Kubrick Season - Christopher Nolan Introduces 2001: A Space Odyssey [2019]
Вставка
- Опубліковано 3 кві 2020
- To mark 20 years since the death of one of cinema's visionary filmmakers, British director Christopher Nolan (Dunkirk, Interstellar, The Dark Knight) introduces Stanley Kubrick's film 2001: A Space Odyssey.
Broadcast : Sat 27 Apr 2019 @ 21:00
*If you want to hear more from THE STANLEY KUBRICK APPRECIATION SOCIETY, why not listen to our podcast KUBRICK'S UNIVERSE... skas.podbean.com
*Don't forget to check out THE STANLEY KUBRICK APPRECIATION SOCIETY on Facebook... / tskas
*I do not own the copyright on this clip but have uploaded as a matter of interest without ownership, any copyright issues then please let me know and I will remove, thank you.*
*Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favour of fair use.* - Фільми й анімація
Kubrick was way, way, WAYYY ahead of his time.
That's why he was so unique.He did groundbreaking work way before Lucas,Spielberg,Cameron,Jackson and even Nolan.
Also a mad man, dont forget
Some parts of the world wouldn't understand his works even now. That's how far he went.
Such an inspiration for hardwork and dedication. Actors hated Kubrick for his perfectionism.
@@targaryenXoolf Not all actors.Jack Nicholson enjoyed work with Kubrick.
2001 is not a movie.
It's an experience.
It's an odyssey.
It's a SPACE Odyssey.
But I found it boring, how do I enjoy it now?
your mom was an experience too last night
@@crapshotunderstand it
2001 is pure art, you can’t compare it with any other movie, it exists in it’s own realm
you're godamn right
Pure art succeeds in changing the ways that people think and 2001: A Space Odyssey still succeeds after fifty years.
Tree of life? I know 2 different movies but in terms of a large scale story they are trying to tell they are similar
it’s in a whole other stratosphere of cinematic greatness
Yes, and be sure. No one will ever attempt a remake
A master introduces a legend.
Can't get much better honestly
Christopher Nolan introduces a master and a legend.
@@markhopo9335 Christopher Nolan is a master.
@@darkyknight9788 no not even close
@@shubhamtanwr_ why not?
If 2001 would have been created today, it would still be ahead of it’s time.
Sorry, I’m an English teacher: “If ‘2001’ had been created today, it would still be ahead of its time” OR: “It would still have been ahead of its time if ‘2001’ had been crafted created today” (inverted word order). For conditional sentences, the modal verb - would, could, should, shall, ought to, and their negations, etc. - can only be used once, except in complex and compound sentences, and can only be used as part of the result of the condition (i.e., not in the condition itself).
Actually, if released today it would be considered the same as then by most: incoherent and boring. So I guess you are right!!
@@loge10 i guess you do not understand a single thing with this movie.
@@feliscorax English is not my 1st language and it's still hard for me. Thanks, like this answer teacher!
@@amadeus4397 Shows what a poor writer I am - or I didn't proof the comment very well. I meant that I agreed with the reviewer - and to me the movie is anything but boring and incoherent since the first time I saw it in 1969 at the age of 14. It changed my life.
Nolan would be a great narrator for film history/ history of humanity documentaries
true
Personally I really enjoyed Martin Scorceses documentary on his personal take on the history of American cinema. I don't always agree with him, but he's always such a joy to listen to.
It's called "A Personal Journey with Martin Scorsese Through American Movies", very enjoyable.
@@voiceover2191My favourite documentary on film and cinema.
The Dawn of Man sequence is probably one of my favourite scenes in all of cinema.
Agreed, and there is an entire story there, that many people don't catch because they are used to being fed a story through talking.
I saw it first as a student and knew nothing about the movie, other than it was a famous scifi movie. In the display window outside the cinema were just a few pictures of space ships, so when I sat down and saw what looked like a nature documentary I actually thought I was in the wrong movie. Something made me stay though and though, at the time, I missed most of what it was actually about, I was transfixed and spellbound and it was one of the seminal movies that forever changed the way I experienced cinema.
*The movie should have named as 2101: A Space Odyssey*
that would still be an understatement
I saw this great cinematic film when it came out in 1968. No other film affected my memory and emotions more than 2001. For me it’s more than just a sci-fi film. It’s about life itself.
