4 ms·

I literally had to scroll all the way to the very bottom in order to get to the point. If journalists want us to pay them then they must abandon this cancerous

I literally had to scroll all the way to the very bottom in order to get to the point. If journalists want us to pay them then they must abandon this cancerous writing style of endless fluff and nonsense.

MR4D 8y ago
I think you nailed it. Clarke's dialogue in his script was mostly removed. Relevant passage is this: "Close to tears, he left at the intermission, having watched an 11-minute sequence in which an astronaut did nothing but jog around the centrifuge in a scene intended to show the boredom of space travel. This scene was considerably cut in the version put out on general release. If Arthur was disappointed by Kubrick’s decision to cut his dialogue and narrative to the bone, he was eventually reconciled by being able to put everything left out of the film into the novel, meaning that each man was able to produce his own preferred version. The success of the film ensured that the book became a bestseller, as audiences sought answers to questions raised by Kubrick’s version, and Arthur soon got over his disappointment, going on to write three bestselling sequels to his novel, only one of which has been filmed so far."
terminado 8y ago
It's not "some journalist," it's Michael Moorcock, and not only that, he's recounting personal first-hand details of his interaction with a friend. And you didn't even condense the salient detail for us, being that Kubrick had cut Clark's extensive voice-over narration, which wasn't revealed until the premiere, provoking Clark to walk out of the screening.
pavlov 8y ago
If you want information delivered in ultra-condensed nuggets, try Twitter? There’s no shortage of TL;DRs on today’s Internet. No one is forcing you to read the “fluff and nonsense” of an award-winning 78-year-old author who was friends with A. C. Clarke.
- jonhendry18 8y ago
  Oh lord Moorcock is 78. I feel old.
coldtea 8y ago
It was actually a celebrated science fiction author, and friend of Arthur C. Clark, who wrote the article, not a journalist.

MR4D 8y ago

I think you nailed it. Clarke's dialogue in his script was mostly removed. Relevant passage is this: "Close to tears, he left at the intermission, having watched an 11-minute sequence in which an astronaut did nothing but jog around the centrifuge in a scene intended to show the boredom of space travel. This scene was considerably cut in the version put out on general release. If Arthur was disappointed by Kubrick’s decision to cut his dialogue and narrative to the bone, he was eventually reconciled by being able to put everything left out of the film into the novel, meaning that each man was able to produce his own preferred version. The success of the film ensured that the book became a bestseller, as audiences sought answers to questions raised by Kubrick’s version, and Arthur soon got over his disappointment, going on to write three bestselling sequels to his novel, only one of which has been filmed so far."

terminado 8y ago

It's not "some journalist," it's Michael Moorcock, and not only that, he's recounting personal first-hand details of his interaction with a friend. And you didn't even condense the salient detail for us, being that Kubrick had cut Clark's extensive voice-over narration, which wasn't revealed until the premiere, provoking Clark to walk out of the screening.

pavlov 8y ago

If you want information delivered in ultra-condensed nuggets, try Twitter? There’s no shortage of TL;DRs on today’s Internet. No one is forcing you to read the “fluff and nonsense” of an award-winning 78-year-old author who was friends with A. C. Clarke.

jonhendry18 8y ago
Oh lord Moorcock is 78. I feel old.

coldtea 8y ago

It was actually a celebrated science fiction author, and friend of Arthur C. Clark, who wrote the article, not a journalist.