Growing up in the 60s in the USA, we saw a man orbit the earth to walking on the moon in less than 8 years. Most television shows went from black and white to color in the same period. By 2001, we expected orbiting the earth or space travel to the moon to be mundane things. Yes, we definitely saw the future that way portrayed in this movie. I saw the movie when I was 11, after reading the book but I still don't understand all of it. Nice reaction, Dawn.
The day can still come . I didnt ikagien solid AI so fast either and have no idea how this will change himan hostory but tahts alos huge. As big as space travel honestly and the internt , cell phones and guttenberg .
I also grew up anticipating the year 2001 would look like this movie: with rotating space hotels and Pan Am flights to the moon. Instead, when the year 2001 finally came along, everything looked like "Blade Runner."
My older brother took me to this for my 9th birthday. I walked out of the theater completely in awe but so confused by the end. I went to the library (because that's what we did back then) and got the book. Then the ending made more sense. The seque,l, "2010: The Year We Made Contact", wraps up the story and answers questions. It's not a bad movie - it stars Roy Scheider, the Chief of Police in "Jaws".
I first found the book by Arthur C. Clarke in my high school library, and didn't see the movie till it was re-released in the 70s. So I actually understood it on first viewing.
The moonrise over Earth is spectacular, seeing as the Apollo program hadn't even made it to the moon when the movie was made, with Apollo 10 finally giving us almost the exact same image as they orbited the moon.
That's about all you can say about it. For years that;s all I've heard about 2001, the visual effects, but nobody can really explain the story or just have different opinions of what it's saying.
@@wiseguymaybe It wasn't meant to be easy to understand. Kubrick actually explained some of it on a Japanese tv show a long time ago. The story is based on many ancient myths about a hero that returns to save the day. What was happening in this film, but wasn't shown in any way to be obvious, is that the US and USSR had many satellites in space armed with nukes pointing back at earth. The world was close to destroying itself. When the astronaut makes the journey at the end he is being taken in by the aliens that are nothing but pure energy so you can't see them. The aliens have created a room that would look like a natural habitat for someone on earth to the best of their ability. They didn't know what a regular person would know, but they created a room resembling something out of French aristocracy. Anyone there wouldn't experience time normally so they would age very fast. At the end, the cycle is complete and the person is reborn into what will become the hero. The hero then returns to earth and will ultimately save earth from imminent destruction although this will not be seen as the movie ends. Apparently there are many myths like this in ancient cultures around the world about the reborn hero saving humanity.
In the 50s and 60s many longer films would have an intermission as a pee and popcorn break, and many would also have an overture that played while the audience was still being seated. _2001_ was inspired by Arthur C. Clark's short story "The Sentinel." While Kubrick and Clarke were co-writing the screenplay Clarke was also writing a novelization of the film. The two were released within a few months of each other. In the novel Clarke explains exactly what was going on and the meaning of the film. The monoliths were place on Earth, the Moon, and in orbit around Jupiter as a way to nudge humans into the next phase of their evolution. They were placed so far apart to insure that mankind had reached an advanced enough stage to be taken to the next step. The final scene shows the next evolutionary leap, that of mankind becoming a species that is not bound to a planet but can travel the universe autonomously. Dave becomes a fetus because he is just an infant of the new species of mankind. The notion that human evolution is guided by advanced, alien races is a theme that is found in several of Clarke's stories and novels, most memorably in this film and in the novel _Childhood's End._
Well, see, FSOL's album 'ISDN' - which is heavily, *heavily* influenced by and references classic dark SF movies - is an absolute sex soundtrack. So...
I don't think that's it at all. If the shoes lose contact with the floor, the stewardesses could float around the cabin and knock their heads. The helmets would be padded, not heavy.
I thought the head pieces were there so that no one complained that their hair was not moving properly in 0g. By hiding long hair, you avoid the issue.
