Could someone tell me what that movie is about? Just finished watching it and am not sure what to think of it, especially the ending. I am curious as to how this is regarded as one of the top movies of all time. Maybe I missed something, but I thought is was not very good, and that nothing really happens in the 2+ hours that it goes on.
2001 Space Odyssey
4,492 Views |
49 Replies |
Last: 14 days ago by St Hedwig Aggie
I saw it when it came out and watched maybe half a dozen other times and still have no idea!
i've read the entire series of books and have no idea what the last 30+ minutes of that movie are supposed to mean
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretations_of_2001:_A_Space_Odyssey
There are many interpretations, but here is a summary of them on wikipedia.
Here also is a quote from Kubrick:
"You're free to speculate as you wish about the philosophical and allegorical meaning of the film—and such speculation is one indication that it has succeeded in gripping the audience at a deep level—but I don't want to spell out a verbal road map for 2001 that every viewer will feel obligated to pursue or else fear he's missed the point."
Another fact I remember from this film. IBM had a rather large presence in this film. They even got creative with naming the computer system HAL...which is one letter back from IBM in the alphabet.
There are many interpretations, but here is a summary of them on wikipedia.
Here also is a quote from Kubrick:
"You're free to speculate as you wish about the philosophical and allegorical meaning of the film—and such speculation is one indication that it has succeeded in gripping the audience at a deep level—but I don't want to spell out a verbal road map for 2001 that every viewer will feel obligated to pursue or else fear he's missed the point."
Another fact I remember from this film. IBM had a rather large presence in this film. They even got creative with naming the computer system HAL...which is one letter back from IBM in the alphabet.
It's art, if it captivates you and makes you feel a certain way, great. If not, great.
The funny thing about when I saw it at the Theatres I was probably 12 or 13 and all the "Cool People" came out saying how great it was and if you didn't "get it" you had no insight, but I never heard a one of them actually verbalize what it was about. They all just acted like they knew and you were un-cool if you didn't.
I am cool now but still don't get it.
I am cool now but still don't get it.
Check this for an explanation.
http://www.kubrick2001.com/
Basically the black obelisks have change the evolution of man. The first one turned us from ape into man. The second from space beings that go to the moon to ones that go to planets. The third reborn man into energy beings.
But it is one of those movies that everyone can interpret differently.
[This message has been edited by Quad Dog (edited 12/13/2008 2:28p).]
http://www.kubrick2001.com/
Basically the black obelisks have change the evolution of man. The first one turned us from ape into man. The second from space beings that go to the moon to ones that go to planets. The third reborn man into energy beings.
But it is one of those movies that everyone can interpret differently.
[This message has been edited by Quad Dog (edited 12/13/2008 2:28p).]
I turned this movie off about 45 minutes into it because it was the slowest movie I have ever seen. I absolutely love scifi movies and read scifi books all the time, but I just couldn't stand the 20 minute long space docking, monkey, and obelisk scenes (yes they were each at least 10 minutes long). I understand those were landmark scenes at the time, but they are quite outdated now.
I also couldn't get over the ridiculous grip shoes and the total misrepresentation of walking on the Moon (granted we hadn't been there at the time the movie so it's somewhat understandable).
Overall the movie was so brutally slow that I just couldn't appreciate the very realistic hard scifi elements to the movie.
I also couldn't get over the ridiculous grip shoes and the total misrepresentation of walking on the Moon (granted we hadn't been there at the time the movie so it's somewhat understandable).
Overall the movie was so brutally slow that I just couldn't appreciate the very realistic hard scifi elements to the movie.
i absolutely loved this movie. The effects were amazing even by today's standards and the music was stellar. Although i didn't get the ending, it is thought provoking which is the whole point.
One of the very best.
Reading the other Odyssey books in Clarke's series helps a bit. I'm sure Wiki has a good plot summary of 2010 and 2061 if you wanted to look it up. Dave, the astronaut character, get's transformed into this new being and then interacts with humanity in various ways.