I love how his eyes shine when he talks about Kubrick, it's like a son talking about his father with proud.
Every modern great does the same it seems. PT Anderson constantly refers to him in his films. Ridley Scott, Tarantino, David Fincher..they all proudly nod to Kubrick in many of their movies.
Amen
@@davidlean1060Tarantino not so much…
La Padite in the opening scene of Inglourious Basterds is a ringer for Stanley circa the time he was making 2001 ASO. There is a theory that QT chose an actor the image of young Kubrick as some sort of homage since Kubrick never got to make his planned movie about WW2, Aryan Papers. Not so much, fair enough. He's not like Ridley Scott or Anderson where there's a little Kubrick in every movie they make, but he's nodded to the great man all the same. @@radonaccount4454
@@radonaccount4454 Are you kidding? Tarantino's entire first two films alone are both heavily patterned after Kubrick films.
Beautiful words from Christopher Nolan!
I love Stanley Kubrick and his films.
Stanley Kubrick was quite unique which I had originally appreciated thanks to 2001: A Space Odyssey and The Shining.
so do I.
I do as well. Just not 2001.
When I saw Interstellar, I knew 2001 was an important movie for Nolan. It's the blueprint of many great sci-fi movies since.
And thats kubrick!!!
2001 is like a museum and a film all in one i hope it comes back to the big screen
It will! I caught it in 2018 for its 50th anniversary. Look for it again for sure when it hits it's 60th year. Cineplex usually shows the classics on anniversaries. I caught Full Metal Jacket for a second time in the theatre in 2017 as well.
I remember my dad taking me to the cinema to watch the re-release of 2001 also but i'm two years older than Nolan. Maybe the re-release had a longer run in the UK..... Born in '72. Remember the pause in the middle with the ghostly / space age music playing during the interval and getting a plastic triangle like shaped drink with foil lid and a straw called KIA-ORA. I remember people around me saying that it was a boring film. 2001 A Space Odyssey..... blew my mind.... as a young child in the 70's I shouldn't have been allowed into the screening. Thank heaven I did. For whatever reason my father let his son into the cinema... 2001 A Space Odyssey opened my young mind for the better. OH By the way ..... I, deep in my heart/soul, love 2001 A Space Odyssey.
Great analysis Christopher. I regard you and Kubrick in the same vein. You love your art and you are pushing boundries within your own constraints. You gave us Interstellar. I watched this for the first time with my eldest daughter many years ago. We were both in tears watching it. I loved the fact you got got Kip Thorne onboard for the Scientific reality of it. You have done many great Movies, but Interstellar will always remain our own Favourite. Maybe until your new movie is released later this year. Love to you Chris and keep doing your great work. A genuine fan.
A 1968 film which predicted talking computers, facetime, ipad, how terrifying AI could be! 1968!!
Not so sure if Kubrick predicted the future or he directed the future
Exactly
Strangely enough though, the film is not a celebration of technology, in fact, it's about a man who manages to escape 'the machine', so to speak.
Kubrick consulted a lot of engineers from AT&T, IBM & NASA on their ideas of the future.
@Death Is A Doorway If the film maker has intentions for the film, then that is what the film is about. 2001 is clearly not a celebration of technology and Kubrick went out of his way to say as much, though in a coded way. Whether you want to dig deep and find those intentions, that's up to you, but the film is not just what the viewer finds. That just sounds a tad lazy to me,especially when dealing with Kubrick. That's not to say there aren't films that encourage the sort of audience participation you are speaking about, but Kubrick's films are often conceptual puzzles and his idea of audience participation was not having them come to their own conclusions, it was to encourage the audience look closer at films and discover what he was saying in them.
All these ideas have been in literature before 2001.
I was 13 in 1968 when I first saw 2001 and apart from blowing my mind I also found it an emotional and experience. 50 odd years later and I have quite a lot of books on the movie and quite a lot of books on Stanley.
First time I watched 2001 I was probably in undergrad trying to catch up on 20th century cinema. It’s the type of movie that I enjoyed but didn’t get and wasn’t blown away necessarily, but I enjoyed it.
Then six months or a year later, you hear a piece of the soundtrack and decide to give it another viewing. This time you catch a few more things and you repeat this cycle for 20 years until you just admit it’s an amazing film or you wouldn’t keep watching it.