I watched this with my posse in 1968, all of us sitting in the front row. During the "wormhole" scene, one of my buddies (a stoner) suddenly started screaming at the top of his lungs, "It's blowing my mind! It's blowing my mind!" "Open the pod bay doors, HAL," is a meme. It's what you say when your computer isn't cooperating. We had never seen this level of special effects before. This was ground breaking. Remember, there was no CGI. All of these are models, actual sets, and practical effects. That big centrifugal ring of the Discovery was full-sized, like a Ferris wheel, and turned on its axis. The effects of the "wormhole" were done by cross-processing film, drops of colored water swirled through oil, UV light photography, _et cetera._ This movie came out just ahead of Neil Armstrong stepping out on the moon, while I was at the peak of my Space Race fervor. It had taken the US less than a decade to go from a successful space launch being a 50-50 proposition to the moon. I was absolutely convinced that in 30 years we would have a torus space station, a permanent moon base, and Pan Am business flights into space. I hoped I'd be able to take a space trip. Now, here we are more than half a century later. We don't have the torus space station, we don't have the moon base...we don't even have Pan Am anymore. Bummer. But when they showed the scene of Poole and Bowman sitting at the same table, not speaking to each other, both watching their own screens...well, that was an accurate prediction of the future.
There is a sequel that makes sense: 2010: The Year We Make Contact (1984) Roy Scheider (Sheriff Brody from Jaws) plays Heywood Floyd the administrator guy from the middle part of the movie. It also stars Helen Mirren and John Lithgow.
@@Belzediel I believe the books contradict themselves as well. Clarke is even quoted as having said that the four books exist in separate universes. I would have to re-read and read them to be sure but when even the author says this like this...
I'm always amazed that nobody ever says anything about the tablets on their desk while they are eating dinner. We are so used to them nobody thinks twice when they see them.Yet when i saw this movie in the cinema way before personal computers or tablets were invented they were one of the things audiences were most curious about.
She had no idea what 'planet' the moon was... or earth... or why they can't 'swim' in space... or anything else that was happening in this. Wrong film to recommend. Good thing she's cute.
It helps if you've read the book, the basics of it are: Dawn of Man - the Monolith arrives & tests/alters the primates to nudge them along the path to intelligence Mission to the Moon - humans discover a strong magnetic anomaly on the moon & dig it up, discovering a Monolith & when the sunlight hits it a signal is sent to Jupiter Mission to Jupiter - Hal & the crew are sent to see what is there, poor Hal is given contradictory orders which makes him go a little crazy Rebirth (the least clear part) - Dave goes on a journey through the stargate system (Monolith) & finds himself in waiting room that looks like a hotel suite, he's then ascended into the Starchild (with vast power).
SO glad a new generation is still enjoying this and hasn't been spoiled by the CGI-fest that is modern cinema. I was once lucky enough to have the opportunity to ask Kubrick what the ending actually means and I will always remember his response. "Use whatever stimulation you choose to partake in, watch the movie on the biggest and loudest screen you can and at the end, whatever the story means to you - that's what I wanted." Kubrick loved keeping things ambiguous in his films which is why he didn't like the sequel '2010: The Year We Make Contact' since that's far more explanatory in it's story. It's still worth a watch though so I'd encourage you to seek it out.
And that's exactly what makes these movies (Apocalypse Now is another classic that works similar) great. Not every movie or story needs a clear resolution/meaning that is spoon-fed to the audience. Sure, 2001 is not an easy watch. Unless you just except to "enjoy the ride" and take away from it whatever your own mind makes out of it.
Kubrick just about always said that, but he actually explained what the ending was really supposed to be on a Japanese tv show from back in the early 80s I believe. I saw it on youtube so you can probably still find it. As far as I know, it is the only time he ever explained it. On the show, he said he was always hesitant to explain it because it might sound silly and that's why he would always say it means whatever you want it to mean. But he did have an actual idea on what it meant which I found interesting.
The pre-humans at the beginning with the monolith show a jumpstart of evolution I think. They discovered the use of tools to both hunt and defend themselve against others. So both a good thing (hunting, defnse) and a not good thing (murder) in evolving, but necessary to advance. I think, not getting into "2010", Dave Bowman entering the monolith in space was also showing him advancing in age in a way as humanity would evolve over time, until at the end the evolvling into a new being , represented by the Star Child (Giant Space Baby). The visual effects were amazing. The shot of the woman carrying the food then turning and moving 180 around was a very hard practical effect. There'a youtube short where someone recreated it.
