What you said, exactly.
Interstellar, like Gravity before it, was entertaining, often gripping, and looked stunning at times ... but in both cases, I've never felt any particular desire to see them again. If I never did see them again, I wouldn't feel as if I'd really missed anything.
2001, on the other hand, I have seen again, many times over the past decades. And I still want to see it again, many times more. Far from being a failure as a film, it's in fact pure film, where everything that matters is in what's seen, not in what's said. Like Beethoven's Ninth or Miles Davis' Kind of Blue, for instance: like those works, 2001 is inexhaustible. No matter how many times I experience it, I always get something new from it.
reply
share
gottaluvafriend
8 years ago
Yep, I watch 2001 any chance I get despite having seen it more times than I can count.
reply
share
aaahmemories
8 years ago
I've never felt any particular desire to see them again
^This. To use a gastronomic metaphor, some films "stick to your ribs." Those do not. Now, I actually own Children of Men which I've rewatched several times to good advantage, but Gravity was a one-time shot. I did also purchase Inception, but found it another one-time shot, despite all the hype.
I've nothing against purely "entertaining" films. I just don't generally spend a lot of time with them.
The Dumpster gives a whole new meaning to "red" states.
reply
share