Kubrick made much more sense in Full Metal Jacket.
Just a more complicated way of saying "Be the ball Danny"
The movie influenced architecture and fashion. Great link Quad Dog, thanks.
[This message has been edited by dcAg (edited 12/14/2008 5:32p).]
[This message has been edited by dcAg (edited 12/14/2008 5:32p).]
Sorry, folks, but I found it 3/4 of it pretentious and dull and very full of itself. I did enjoy Mad Magazine's version of it, though.
The ending was good, though. When Mrs. Ro and were living at Casa del Sol in the summer of 1970 there was a drive-in theater where the Albertson's later went in. When 2001 was playing we'd go sit on the lawn of the church and watch the last thirty minutes every night, always with a fairly large group of people.
What did it mean? Good question.
Who is John Galt?
The ending was good, though. When Mrs. Ro and were living at Casa del Sol in the summer of 1970 there was a drive-in theater where the Albertson's later went in. When 2001 was playing we'd go sit on the lawn of the church and watch the last thirty minutes every night, always with a fairly large group of people.
What did it mean? Good question.
Who is John Galt?
quote:
Here also is a quote from Kubrick:
"You're free to speculate as you wish about the philosophical and allegorical meaning of the film—and such speculation is one indication that it has succeeded in gripping the audience at a deep level—but I don't want to spell out a verbal road map for 2001 that every viewer will feel obligated to pursue or else fear he's missed the point."
Let me translate:
I was as high as a kite when I made this movie, and I have no idea what the ending means. But if I say it is open to each person's interpretation, then this will add to the perception that I am an artist.
FYI: The book was written after the movie.
I'm convinced people who believe this movie is the GREATEST, are just posers who have heard other people say it is the greatest and just want to sound like they know what they are talking about.
This movie is horrible. The only thing it has going for it was that it was probably the first sci-fi movie to get a big budget and a "Big name" to direct it, and the concept of HAL.
the voice of HAL deserves an Oscar.
extremely creepy.
extremely creepy.
I love that movie. I was born well after it was made, as a point of reference.
To appreciate it as great film making, watch other sci-fi/space movies from the same era (late 60's). It is mindblowing how much 2001 took the whole genre to another level.
The storyline - machine achieves sentience - is still used today. The movie is 40 years old for Pete's sake. James Cameron was probably a fan.
For a 40 year old movie, I don't think it's that dated. The portions of the movie from when HAL won't let the pod re-enter to when he's disconnecting HAL's memory banks are some of the most memorable scenes from anything I've ever watched.
It's a matter of opinion of course, but I love it. I don't know what the ending really means, and I like that. It's creepy and thought provoking.
To appreciate it as great film making, watch other sci-fi/space movies from the same era (late 60's). It is mindblowing how much 2001 took the whole genre to another level.
The storyline - machine achieves sentience - is still used today. The movie is 40 years old for Pete's sake. James Cameron was probably a fan.
For a 40 year old movie, I don't think it's that dated. The portions of the movie from when HAL won't let the pod re-enter to when he's disconnecting HAL's memory banks are some of the most memorable scenes from anything I've ever watched.
It's a matter of opinion of course, but I love it. I don't know what the ending really means, and I like that. It's creepy and thought provoking.
I know what it was about...but it helps to have read all of Clark's books and his post 2001 books as well.
But, frankly, it would take a book to tell you what it was all about...Read the books.
The movie was considered a classic because it was a ground breaker in the technology of filmaking. Up until that time "Space Movies consisited on paper plates being hung from a string in front of a picutre of Washington.
Star Wars to Jurasic Park owe their quailty and success to this movie.
But, frankly, it would take a book to tell you what it was all about...Read the books.
The movie was considered a classic because it was a ground breaker in the technology of filmaking. Up until that time "Space Movies consisited on paper plates being hung from a string in front of a picutre of Washington.