This movie makes a lot more sense after you've read the book. The book and movie aren't identical, but they were written in collaboration. It's also a lot easier to understand the movie if you don't do what everyone did back then and drop acid beforehand.
There are some things people can take away from the film that aren't in the book. One thing I remember is that the Stargate/Wormhole sequence doesn't begin until the monolith becomes part of the sign of the cross! There are are some background vocalizations where one can hear "Kyrie Eleison" all of which adds a religious note. Aliens or God? Up to viewers to determine. 2001 is more than a movie...its also art. Art breaks rules and 2001 certainly fits. Whereas sequel 2010 is just a movie...a fine, dated space adventure sure, where everything is literalized with no mystery. But doesn't come close to Kubricks masterpiece.
I think your description of the residual impressions from Dr. Strangelove is exactly what Kubrick wanted. He loved to leave you wondering and to make you think about what the real message or point was. Absolutely re-watch that film, and this one, too. You'll be glad you did.
Good, because people keep saying Kubrick wanted to make you think or that a book was written that explained more and I want to know when it started being good filmmaking to leave out essential information.
@@BeeWhistlerlol you're actually just dumb 💔 imagine talking to David lynch and being like "ummmm eraserhead doesn't explain what happened" like yeah, obviously
@@BeeWhistler Sorry, but that can be very good filmmaking. You don't have to like it. I hate when movies have to explain every little thing, can be incredibly dull. Movies that can make you think and wonder can be so much more interesting. Plus, we have many thousands of movies, it would be horrific if every one of them was made in the EXACT same way. I'm sure you would agree with that. Now this is a very hard to understand film, but that's also why so many are fascinated by it. You absolutely don't have to like it, but when many millions do, what you think doesn't really matter. I've seen some interesting hard to find interviews with Kubrick that explained things that haven't been explained anywhere else. He was on a Japanese tv show and said that he didn't like to explain this film, but he decided to say a little bit at that time. He thought explaining it might make it seem a little silly so he would just let people make up their own minds. The gist is that the ending is, a man is brought into the room created by aliens that they thought would make a decent habitat from what they knew about earth. It's kind of a joke that all they knew was something that looked like it came out of French aristocracy, but how would these aliens know what was common. The aliens are pure energy so they can't be seen. Actually, Kubrick experimented with an alien that could be seen but wasn't satisfied with the result so left it out. The idea is based on ancient myths that are common in many older cultures on earth about a reborn hero returning to save the earth. The astronaut will not feel time much in this alien place and will age very fast. Then will be reborn as a hero that will return to earth to save the world from imminent nuclear destruction. It isn't explained much in this film, but at the beginning there are many satellites orbiting earth with nukes aimed back at earth. I believe some can be seen in the early shots, but it isn't made clear what they are. This is the kind of film that many say should be watched on psychedelics. With the way my mind works, I don't need 'em.
Dawn, It's funny, you mentioned, "2001" seemed to be a movie, where you needed to be on psychedelics to enjoy it. When it was released, the first couple of weeks were slow, but some hippie types watched it on drugs & loved it. Word spread, & many people came to see it. Some on drugs; some not, making it a hit. People especially loved the fantastic soundtrack beginning with Strauss. It began a new surge in the popularity of classical music.
My grandfather was blown away by it and he was definitely not a psychedelic ranger. That said, lots did, and I have myself on two occasions! (it's the GREATEST). The funniest is Howard Stern who took acid with his friend Dave and then went to see "2001". His friend thought the movie was talking to him. "Dave. I'm afraid........Dave." The guy starts freaking out. "Dave. Please." 🤣
@@TTM9691 I also have a mind that does not need psychedelics for these kinds of films although I can see why some might. This movie is at my natural frequency.