I feel poor just by listening to his accent 😍
**american
It's 2020 and Space is still a big mystery..
One day we will find out that the story is actually true. Extraterrestrial beings manipulated our evolution and are still watching us from above
The feeling of being mesmerized by a film is exactly what I felt the first time I saw interstellar in IMAX. It was also my first IMAX experience. You can see that Nolan was clearly inspired by this movie.
Inspired, certainly, but that's about where a comparison stops, the two movies have very little in common other that they both involve a journey through space, but in the end Nolan's movie is a very human love story and not at all about man's place in the universe or anything that grand.
@@voiceover2191 story wise I definitly agree, but stylistically and visually it borrows a lot
@@_sawbonz_ Can you name a few examples because I have a hard time seeing the similarities, so I'm curious?
@@voiceover2191 long wide shots of spacecraft in the distance with little to no sound going in front of large plants, no frequent cuts, groundbreaking visuals from the respective eras, the protagonist being at the end of his journey in the third act, the stargate sequence vs entering the black hole and the tesseract. A lot of elements like these are borrowed.
"Mesmerized" that's how describe my experience with every single Kubrick film
but for me Nolan's films are great in a different way
Very interesting indeed to hear Nolan's take on 2001. As a matter of interest, I think that the moment where the pod begins to turn towards Frank Poole and unfold its waldos is one of cinema's most fear-inducing and disturbing scenes ever made.
The horror is in its subtlety because although we don't see the pod strike Frank, we witness the gut-wrenching aftermath as he struggles unsuccessfully to reconnect his suit's air hose while being propelled into the void.
It still blows my mind I never have had the joy of seeing the movie in a cinema I make do with my 4k but maybe some day it will be showing near me I did see 2010 in 70mm that was wonderful it was so loud my seat shook
This movie is everything
Coming from a great director, Kubrick was a artist in the highest form.
A great story is like a monument, statue and painting , it just goes on and on.
I don’t think anyone till now has mixed art and accurate ideas like Kubrick. Ever.
Considering how much I loved interstellar, this is going to be a must watch considering Nolan himself says it's pure art
I saw 2001 in a theater as a kid. I didn't understand it. That being said it is not a kid's film. So I watched it as a adult and was trying to figure out what I saw. Years and many viewings later I finally grasped the meaning. Everyone is going to have their own interpretation of everything they see and hear. That much I know. Some films take several viewings just like listening to music. Some albums I didn't like until several times of hearing them. I like philosophical films because they make you think outside the box. That's why I like 2001: A Space Odyssey.
2001: A Space Odyssey is timeless piece of art. Just like Mozarts requiem. And thus it will always be relevant.
Most of classical music is still relevant and way superior to modern music
@@venkatadurvasula6379 yup
@@venkatadurvasula6379 you're right
Please one should compare AI with the Requiem. I remember Kubrick just wrote the script but not finished. Like Mozart Requiem
Wow this guy looks like he could be a director someday 🔥🔥💫
I am assuming that you are kidding
Joker poster behind Nolan’s shoulder
And?
Sky is blue.
@@philipkempbell7174 wait for real? :o let me guess, you're gonna tell me the floor is made out of floor? smh
He’s also dressed kinda like joker
Water's wet
50 years later here must be a Nolan Season XD
A student talks of a teacher.
Kubrick is the manifestation of endless time
Look into Arthur C Clarke
Kurbick is forever fire.
My favorite director of ALL TIME. Pure genius.
Arthur Fleck Which one? 😂
If you had said that to Stanley..he would have been so surprised too. stew fmj crew.
I hope Kubrick....
@@darknessnaxxion Yes he liked to be called Stanley.
Me too 2001 is my fav Kubrick #1 my son found top 25 sci fi films and 2001 was first place
My 10 favourite movies change continually (Duh.. I'm male) but, if I was forced to choose just one, the only one I could ever watch again, forever. It would be 2001. It's genius on every level.
Most 7 year olds watching movies: “Wow, dragons and lasers and ninja swords and kung-fu! This is awesome!”
7 year old Christopher Nolan watching movies: “Why yes, 2001: A Space Odyssey is truly one of the greatest cinematic experiences the world has ever witnessed. Indubitably, Stanley Kubrick has established himself as quite the auteur.”
