DVDizzy Forum

Both films were released in 1968. Both had ape men. Both were hardcore sci-fis. Both were initially laughed at by audiences and critics alike...

.. And both became classics!

WHICH ONE WAS BETTER?

Well I went with Planet of the Apes. Neither of them rank on my favorite Sci-Fi list. Apes always had bad special effects to me and trying to pass off Heston as a scientist was ridiculous (he's more convincing as a caveman and as believable portraying a scientist as he was a Mexican in Touch of Evil). The mystery bit in Apes is pretty good and the end is what made it famous. I guess its the whole theme of the movie that makes it what it is.

As for 2001, OVERRATED. Thats all I can say. Kubrick has to be the most overrated director of all time. I enjoy his earlier work like The Killing or Paths of Glory but his latter work just doesn't deserve the praise it gets. Most people will justify the mediocrity of his latter work by claiming you just don't understand it or its above you. Thats BS, I'm sorry I just don't overanalyzed every frame to get unintentional meaning out of it. Anyway, 2001 has a decent story but its a film I've only seen twice and don't really plan on watching again.

As a concept, I like 2001 Space Odyssey better.

I voted for both, as they each bring something unique to the audience. But if I had to pick one movie to watch over the other, it'd probably be Planet of the Apes. I need to be in a specific mood to watch a Kubrick film, whereas Planet of the Apes is easier to "fall into", if that makes any sense.

albert

Though I'm not a particularly huge fan of either, I vote "Planet of the Apes". To enjoy "2001" properly, I need to be tripping on acid.

Each has its strengths. <i>2001</i> is more of an experience, a visually and aurally wondrous one unlike anything else. <i>Planet of the Apes</i> tells a coherent story and it does so intelligently and engagingly. So to answer your question, I don't know. But I'm glad to have both of these classics in my collection.