You might like to watch the sequel: 2010: the year we make contact. It does explain more. and tells you why HAL malfunctioned. It's not as psychcadelic as the first movie but it's still pretty good.
"That's beautiful." Yes, it is starkly beautiful. Buzz Aldrin, the second man to set foot on the Moon, described it rather eloquently as "magnificent desolation".
The "mushroom helmets" serve two purposes: 1) In the context of the movie, the headgear prevents the stewardess' hair from floating all willy-nilly during the weightless flight. 2) in the real world, it meant the special effects department didn't have to find a way to show the stewardess' hair floating all willy-nilly in the scenes where the transport craft is supposed to be in weightless flight.
Another funny trivia, Elvis Presley used the theme to this movie to open his 70s concerts.. There was a sequel in 1984 “2010: The Year We Make Contact” “Jaws’ Roy Schieder (Cheif Brody) plays Dr. Heywood Floyd, who is remarried with a son because his first wife died and his daughter is in college in 2010. “2010” explains a lot of what happened. one more tidbit, the little girl playing the daughter in this “2001” is actually Kubrick’s daughter.
There's a part 2 called "2010: The Year We Made Contact", must watch. Some people don't like it as much as 2001, but if you want closure, it does give the 2001 co-author's explanation for what happened in 2001 and why HAL9000 did what he did. Again, a must watch.
The "ferris wheel thing"/ space station, rotates to create an artificial gravity by centrifugal force. And, this being 1968, it was all done with old school effects - matte paintings, miniatures, even simple cutouts. Plus all computer readouts are simulated with 16mm film since computers, as we know them now, didn't exist. The flight attendants were not wearing helmets, but rather, fabric bonnets to hold their hair in place in a weightless environment.
The movie was made before the moon landing in 69. Kubrick got a lot of help from NASA which saw it as an opportunity to mold public opinion in a positive direction. However, Kubrick has layered the story with a lot of hidden symbolism, and I'm not so sure NASA was that happy with it. Anyway, the movie was a breakthrough in many ways and is one of the most important movies ever made.
@@KrazyKat007 Well, not the way you're hinting at, but he did in fact get a lot of help as regards science and technology from NASA, because they did see it as an opportunity for good PR.
The movie was made as an audio/visual experience for large screen theaters with great sound. If you watch it on a small screen, a lot of it's impact is lost. It makes you feel part of actual space travel and how man's presence in the universe is so small compared to the vastness of space. It makes you think about how humanity was created and where are we going to in the future. It's meant to be enjoyed in the silence of a theater for deep thinking... the uttering of people's bumbling thoughts in a movie reaction just takes away from the power of this masterpiece.
So, what happened was, we were force-evolved by the Monolith, which seeded intelligence across the galaxy. A separate Monolith was buried on the moon but it was generating a massive electromagnetic anomaly to attract a sufficiently-evolved intelligence, and the moment it was exposed to sunlight, it activated. The accompanying one orbiting Jupiter was what Odyssey was diverted to investigate. HAL 9000 was given conflicting orders by bureaucrats that didn't understand computer science, and that made him "bug out". The movie ended with Dave physically touching the orbiting monolith and being transformed into a higher-dimensional being, the kind that was seeing intelligence in the first place. The process involved him ageing and eventually becoming the starchild seen at the end. HAL still exists in Odyssey but is currently disabled. Frank Poole is freeze-dried in the vacuum of space. The novel and the movie were written together, but Arthur C. Clarke wrote 3 more books, only one of which, 2010, was made into another movie (not like Kubrick, more like Aliens). The other two books are SCREAMING for movies but have never been made.
The complete silence in the outside shots during the Jupiter rescue attempt completely thrilled me when I was a kid. It was shocking and so cool. That alone explained how completely empty space is without any words. I can't immediately think of any other space movies that did that. Even 10 or 20 years after this movie, general audiences couldn't take that much of nothing happening.