Chad Nolan
The Oscar on the shelf behind Nolan was given to him as an honorary award for Contribution to Technical achievements in film. The vid is on YT where he accepts the oscars during the Governors ball in 2011... so I guess this means Nolan has an Oscar?
I like 2001 it's okay for me Kubrick's best movies will always be The Shining.
T-800 It’s strange, I’m a Kubrick fanatic yet I found nothing special with The Shining, thought it was a pretty average film. Yet I prefer and think A Clockwork Orange is his best film. Shows how great he was that you and I prefer films he did over 2001.
@@lejam0771 yeah I like clockwork orange also very ahead of it's time like a lot of Kubrick movies.
T-800 yeah of course tho I’m not going to downplay the shining’s importance to the horror genre
I also love shining the most but I also love 2001, well all of Kubricks movie from 1957 to 1999 are good.
Paths of Glory is the best imo. Crazy how Kubrick’s films are so different to one another.
Seven Samurai and 2001 are real time experiences, they change you.
If Da Vinci or Michaelanglo could have been cinematographers, they be in awe of Kubrick.
Arthur C Clarke deserves a special mention. It was probably Clarke who provided the vision of future tech. He was a sci-fi (futurist) genius.
Christopher Nolan is the perfect person to review this film.
Kubrick comes from the future!
Why doesn't this channel have a billion subscribers!!!
I need an audio commentary track of Nolan sitting down with Keir Dullea talking about 2001.
It set the definition of Sci-Fi which no one can go beyond...
I THINK MR. CHRISTOPHER NOLAN MADE INTERSTELLAR KEEPING 2001 IN MIND.
How the Blue Danube Waltz became famous
Kubrick did not rely on dialogue. He had sound and music, art direction, actors, cinematography, lighting, location to think about also. He gathered all those things together to make a movie.
When I first saw it I fell asleep, second time I watched it was better, then the third time it was an awesome experience. If I were to describe the film, is that it feels so alien and weird that it can almost be considered a dream experience. Comparable to what Mulholland Drive does so well.
The greatest movie ever made. Kubrick did not compromise with the audience. But I was very disappointed by the sequel 2010 which I did not see until 1988. Mr. Clarke should have waited until 1993-1994 and then had Steven Speilberg do 2010 ( filmed @ the Film Polski studios in Warsaw with some of the same actors who did Schindler's List ( Polish actors playing Russians) and Ralph Fiennes playing David Bowman with Kevin Kline playing Heywood Floyd....(In fact, Steven Spielberg asked Kevin Kline (Cry Freedom, The English Patient) to play Schindler but Kline said no.) Speilberg was already experienced in science fiction film for doing Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind, and ET The Extraterrestrial. Those 2 last films I enjoyed and recommend. (PS: In the alternate world of 2001: In 1968, Kubrick & Clarke would have released Childhoods End by MGM,--the sci. fi. film, with Keir Dullea and Gary Lockwood etc. In 2002 on the Discovery One mission. Bowman & Poole would watch Schindler's List....)
Just sit down & enjoy the film !
If this film was made today and called 2100: a space odyssey it would still seem futuristic!
...and you could argue that the theme of man trying to escape the bounds of the technology he created is more relevant now than it was in 1968 when the film came out.
Nolan is XXI th Kubrick. In a sense. Both had filmed big blockbusters admired by art film and popcorn film attenders
guys where can i get the full video on this programme
What are these comments? I'm a huge fan of Nolan and Interstellar and can't wait to finally watch 2001.
It's a crapfest.
It's good innit.
Kubrick had the power to watch future, he predicated excetly as same as it is now, he is the finest director of all time.
I agree but his works are all taken from books so he had a lot of things according to the book/books. On the other side he has put his characteric genius into each film and of course, it shows
@@fdormichajlovicdostoevskij3572 Other than one scene being based on a short story by Arthur C. Clarke, "2001" was a wholly original work not based on a previously published work.
At 2:38 notice that the pattern of the metal on and around HAL’s iconic eye seems to spell “lol.” And that’s just as HAL starts to boast of its “perfect operational record.” Prescience by Kubrick?
If 2001 came out now it would be ahead of it's time.
