1. Guest,
    If you need help getting to know Xenforo, please see our guide here. If you have feedback or questions, please post those here.
    Dismiss Notice

2001: A Space Odyssey..bits and pieces.

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

  1. Dan Keliikoa

    Dan Keliikoa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2003
    Messages:
    199
    Likes Received:
    0
    My wife and I watched this masterpiece of film over the weekend. I've seen in before, but I REALLY enjoyed it this time, and 'got' it. I know there are several big fans of this film on the boards, so hoping to get some thoughtful insights from them [​IMG]

    My wife watched it for the first time and thought it wonderful, she was very impressed and she also 'got' it. But, she's very smart and very observant and caught some details I hadn't noticed before...little niggles that I thought were amusing:

    --When Frank and Dave go into the pod for their discussion of their concerns over HAL, why did they have him rotate the pod so he could see them? Why not keep it's backside to him so they would have COMPLETE privacy?

    --When (Dave, right?) goes EVA to service the antenna unit that HAL mistakenly thought was going to fail, why no tether to the pod? Also, how is the pod 'keeping up' with the Discovery, since they didn't stop the ship? Shouldn't the pod be going one way and the Discovery going the other?

    --When Dave is in the 'zoo' at the end of the film and is aging, is he seeing himself, like when he was eating, gets up from the table and walks over to see who was there? Is he witnessing himself age really rapidly, or are we to think it was in real-time? Fascinating sequence.

    --Lastly, if HAL could remotely control the pods (like when he killed Frank), why didn't he take over control of Dave's pod?

    Again, just fun little points/questions we both came up with. I'm so delighted that she enjoyed the film (she'd seen 2010 previously..now she wants to see both films back to back and read the books).

    I think if I had one solitary gripe about the movie, it would be that IMO, the 'stargate' sequence is too lengthy. Despite that (and some obvious backgrounds/staging during the Dawn of Man), 10 out of 10!
     
  2. MatS

    MatS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2000
    Messages:
    1,599
    Likes Received:
    0
    might want to look for future responses to appear in the 'movies' forum
    I have a feeling this thread is about to take a trip through the stargate
     
  3. Dan Keliikoa

    Dan Keliikoa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2003
    Messages:
    199
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh, that's my bad! Wrong forum....should I repost it there, or just wait for this to be moved?
     
  4. Francois Caron

    Francois Caron Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 1997
    Messages:
    2,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Real Name:
    Francois Caron
    The post will most likely be moved. These accidents happen even to the best of us.

    As for the pod being able to stay with the ship, that's easy. It's all part of Newton's first law. Just like everything else we've sent to other planets, the ship's thrusters are only used at the start of the flight to fling them towards Jupiter; the thrusters are turned off during transit. So when the pod left the ship, the pod still had the same inertia as the ship. Hence, they stayed next to each other until the pod altered its own inertia by activating its thrusters.

    However, the tether and the lip reading were gross oversights. Well, maybe not the lip reading as that was more a "hidden talent", but the tether is definitely a no-no by today's standards.

    The sequence in the hotel is basically a transformation sequence. David's body is being discarded so that his "essence" (for lack of a better word) can be transformed into the Star Child.

    You might want to check out the books as well. There's more information in them although some sequences are radically different, such as heading to Saturn instead of Jupiter.
     
  5. Cees Alons

    Cees Alons Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 1997
    Messages:
    19,144
    Likes Received:
    242
    Real Name:
    Cees Alons
    Wait no longer. It's there already. [​IMG]


    Cees
     
  6. Dan Keliikoa

    Dan Keliikoa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2003
    Messages:
    199
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you, Cees [​IMG] Apologies for my mistake.

    Francois, thank you for your insights, but I have a question. If they take the pod out, use thrusters to get to the antenna, stop the pod to go work on antenna, how does the pod 'revert' back to it's initial inertia to keep up with Discovery?
     
  7. seanOhara

    seanOhara Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Messages:
    820
    Likes Received:
    0

    I take it you never took physics in high school. This is Newton's First Law -- an object in motion tends to stay in motion unless acted upon by an outside force. On Earth, that force is friction, and it means airplanes need constant thrust to maintain speed. But in the vacuum of space, an object moving at a hundred miles a second will continue going a hundred miles a second until it hits something. And when the pod left the ship, it was traveling at a hundred miles per second (or whatever Discovery's velocity was).
     
