Do you want to know more: An in-depth article plus extensive video-interviews with the main VFX-players of that time looking back can be found here:

http://www.fxguide.com/featured/fxphd-the-role-of-the-optical-printer/

And the After Effects-demonstration of how an optical printer worked at the end of the video is probably the highlight (at least it was for me).

Greets,
Anteeru

"This is Why Colorists Should Be the Most Appreciated People in Post Production" ... Well, is it not enough to just ALSO appreciate them? I also want to have some appreciation left for my cutter, my sound editor, my VFX guys, my composer ...

"[T]here is no doubt that 2001 would have been better if Kubrick had used North's music. Even if one likes some of the choices Kubrick made for certain individual scenes, the eclectic group of classical composers employed by the director resulted in a disturbing melange of sounds and styles overall." (Jerry Goldsmith)

If you take the art of scoring a film seriously, you see an argument or two in here. Among others, one primary goal of an effective original score is to give musical cohesion even if the styles it needs to employ vary greatly throughout the film. And Goldsmith was actually a master in doing so. He managed to take huge avangardistic steps away from the main theme's sophisticated viennese waltz in "Boys from Brazil" and connected purely electronic sounds with impressionistic orchestral music in "Logan's Run" and he did so by sophisticated us of leitmotifs - or simply his skill as a musician, one could say. He also got kicked out of a couple of projects, too, with people later saying that his successor did not do the film justice as Goldsmiths score would have done: Compare his score for Ridley Scott's "Legend" with the one they actually used in the American version, or his music for "Timeline" with what Brian Tyler composed.

It's difficult for a director to let someone else influence how you movie sounds, but if a talented composer with a cinematic mind is on your side, your leap of faith may very likely be rewarded by a sound totally unique to your film. It's an interesting discussion that I'd love to hear your opinions about.

"[T]here is no doubt that 2001 would have been better if Kubrick had used North's music. Even if one likes some of the choices Kubrick made for certain individual scenes, the eclectic group of classical composers employed by the director resulted in a disturbing melange of sounds and styles overall." (Jerry Goldsmith)

If you take the art of scoring a film seriously, you see an argument or two in here. Among others, one primary goal of an effective original score is to give musical cohesion even if the styles it needs to employ vary greatly throughout the film. And Goldsmith was actually a master in doing so. He managed to take huge avangardistic steps away from the main theme's sophisticated viennese waltz in "Boys from Brazil" and connected purely electronic sounds with impressionistic orchestral music in "Logan's Run" and he did so by sophisticated us of leitmotifs - or simply his skill as a musician, one could say. He also got kicked out of a couple of projects, too, with people later saying that his successor did not do the film justice as Goldsmiths score would have done: Compare his score for Ridley Scott's "Legend" with the one they actually used in the American version, or his music for "Timeline" with what Brian Tyler composed.

It's difficult for a director to let someone else influence how you movie sounds, but if a talented composer with a cinematic mind is on your side, your leap of faith may very likely be rewarded by a sound totally unique to your film. It's an interesting discussion that I'd love to hear your opinions about.

I do like the poster. It sparked my interest in the film. However, although the production value indeed is impressive, as is the cinematography, the story simply is not. I've had the same problem with Meaning Makers' first short, "Trigger". They seem to know the vocabulary and grammar of filmmaking very well, good craftsmen they are, so far, it's just that they have nothing interesting to say. An executive would write a big fat "Have seen this movie before - and it was better" over the screenplay. And while the overall VFX are well done, I took issues with the flash light because they use it in daylight (wtf?) and it has this unnatural yellowish glow that, for whatever reason they did it, for me seemed so over that for a moment made me believe this was all a dream sequence. So, bottom line: This movie stylistically hits a home run, but still looses the overall game.

This is the first time a MoVI video disappoints me. And it's not the cuts that distract me. Ever since I felt the stabilization quality of the MoVI Rigs was on a par with steadycam shots. Maybe it wasn't calibrated or operated properly, but in this video the movement of the camera lacked the weightless feel of shots like these: https://vimeo.com/72021084 (where they even shot from a horseback!).