Quad Dog said:

---

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).]

---

I've seen it maybe twice in 30 years. Thought it had brilliant moments but was overall just weird/pretentious/dull. Didnt really like it better grown up.

I always thought of the obelisks as something more abstract, maybe as observing these 'dawns', rather than contributing; but conceptually this is a cool way to break it down.

Hal is a real precursor though. Frankly hal needed his own obelisk.

I fear where the future was headed.

600 years of enlightenment making brilliant lives and freedom possible for billions…now in a few decades its all getting torn down and replaced ….with…..

Quad Dog said:

---

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).]

---

Finally an explanation that makes sense. Thanks.

It is a groundbreaking movie but relatively boring.

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Smoke weed and watch it.

---

So I have to be high to be capable of appreciating the movie?

Question: wouldn't that take away from my ability to dedicate an ounce of brain power to interpreting it?

No, but if you try it you'll see it's a tremendously enjoyable experience.

Also, no one can interpret art for you.

This is a great edit too. Preferably while doing the above.

AGinHI said:

---

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Smoke weed and watch it.

---

So I have to be high to be capable of appreciating the movie?

Question: wouldn't that take away from my ability to dedicate an ounce of brain power to interpreting it?

---

No but you would have to be high to be capable of creating it.

Saw the first part of this again earlier this week when Heywood Floyd is going to the space station on his way to the moon base.

He's on the pan am shuttle sitting in his seat and is watching what looks like a modern day seat-back screen on a modern aircraft.

He falls asleep and the flight attendant walks by and turns off the screen which is a modern day regular occurrence.

Had to remind myself that this was envisioned and created in 1969.

Also Floyd essentially Facetimes his daughter from the space station.

Also he does facial recognition and voice recognition to clear customs at the space station talking to what looks like an AI rendered deep fake avatar.

The IBM 'iPads' that they are using onboard discovery still gets me every time.

There are some iPads of sorts that the hottie red skirt assistant of the week will bring to the bridge of the Enterprise in Star Trek: The Original Series

Pretty amazing that these filmmakers were so advanced.

It wild to think about how the concept of AI and the risk of AI was well known going back to 2001, but you also got to look at movies like Alien, Terminator and War Games.

So even back in the days of green screen computers and no GUI we had the idea the computers could become sentient and do harm to humanity.

You look at Terminator 1984 and they talking about AI the same as we talking about it today.

Best opening credits though…simple, dramatic and effective.