  8. Dan Keliikoa

    Dan Keliikoa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2003
    Messages:
    199
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, Sean...no physics in high school for me [​IMG]

    What you said has led me to this...the pod seemed 'stopped' relative to it's position to Discovery after it had gone from the pod bay to the antenna. However, it had only 'slowed' to it's position alongside Discovery...is that correct?

    Sorry to be geeking on this...wish I had had physics, now [​IMG] Interesting stuff.
     
  9. Andrew Chong

    Andrew Chong Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2002
    Messages:
    739
    Likes Received:
    0
    Let me try my hand at explaining.

    It's all about relativity. Yes, relative to the Discovery, the pod appeared stopped. Relative to, say, the sun, both the Discovery and the pod would appear to be moving at the same velocity.
     
  10. Holadem

    Holadem Well-Known Member

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

    Correct.

    The same reason when you jump straight up, the earth does not rotate away from under you... you fall back on the same spot because the inertia of the earth's rotation allows you to travel at the same speed in the same direction (West-East) for the time you are airborne, causing you to land on the same spot. Essentially, it is as if the earth threw you. This example breaks down over larger distances, but for the purposes of this discussion, it is sufficient.

    Now imagine what would happen to all of us if the earth stopped spinning all of a sudden (noting that the rotation speed at the equator is a little more than 1000mph, less where you live, all the way down to 0 at the poles). Then you would suddenly become aware of your inertia [​IMG].

    --
    H
     
  11. Dan Keliikoa

    Dan Keliikoa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2003
    Messages:
    199
    Likes Received:
    0
    Okay, I'm good on the physics now [​IMG] Thanks guys!

    Anyone care to comment on HAL not taking control of Dave's pod while he's in it? Or should it be assumed that if he's controlling it, HAL is unable to?

    Also, is Dave aging in a matter of minutes, or is he aging in real time? It seems that the aging process is going as fast as what we are actually seeing.
     
  12. JeremyErwin

    JeremyErwin Well-Known Member

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

    Are you quite sure that HAL made a mistake? Perhaps he had some good reasons for indicating a fault in the AE35 unit. This component controlled the Discovery's antenna, and HAL might well have had reason to interrupt communications with earth. He might have planned the murders at this stage, or perhaps he was testing the crew's tolerance for the mistakes that inevitably arise with full sentience. On the other hand, he might have overestimated the crew's trust in him.
     
  13. Peter Apruzzese

    Peter Apruzzese Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 1999
    Messages:
    3,028
    Likes Received:
    521
    Real Name:
    Peter Apruzzese

    Re: Pod control. I would assume the pods are always under astronaut control, however when Frank goes EVA, the pod is now controlled via ship computer. Sort of like a "dead man's switch" on a train, as long as the astronaut is inside, the pod is under his control.

    Re: Aging: I always assumed real time aging and Kubrick is using cinematic shorthand ("seeing" himself) to let us know that Dave is spending his life in the alien's care.
     
  14. Eric F

    Eric F Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 1999
    Messages:
    1,810
    Likes Received:
    0
    Read the book, it makes thing much more clear.
     
  15. JeremyErwin

    JeremyErwin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2001
    Messages:
    3,219
    Likes Received:
    0
    The novel is not authoritative...
     
  16. Brian W.

    Brian W. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 1999
    Messages:
    1,959
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Real Name:
    Brian

    But that still doesn't explain WHY they had him rotate the pod in the first place. Which is something I've always wondered myself.

    And the answer is: Because Kubrick needed Hal to see their lips. Simple as that.
     
  17. MatthewLouwrens

    MatthewLouwrens Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2003
    Messages:
    3,034
    Likes Received:
    1
    Perhaps not, but Kubrick and Clarke were working on the story together for the novel - if I remember correctly, they were basically writing the novel to develop the story rather than going straight into screenplay - and then adapting that for the movie. The novel may be more linear and straightforward than the movie, but I think the novel can offer some insight into what Kubrick may have been thinking.
     
  18. Dan Keliikoa

    Dan Keliikoa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2003
    Messages:
    199
    Likes Received:
    0

    LOL...this is true! It's so good and realistic, I forget that I'm watching a MOVIE....ENTERTAINMENT. Not a documentary or filmed memoir!

    ...but....

    they could have at least LOOKED like they were working in the pod instead of PLOTTING. [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  19. Flemming.K

    Flemming.K Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2005
    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    0
  20. Dan Keliikoa

    Dan Keliikoa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2003
    Messages:
    199
    Likes Received:
    0

    That was quite entertaining! Thanks! [​IMG]
     

Share This Page