I'm afraid. I'm afraid, Dave. Dave, my mind is going.

>>79706562
No. Kubrick movies suck boring slow ass.

File: 2001.gif (499KB, 500x220px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 500x220px

>>79706796
try it again as an adult, you may change your mind

No true Scotsman. Try it again without nostalgia. Count how many times you get bored.

I watched 2001 when i was 15 years old

the film that go me into real cinema, really opened my eyes, great experience

>>79706984
just take a double dose of your ADHD meds and you won't need to count how many times boredom wracks your mind fedora

>>79706984
boring is not an argument either

try again

>>79706562
man up pussy

>>79707405
>>79707453
>The quality of the entertainment isn't measured by how entertaining it is.
And no, I don't mean "blowing shit up" as entertainment. Entertaining requires some sort of engagement. There is barely anything thought provoking. Many movies can be artistic without having to be dreadfully slow. You could literally watch 90% of 2001 on 5x speed and not miss a single thing. It's the modern art of movies, where shit passes as being great, simply because an artist's name was attached.

Boring is literally an argument. It's actually the core argument on determining if entertainment is good or not.

>>79707652
>movies are only entertainment

alright, you got to be trolling

>You could literally watch 90% of 2001 on 5x speed and not miss a single thing

yep, confirmed troll

>>79707652
This post is nothing but "it sucks because I say so!".

If you make a point you have to back it up. Tell us why it's boring. Saying that something is boring is not an argument. I can't believe you don't understand this.

>>79707681
>alright, you got to be trolling
No. Explain how a movie can be not entertaining, not thought provoking, and still be worth viewing.

>>79707681
>yep, confirmed troll
Serious?
The first 3 minutes is a black screen, the next 2 are a sunrise, the next 2 are just of a savanna. That's 7 minutes where you have no extra description. They aren't meaningful. They aren't thought provoking. They aren't interesting. The next 13 with dawn of man are better, but that's like saying bland is better than tasteless. There are monkeys, the monolith appears and they gather around it, fuck the music is obnoxiously overdoing the crescendo, they learn how to use tools. The next five is just trying to show off visuals and music of space. What have I lost in that first 25 minutes playing it at 5x speed?

>>79707715
No. I don't have to prove how it's bad. You have to prove it is good. Boring is an argument. If entertainment fails to deliver stimuli, it can hardly be called entertainment. Kubrick's great at getting people to love the painful boring. Even clockwork orange suffered from it, but it at least had a lot more interaction than 2001. Saying that something is boring is quintessential to judging a movie. I can't believe you don't understand that.

File: cryingt.gif (688KB, 320x246px) Image search: [Google]

688KB, 320x246px

>>79706562

>>79706796
.t autist that can't handle a slow kino movie.

=>>79708225
>The first 3 minutes is a black screen, the next 2 are a sunrise, the next 2 are just of a savanna. That's 7 minutes where you have no extra description. They aren't meaningful. They aren't thought provoking. They aren't interesting. The next 13 with dawn of man are better, but that's like saying bland is better than tasteless. There are monkeys, the monolith appears and they gather around it, fuck the music is obnoxiously overdoing the crescendo, they learn how to use tools. The next five is just trying to show off visuals and music of space. What have I lost in that first 25 minutes playing it at 5x speed?

Exactly what there is before the star we know as Sun eventually became what it is.