2001: A Space Odyssey..bits and pieces.

Discussion in 'Movies' started by Dan Keliikoa, Apr 24, 2006.

  1. Francois Caron

    Francois Caron Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 1997
    Messages:
    2,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Real Name:
    Francois Caron
    Interesting concept, Man losing control of his tools. What's ironic is that to watch the flash film, I stopped listening to This Week In Tech for a few minutes, a show about people losing control of their computers. [​IMG]
     
  2. Lew Crippen

    Lew Crippen Executive Producer

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    Messages:
    12,060
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks for the link Dan.
     
  3. Dan Keliikoa

    Dan Keliikoa Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2003
    Messages:
    199
    Likes Received:
    0
    You are welcome, but Mr Flemming provided the link originally. [​IMG] Isn't it cool?
     
  4. MarcoBiscotti

    MarcoBiscotti Producer

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Messages:
    4,798
    Likes Received:
    1
    That flash film was great.
     
  5. Flemming.K

    Flemming.K Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2005
    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi! Glad you all seem to like it [​IMG]

    I really think I "nailed" it beforehand, but efter seeing the flash, I believe some things are better explained in it. I guess I buy that for a dollar [​IMG]
     
  6. JediFonger

    JediFonger Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2006
    Messages:
    3,958
    Likes Received:
    24
    Real Name:
    YiFeng You
    if you read the most recent edition's forward by Arthur C. Clarke, the story of 2001 was developed by both Kubrick and Clarke. so, the novel IS authoritative in every sense of the word. although Clarke doesn't say so explicitly, both the movie and book should be enjoyed to fully capture the 2001 experience. =). 2001 doesn't work (imho) as a standalone movie. i'm not one of those Gen X/Y, etc. w/ short attention span, in fact, i like silent films more.

     
  7. JeremyErwin

    JeremyErwin Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2001
    Messages:
    3,219
    Likes Received:
    0
    the novel is the novel, and the film is the film. To argue that either one is necessary to understand the other cheapens both.
     
  8. Jack Briggs

    Jack Briggs Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 1999
    Messages:
    16,740
    Likes Received:
    129
    Agreed.
     
  9. Chris Lynch

    Chris Lynch Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2001
    Messages:
    164
    Likes Received:
    0

    Actually, I always assumed that Dave asked HAL to rotate the pod just to test HAL, i.e. to check his response to the order when Dave knew HAL could hear him, and then follow that with the test when he turned off the sound transmission.

    Besides, I would think that if Kubrick needed HAL to see their lips, he could've put HAL's "eyeball" anywhere in the room to make that happen
     
  10. andrew markworthy

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 1999
    Messages:
    4,769
    Likes Received:
    11

    Neither and both. [​IMG] Essentially, the final sequence represents Dave learning the wisdom of the aliens. This seems like a matter of moment for the aliens but is a lifetime for human beings. The broken glass section is symbolic of the marriage of human and alien minds (think of the jewish wedding ceremony) and from this union comes the starchild. It's useful to remember that in the original version of the script, the starchild doesn't just gaze at the Earth but blows up the various satellite weapons (remember the bone that jump cuts into the spaceship at the start of the film? - that spaceship is meant to be some kind of weapon) that threaten humanity. However, Kubrick scrapped the idea because he thought it would remind people too much of his previous film Dr Strangelove.

    In a less metaphysical frame of mind, you can explain the ageing in minutes as the effects of relativity playing themselves out. However, I get a headache trying to explain it.
     
  11. Ricardo C

    Ricardo C Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    5,060
    Likes Received:
    0

    I enjoy the novel (and its sequels), but I think they should only be read after taking in the film. 2010 and the rest diminish the beauty of the film's third act by explaining and trivializing too many things the film made mysterious and majestic.
     
  12. Holadem

    Holadem Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2000
    Messages:
    8,972
    Likes Received:
    0

    It's a match cut. An extremely common error.

    --
    H
     
  13. Dan Keliikoa

    Dan Keliikoa Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2003
    Messages:
    199
    Likes Received:
    0
    Great responses everyone [​IMG]
     
  14. Ike

    Ike Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2000
    Messages:
    1,677
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm sure that at some point-be it while writing the scene, or rehearsing the scene, or while the mechanics for the pods to spin were being made-the thought was had that they could simply have the pods facing forwards when the two enter and save a lot of money and time. That the film goes out of its way to include the scene should not be looked at as a flaw. Without looking at the scene again, I suspect the point might be along a similar vein to the anti-gravity toilet, showing the fearless crew either unwilling or unable to walk the few steps to the front of the pod, so they instead have to rely on HAL to slowly spin the pods around. That seems to be the major point of the scene-how slow the movement of the pods is. A seemingly pointless action that takes up a lot of time, which encapsulates a lot of Kubrick's version of the future.
     
  15. rich_d

    rich_d Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2001
    Messages:
    2,025
    Likes Received:
    50
    Location:
    Connecticut
    Real Name:
    Rich
    I think a highlight of 2001 is that there are different valid ways of interpreting the film. Personally, I'm not wedded to any particular 'this is it' kind of viewpoint.

    I like the idea that the monoliths are more than just tests of accomplishment as well as:

    - beacons that report progress back to their maker

    - passing of intelligence

    The last point being the possibility that intelligence of man didn't evolve over millions of years but received as a 'booster shot' (for lack of better words) from a more advanced civilization.

    Using a bone as a weapon occurs after the apes touch the monolith.

    I also like the idea that the ape age monolith was not the only monolith on Earth. I fancy the idea that one jump started the Renaissance. After all, that was a remarkable period of human creativity and production. Further, was this the last report back from the Planet Earth (itself) to the monolith's maker? After all, the guest quarters are done in Louis the 15th pattern (or whatever Louis that was). Was that done to make the guest feel at home or was the maker's style reflected on Earth though our encounter with a monolith?

    Fun stuff.
     
  16. JeremyErwin

    JeremyErwin Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2001
    Messages:
    3,219
    Likes Received:
    0

    Louis Seize (at least according to this article)

    (as much as I can figure out, XIII is renaissance, XIV is baroque, XV is rococo, and XVI is neoclassical.) see Wikipedia:Louis for more details.

    Perhaps it was in fashion in 1968.
     
  17. JeremyErwin

    JeremyErwin Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2001
    Messages:
    3,219
    Likes Received:
    0
    I found this Claudia Zimny essay on the significance of 2001's Louis Seize Room For instance,

    And, of course, had the room been Louis Quinze, those connections could not have been made.
     
  18. george kaplan

    george kaplan Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2001
    Messages:
    13,064
    Likes Received:
    2
    I always thought it would have been better as Louis De Palma, with tiny furniture, that Bowman had clearly outgrown. [​IMG]
     
  19. Dick

    Dick Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    May 22, 1999
    Messages:
    5,456
    Likes Received:
    1,496
    Real Name:
    Rick
    It's a match cut. An extremely common error.

    Not a perfect match cut, either. The positioning of the bone is about 45 degrees off from the positioning of the warhead. With a super 8mm print I owned of this film, I cut 4-5 frames so that the transition was smoother. I know, Kubrick was a perfectionist and what is in the film is exactly what he intended, but for me, a more aligned transition worked better. Playing God? I don't know. Worked better for me.
     
  20. Holadem

    Holadem Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2000
    Messages:
    8,972
    Likes Received:
    0
    Agreed. It's a nitpick, but perfectionism is ALL about nitpicks. And for the work of such a vaunted perfectionist, that cut could have been much better. But I am sure the "Kubrick can do no wrong" crowd will find a way to rationalize it [​IMG]

    --
    H
     

Share This Page