Star Wars to Jurasic Park owe their quailty and success to this movie.
not a big fan of the film, but:
you're wrong. kubrick and clarke worked on it together, it was written at the same time as the movie. its not like clarke wrote the book as a novelization of the movie, like some star wars book.
its hard to watch the film now and get the same sense of awe maybe that it had 40 years ago. I could do without 30 minutes of apes, and the ending was trippy but pointless. but I like the middle two parts, I like how space is big and silent, and the HAL story is great. I dont need to see it again, but I can understand its influence, and I do think its worth viewing at least once.
quote:
FYI: The book was written after the movie.
you're wrong. kubrick and clarke worked on it together, it was written at the same time as the movie. its not like clarke wrote the book as a novelization of the movie, like some star wars book.
its hard to watch the film now and get the same sense of awe maybe that it had 40 years ago. I could do without 30 minutes of apes, and the ending was trippy but pointless. but I like the middle two parts, I like how space is big and silent, and the HAL story is great. I dont need to see it again, but I can understand its influence, and I do think its worth viewing at least once.
quote:
The film contains little explanation for the events taking place. Clarke, on the other hand, wrote thorough explanations of "cause and effect" for the events in the novel. James Randi later recounted that upon seeing 2001 for the first time, Clarke left the movie theatre during the first break crying because he was so upset about how the movie had turned out
The movie is fantastic and if you don't get it you are a dolt.
This may be the greatest movie of all time.
The HAL 9000 computer is one of the greatest characters of all time.
I can make the case that Arthur C Clark was a time traveller.
Predicted modern day user interfaces, the iPad and future problems with AI.
The HAL 9000 computer is one of the greatest characters of all time.
I can make the case that Arthur C Clark was a time traveller.
Predicted modern day user interfaces, the iPad and future problems with AI.
One of the GOATS of any genre. The special effects was revolutionary., especially for a movie produced in the 60s. Kubrick did a masterful job.
Class of '91 (MEEN)
The atmosphere of the film felt so unbelievably alien. It really transmitted the sense of awe and terror that encountering something like the Monoliths would cause.
91_Aggie said:Quote:
Here also is a quote from Kubrick:
"You're free to speculate as you wish about the philosophical and allegorical meaning of the filmand such speculation is one indication that it has succeeded in gripping the audience at a deep levelbut I don't want to spell out a verbal road map for 2001 that every viewer will feel obligated to pursue or else fear he's missed the point."
Let me translate:
I was as high as a kite when I made this movie, and I have no idea what the ending means. But if I say it is open to each person's interpretation, then this will add to the perception that I am an artist.
FYI: The book was written after the movie.
I'm convinced people who believe this movie is the GREATEST, are just posers who have heard other people say it is the greatest and just want to sound like they know what they are talking about.
This movie is horrible. The only thing it has going for it was that it was probably the first sci-fi movie to get a big budget and a "Big name" to direct it, and the concept of HAL.
Let me translate:
I prefer to have all movie plots and themes spoonfed to me.
Because I am not capable of appreciating the movie or dedicate an ounce of brain power to interpreting it, everyone who claims to enjoy it is lying.
I also have poor taste in art.
Obelisks looked like movie screens.
2023.
Walking around with the monolith in our pockets.
Frank Poole's space pod catapults off into deep space and later ends up in the background of a junkyard scene in star wars.
Great! An expert!Brian Earl Spilner said:91_Aggie said:Quote:
Here also is a quote from Kubrick:
"You're free to speculate as you wish about the philosophical and allegorical meaning of the filmand such speculation is one indication that it has succeeded in gripping the audience at a deep levelbut I don't want to spell out a verbal road map for 2001 that every viewer will feel obligated to pursue or else fear he's missed the point."
Let me translate:
I was as high as a kite when I made this movie, and I have no idea what the ending means. But if I say it is open to each person's interpretation, then this will add to the perception that I am an artist.
FYI: The book was written after the movie.
I'm convinced people who believe this movie is the GREATEST, are just posers who have heard other people say it is the greatest and just want to sound like they know what they are talking about.
