Geffo Me- Your brother WILL be with you. God bless you both!

Thank you for your kindness Alec. I'm not a religious man but the universe is still a vast unknown and our consciousness an even greater mystery. Something which Kubrick so brilliantly expressed in 2001. Rob was kind and generous. Perhaps he has just moved on to better things.

in the infinite timelines of the monolith, there is one in which you had that monolith stuck there.

Well, I didn't expect to get a lump in my throat from a KZfaq comment. Thank you for that. +1

Who put onions in here!

Solaris

I Commando no

No what?

I don't think its beautiful, but I respect it and adore it for the fact that this was created in 1968 and has had such great impact on the evolution on cinema, that we cannot even fathom. I loved this film. Also, regarding it being boring. In this age of faced paced-ness, where people need 'tl:dr' for every article, need shorter films and want to spend less time on everything, this film stands out as grandiose. This is not the average film which is bound by our useless constructs of 'time'. this is not the kind of film you watch with your girlfriend while binging popcorn. The title film belittles it. It is an EXPERIENCE. It calls upon the human race to take part in it, to be a part of this journey and to question our existence, and space-time constructs. This film basically spits on today's world, which wants everything to be fed to them, in small quantities. It shows the human race what it didn't deserve: 2001 A Space Odyssey.

This KZfaq trailer version is really ugly. You should see it in its restored form. It's actually a good looking movie even compared to todays films.

I don't think its exceptionally beautiful, but I respect it and adore it for the fact that this was created in 1968 and has had such great impact on the evolution on cinema, that we cannot even fathom. I loved this film. Also, regarding it being boring. In this age of faced paced-ness, where people need 'tl:dr' for every article, need shorter films and want to spend less time on everything, this film stands out as grandiose. This is not the average film which is bound by our useless constructs of 'time'. this is not the kind of film you watch with your girlfriend while binging popcorn. The title film belittles it. It is an EXPERIENCE. It calls upon the human race to take part in it, to be a part of this journey and to question our existence, and space-time constructs. This film basically spits on today's world, which wants everything to be fed to them, in small quantities. It shows the human race what it didn't deserve: 2001 A Space Odyssey.

Vinayak Agarwal thanks to this movie we have Tom Cruise! This was his first cinema movie

Jim Cameron lmao there is nothing exceptional about Cruise.

No, it looks better than yesterday. It's not full of a bunch of unconvincing CGI crap.

Vinayak Agarwal nothing only the fact that he STILL is not only the biggest movie star in the world since TOP GUN but the only actor since the 80s, 32 years Cruise control

It was written in 1896, so it pre-dates the movie quite a bit but this version is definitely a cinematic icon.

WOOOOO!

Kubrick actually did commission an original score--then he threw it out in favor of the classical temp music.

Psycho.

Yup. Good ole Rickie-boy knew his stuff!

Not true

Gta? More like Gtgay! Whoosh

😁

There's more to fine cinema than, um, dialogue.

CurtisAmusements am I loosing my mind or was that an incredibly subtle spiderman 3 reference?

Oh ! this is very sad.

I can just imagine it being just a surreal unerving experience back then...

Did you ever watch back to the future

Cinerama was crazy. 3 booths, 6 projectors, all rotated 90 degrees. I can't imagine how wild it would have been to run a 70mm Cinerama film.

I was six years old when I saw it in 68, it expanded my perceptions of what the future could be.

The book isn’t based on the film or vice versa. Kubrick had Clarke write it under his supervision and only showed him a few things from the movie so Clarke had to make it up as he went along, that’s why the book and film are so different.

Clarke actually the film. @@aidanlynn

josh aguilar best coment on here and absolutley the best parenting in history

Haha

Parenting 101 for you all

Leo Can i be your son please?

@@leokatzzz ahh yes, Leo Leo Katz

It's too bad imax crops the sides of the frame

It usually plays every summer at the Paramount Theater in Austin .

@@michaeltrower741 lucky to be an american

I’m going tonight to see it in 70mm.. I’m pumped..

Apolosa Cakau what are you talking about HAL?

That's what she said.

Wow and you got 88 likes for copying a movie line without context

Samuel Black I've seen it over 30 times, the last time in a non IMAX and it was the most powerful experience for me, I don't know why.

It absolutely will. I saw it in Imax today and It was like seeing it for the first time all over again

This is my favorite movie!

So true!

Not just a poem. An epic, worthy of comparison with likes of divine comedy. And dare I say, some of the best writing the legendary Arthur c. Clarke ever did.

@@kutlumzrak2689 The novel is less interesting sadly

It's a religious movie.

Except that imax screens cropped the sides...

Movie from almost 60 years ago with great picture, color, artificial intelligence and flat screens.

Let’s start a petition to re-release this movie

Amogusus; inspired by 2001.

And…the shining

Stalker is leagues ahead of Interstellar come on

where is blade runner ????

@jdouglas8585 I discovered Stalker after Instersaller, and to me it's a more important sci fi film than Interstellar.

@jdouglas8585 Yeah ok but it's pretty much universally acknowledged that Stalker is one of the top 100 films of all time (look at any list over the years), while Interstellar isn't even Christopher Nolan's most acclaimed film (and he's not close to the level of Tarkovsky, but then again there's less than a handful of directors who came to his level). Please go watch Stalker.

@jdouglas8585 Why are you saying that, when I clearly said I discovered Stalker after Interstellar (so if anything I'm more nostalgic for Interstellar, which came out in my teens).Anyway, to each their own, but invoking nostalgia for the appreciation of a universally acclaimed masterpiece (not the messy, often laughable plot of Interstellar) isn't a legitimate argument.

You're assuming we don't. For all we know humans have had space stations for thousands of years, but keep it hidden from the majority.

@@SuperMuneera well we do know that's not true

I thankfully had the luxury of finally seeing 2001: A Space Odyssey in the cinema once. Not IMAX though. It was an old cinema at the time that no longer exists. Yet the chance to see the Beyond The Infinite sequence on that cinema screen was still quite rewarding.

I didn’t know the space force made movies

70 mm film, not video.

This particular release isn't 70mm, just standard digital IMAX. That said, the loud noises are incredibly amplified here. The scene on the moon was so loud, and I saw people squirming in their seats because of it.

Ancient One that's what happened to me, I cried when I saw this trailer at the cinema !

Well when you compare both cuts on trailer the unrestored is all yellow like the guy who preserved it smoked too many cigarettes lol

A few IMAX theaters in North America will be showing it in that format.

Dr. Manhattan shouldn’t you be creating life in a distant planet not wanting to be involved in this planet?

No it's IMAX 4K, it was shown in 70mm at a number of cinemas worldwide a couple of months ago though, it looked fantastic, better than 4K.

IMAX 70mm is king. It has like an equivalent resolution of 18k. However if it's the newer IMAX laser projection system, it should also look great, with really good contrast and colors.

As far as I can tell it will be the 4K laser presentation, and I find even standard format 70mm to be better, though if you missed the 70mm in cinemas a few months ago, 4K will be the next best way to see it.

JD Bond it is amazing

I concur, the full movie is totally amazing !

Lavon Media I’m pretty sure that’s not the case with older films as what’s scanned on the 70mm print would be translated directly. The big benefit being a 70mm print as this is the new restored version presented by Christopher Nolan.

As usual I think we're out of luck if we aren't in the US

Singapore showed it and I saw it

whats the first?

Stop being that guy, it's not "infinitely more breathtaking". Sure it's better, especially because of the lack of image cropping, but not a game changer.

Plus the yellow hue of unrestored was awful