very good and is widely regarded as so but to say it's so much so that it's comparable to Beethoven's 9th is a bit of a stretch.
I'm actually reading it currently that's the reason for my unimaginative response.
how about this instead?
>>B-but its violent and edgy and kewl
It's supposed to be violent and edgy as a commentary on how America overlooks violence but is super strict on sexualization in movies.
[spoiler]I took the bait[/spoiler]
you are the most anal butthurt nincompoop ive read in a while in this place. Are you sure your smurf dolls are on your shelves correctly?
cant be classical shit cuz not violent enough. could be DG, but their violence is almost too formal. probably some punk shit, don't know who.
2001 is an excellent movie. tedious pacing? its FILM, IT USES TIME. Learn how to art. or stick with your books.
the rest of your opinions are dogshit.
enjoy smothering yourself with them.
Kubrick shifted the thematics from being focused on youth and coming of age to government corruption.
Watch Rob Ager's video essays on the movie, and watch the movie again, and you'll realize that the ACO movie is independent from the novella and great in its own right.
>A Clockwork Orange is a good movie
>a good movie
Before it was a movie, it was a book, and the author has even stated the book's popularity only comes from people being edgy retards and misinterpreting it.
You have no taste in art and do not deserve the gift of life
>not understanding that the strange dehumanised acting in 2001 is intentional
he directed the shit out of it, you think that was some kind of default acting style in the late 60s?
have you ever seen any films?
>>hurr it's okay to not make sense and to give it less moral and subtlety because he just did what he wanted
>>Film is a more meaningful art to me than literature anyway.
Yes, it is. Artistic license Faggot. It's like someone covering a song and changing the overall style and instrumentation. Why is that okay? Are you such a pedant that can't deal with people changing source material to their liking in their own rendition? Yeah no fuck off
I like the film exactly as it is