This movie is horrible. The only thing it has going for it was that it was probably the first sci-fi movie to get a big budget and a "Big name" to direct it, and the concept of HAL.
Let me translate:
I prefer to have all movie plots and themes spoonfed to me.
Because I am not capable of appreciating the movie or dedicate an ounce of brain power to interpreting it, everyone who claims to enjoy it is lying.
I also have poor taste in art.
Then you could interpret this for me
Smoke weed and watch it.
If you are on the fence about this movie or got kids or a so with low attention span. ... I'd recommend starting the movie at the start of the Jupiter mission where they are already onboard Discovery.
Then if that goes well, I'd think about watching the sequel 2010.
The sequel involves a team of US scientists including the programmer of the HAL 9000 going back to the Discovery I to investigate what went wrong and what happened to the crew.
To do this they have to reactivate the HAL 9000.
2010 is also a great movie. It's more of a part 2 to 2001 than a sequel. Another great movie.
Part 2 in the sense that 2010 explains what went wrong with HAL 9000. Makes what happened in the original more clear. At the end of 2001 you never know why HAL went off the rails and killed everybody.
Thats explained in the both of the book.
If you want to understand what's about to happen with AI ... watch these movies and read the books if you need a deeper understanding of what went on with HAL.
The whole thing with HAL is an interesting case study on AI and machine learning.
Watching these movies as a kid, it was all theoretical. When I first watched these movies a see n' say with the pull string cord. That was as talking computer as it got, where I was at.
We've seen all this come to fruition with this AI. We are watching it happen now.
2001 is a warning to future generations.
About what can happen if things get out of control.
There's always this talk about the great filter. The idea that civilizations advance to a certain point until they inevitably manage to destroy themselves.
We get out over our skis and we got real trouble.
Thats all i'm trying to say.
Then if that goes well, I'd think about watching the sequel 2010.
The sequel involves a team of US scientists including the programmer of the HAL 9000 going back to the Discovery I to investigate what went wrong and what happened to the crew.
To do this they have to reactivate the HAL 9000.
2010 is also a great movie. It's more of a part 2 to 2001 than a sequel. Another great movie.
Part 2 in the sense that 2010 explains what went wrong with HAL 9000. Makes what happened in the original more clear. At the end of 2001 you never know why HAL went off the rails and killed everybody.
Thats explained in the both of the book.
If you want to understand what's about to happen with AI ... watch these movies and read the books if you need a deeper understanding of what went on with HAL.
The whole thing with HAL is an interesting case study on AI and machine learning.
Watching these movies as a kid, it was all theoretical. When I first watched these movies a see n' say with the pull string cord. That was as talking computer as it got, where I was at.
We've seen all this come to fruition with this AI. We are watching it happen now.
2001 is a warning to future generations.
About what can happen if things get out of control.
There's always this talk about the great filter. The idea that civilizations advance to a certain point until they inevitably manage to destroy themselves.
We get out over our skis and we got real trouble.
Thats all i'm trying to say.
2010 is a great movie. In some ways, it's better than 2001.
It is the greatest movie of all time. The direction, the open-ended famous closing sequence, the millions of years jump cut, the music, HAL, and everything else was superlative.
It's the only movie that transcends being a film and becomes an experience.
It's the only movie that transcends being a film and becomes an experience.
Username does not check out.citizenkane06 said:
It is the greatest movie of all time.
Featured Stories
See All
49:45
11h ago
7.0k
25:48
14h ago
2.8k
Scouting Report: No. 22 Texas A&M vs. No. 1 Auburn
by Tom Schuberth
Wade Taylor IV will be chasing history during his final game at Reed
by Luke Evangelist
74OA
An offseason sit-down with Texas A&M head football coach Mike Elko
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
4
Dirty Mikes Boyz
An offseason sit-down with Texas A&M head football coach Mike Elko
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
3
Ag12thman
An offseason sit-down with Texas A&M head football coach Mike Elko
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
2