Believe it or not *INTERSTELLAR* 2014 is mix of *2001 space odyssey* 1968 and *SOLARIS* 1972
I wish they still had movie theaters now all it is are big tvs with tv sound as well no curtins no masking no loud sound no presentation just a tv with low sound bad contrast black bars and low tv sound
It’s really difficult to compare 2001 to anything because it really is unlike any other movie I’ve seen (at least that I’ve seen, I haven’t watched THAT many movies). I guess it’s comparable to Interstellar and Gravity because SPACE but even they pale in comparison to 2001. Kubrick was a genius.
Watched
What Christopher Nolan is far too humble to point out is how he subverted the antisepsis of Kubrick's humans in 2001-making HAL and his neuroses the most human character-in "Interstellar," where the humans, no matter how cerebral, continue to have fully human motivations: to lie in order to be rescued; to love in order to be fulfilled.
Nice observation. Though HAL isn't that a memorable character.
Well, Kubrick deliberately made humans as emotionless as a computer, to show them close to HAL. They were two species of intelligent life fighting for an evolutionary chance.
@@carefulviewer-9887 I'm not convinced that was the reasoning behind it, To my mind Kubrick simply wasn't really that interested in human beings, but in ideas, concepts and realizing them. I'm not holding that against him and I do believe that 2001 still is the greatest scifi movie ever made and will unlikely be dethroned of that position, but Kubrick's mind is very sharp and analytical, that's why, in my minority opinion, he utterly failed with The Shining as that story is do deeply human and emotional, he is utterly out of his depth.
@@voiceover2191 Remember: there were very emotional heroes in 2001: the people who telephoned from the Earth. It was to underline the contrast between them and those who were going to space.
@@carefulviewer-9887 Hmmm, I'm not convinced, talking with his little girl at her birthday, sure, it was a cute scene, but far from "very emotional", but I guess that's just my take, hard to argue the depth of emotion displayed, I think Kubrick more wanted to show what Space-to-Earth communication would look like. As far as emotion goes, even when Hal kills all the crew members except Floyd, it's far from emotional, you don't build up a connection as a viewer to the victims, so on an emotional level it doesn't look to affect you. The only emotion is when Floyd wants to get back on board, which is suspenseful.
Ironically, the most emotional sequence is when Floyd proceeds to shut down Hal, where you feel sorry for the AI, as if Floyd is actually killing a real life form, underlined with the AI's pleas to Floyd, even though the AI of course basically killed off an entire human crew. I think that was rather tongue-in-cheek of Kubrick's if that irony was intentional.
The Jetsons predicted Facetime way before 2001.
C.Nolan looks like L.Ron Hubbard
Modern filmmakers should go as far as they can with practical effects. The CGI can be a crutch. Practical effects lend themselves to realism.
It's amazing to watch 2001 and not think it was just made, the SFX are just that good!
My fav movie
Mine too.
👌🙏
Idk why but Nolan seems oddly like a god when he is describing the way that technology has evolved. Like he is intricately and knowledgeably narrating the course of humankind.
@callmecatalyst he doesn't carry a cellphone 😂😂 i would try talking to him in your dreams, or while praying or smth
@callmecatalyst nah god has no gender. I said he because I'm too lazy to put the s on there
But you can say she. Since I'm a guy, I'm also more used to saying he, but this doesn't change anything about god, doesn't matter what you or I say lol
@callmecatalyst It's not the world that's the problem. It's you.
Ok y'all need to stop sucking his Dick that much now 💀
" A god" bro wtf 😭
And yet not one mention that Kubrick really had to twist Arthur C Clarke's arm to help him with the basis for the story. Kubrick is a genius but it takes two to tango.
I think that was down to Clarke secretly knowing Kubrick would have more in mind than a mere story about men going into space. He was right too. Clarke's story was a start point for the film, but as with every movie after that, he expanded on the source material he used, often to the rancor of the author. It is ironic that Stephen King, who famously hated Kubrick's version of The Shining then bases Dr Sleep on the film version, not his version!
@@davidlean1060 That was the directors decision, Mike Flanagan. When he first talked to King about it, King actually had one specification and that was it had to be based on the book not the movie. Flanagan ended up convincing King to allow him to do it. Also, King doesn't hate Kubrick, he just dislikes the Shining movie. One reason I think is because the Shining book is so heavily based on King's alcoholism that Jack Torrence shares within the book and at the end of the book there is some form of redemption for him, which King might have wanted because at the time he was an alcoholic and very much would have wanted a redemption with his family. The movie adaption scraps this and just makes Jack Torrence crazy with no redemption. I can imagine that might have felt pretty bad. Generally, King has a pretty leanient view on adaptations, I just think the Shining was very personal.
@@alexhughesxz All that aside, it is still ironic that King is forced to accept a film he strongly disliked. I'm sure he is older and wiser now and realizes people love the movie. I haven't read King since my teens, but I frequently watch Kubrick's film. I'm sure there are 1,000's like me. I guess King just accepted that with grace eventually. I might think Kubrick is the greater artist, but regardless, King will be read and remembered for generations to come, so fair play to him.
@@davidlean1060 Yeah. I'm a big fan of Kubrick too. 2001 is one of my favourite movies ever. I also love King tho.
@@davidlean1060 Love your movies, especially David Copperfield
Face to face transmissions have been around long before FaceTime. The first video phone was in 1936.
great vid
Seen it once. Fell asleep the first few times I tried watching it.
You either have an attention span disorder or this movie simply is not for you.
@@voiceover2191 There are several "slow" movies that people enjoy, and yet despise 2001. 2001 is just an ass film which pretends to be deep but is not.
I'm not 100% convinced Chris Nolan isn't a Harry Enfield character.
Lol i was literally just going to write this and saw your comment.
I've thought this for years! Has anyone seen them in the same room together?
Without “2001”, half of all films wouldn’t exist
Without Kubrick, there can be no Amazing Science fiction films, amazing sci fi directors, amazing gadgets, Apple, Artificial Intelligence, Interstellar Space Exploration, wormholes, space time, hyper drive, social media,
2001 is not a glory march announcing some new tech filled future run by the likes of NASA and IMB however. Bowman only becomes the enlightened star child once he turns off HAL. It's an anti tech film if anything!
🃏 I have the same Joker poster hanging in my office.
well let's not forget - it was the very first dystopian sci fi film - the first film to actually question whether we are going in the right direction...
Uhm ... nope, it wasn't, Fahrenheit 451 (1966) by Truffaut I would say and I'm not completely sure even I would call 2001 dystopian. To some degree "Things to Come" (1936) could be called dystopian, or even ""The Time Machine" (1960). The latter two in the very end are not really depicted as dystopian, but I certainly would not have wanted to live in either future.
What about Metropolis?
Interstellar would not exist if 2001 a space odyssey didn’t exist
Kubrick movies are more than movies.
Real genius! ❤️
Well, I haven't touch Interstellar for 2 years after the release, meantime rewatching the 2001: A Space Odyssey over 30 times. Interstellar has some beautifully managed scenes, still popcorn is allowed. Great Intro from Mr. Nolan. Thank you Sir.
Badla me pae.
Came on UA-cam to research Quince plants, got a bit sidetracked... Two hours ago.
Maybe don't have a red green colorblind person supervise the film that has sequences where the entire color scheme is a mono chromatic red along with other sequences with lots of color.
Tenet was 👌
What kind of 'appreciation' can you have for Stanley Kubrick if you show his work in a measly 720p? He'd hate that.
I'd take Alien over this, but still, phenomenal films that will live on forever.
It's not about entertainment , it's about cinematic achievement way ahead of his time.
Tolstoy is to writing what Kubrick is to filmmaking, the man was obsessed ,greater than even great Sergio Leone whom I respect most.
I would like to see another two sequels shot by Nolan
Please don't.
Imagine kubrick with all the CGI and the inventions directors nowadays have , he would've revolutionized cinema again
Bro made interstellar but in 1968🗿
Man predicted the future !!!....all Hail to Kubrick
Actually, you may want to look into Arthur C Clarke's work. Many of Kubrick's ideas came from him like his short story the sentanel
The idea of AI is not special to Kubrick.
I read the book but never seen the movie.
The novel 2001: A Space Odyssey is one of the most underrated science fiction novels of all time!
You must see it! It's long and things are done in real time. The special effects hold up even today considering that much of the hardware had not been invented as we know it and take for granted today. I saw this movie when it first premiered in the UK to a slightly puzzled audience that wasn't really ready for it in many respects! ;-)
Somebody should take this man and send him to the space, far away, for what he did to the Kubrick masterpiece
Face up, boy, you'll never be him, never
Wt do u mean