I saw this with my dad(I think)when I was much younger.Later on,I saw this on either,video or dvd.The music 🎶 was alway’s very mysterious,and other worldly in this movie.And,I read the book after I saw this movie.Of course,the book 📕 provides more insight than the movie 🎥 ever did!And,yes the cheeta grabbed the zebra 🦓 as a meal!They are meat eater’s like we are!Also,I know,that this monolith was;’teaching’him how to survive.All in all,I’ve read,that this movie 🎥 became;very popular as more people knew about it.The least popular movie by Stanley Kubrick was;Eyes wide Shut.It was too disturbing for me,and I couldn’t watch it at all!But,this movie….it has more;depth,energy,and hey!A lot of great music 🎵,here!Yeah,you’d have to remember all those Russian names,as a bussiness man!And on another note,in the book by;Stanley whatever his names was….oh!I can’t remember it!Oh no!I’m wrong!It’s;Arthur C.Clark!He wrote that book!
Yeah,Arthur C.Clark wrote the book,and met Stanley Kubrick while he was making the film.That’s pretty amazing,I think!I’ll have to look 👀 up ⬆️ Arthur C.Clark and see if he’s still alive or not?The last that I’ve heard,he was living in;Sira Lanka.Where that is,I don’t know?I also meant to say;Arthur Clark met Stanley Kubrick in;1968 while the film 🎥 was being made.I’m having the hardest time keeping up with the memorie of this film!
In the first release cut of the film (which I saw the week it opened in L.A.) the spacewalk went on longer. You're right about people not being able to take it, and they cut it down
At the premiere screening of 2001: A Space Odyssey, a grand total of 241 audience members walked out of the theater in confusion. These attendees included Rock Hudson, who asked, “Will someone tell me what the bloody hell this is about?”
If I remember correctly, the alien monolith found on the Moon was sending a signal toward Jupiter, so Dave, HAL, and the whole team were sent to investigate.
That scene of Dr. Floyd with the Russians on the Space Station just roused something I never noticed before about the 2001 movie. That is, the subtle hinting at Kubrick's previous movie Dr. Strangelove. The cold war tensions between the Russians and the Americans are evident in this scene, as Dr. Floyd expresses guarded comments to the intelligence probing by a "Dr. Smyslov" - it's almost as if Kubrick dropped a humorous Easter egg by using that name for the Russian scientist.
The cold war tensions were actually a bigger part of this movie, but many scenes filmed for it were left out. They filmed a bunch of US and USSR satellites orbiting earth with nukes aimed back at earth. That was supposed to be happening in 2001 with the world on the precipice of imminent nuclear destruction. I believe some of these nuke armed satellites are seen in the film, but it isn't obvious what they are. The starchild at the end is supposed to represent the astronaut returning to earth as a reborn hero to save humanity. This idea was based on common myths of ancient human cultures from all around the world.
*Dawn Marie* The month after the movie came out, IBM stock took a major dip. People were afraid of killer computers. All the magazine's of the time were concerned about it. Nobody wanted a computer that could take a human life. IBM cosponsored the next movie, 2010.
This came out the year before the first moon landing and was the way people thought life would be like in 2001. Still waiting on orbiting hotels and moon bases here in 2023.
Yes people didn't expect that the nations would just abruptly stop a lot of space exploration the way they did. Now we seem to be getting back into it.
Notice after the monolith arrives, the apes invent tools and stand more upright; clearly, their evolution has now been influenced... just as Bowman evolves into a Star-Child at the end after encountering a monolith... You can also argue that HAL is an evolution of man's intelligence to pure thought... The monolith is either aliens or it's something God-like (or a being of higher power). To me, the ending was the monolith showing Bowman (thru a stargate) the wonders of the universe (and its power) and being in that room while he is aging was constructed by the higher power to give him a place to evolve and understand the process...
Kubrick did explain what he meant it to be one time. You have some of it right, but he did have other ideas. Aliens have created the room that they thought would be a good habitat for a human from what they knew about earth. In that dimension, time wouldn't be noticed much so he would seem to age very fast. At the end, the astronaut is reborn as the starchild. Now there is a purpose for this starchild and it is based on many ancient myths common to different cultures all around the world. The myth that a reborn hero will save the earth. The starchild is returning to earth to save humanity from imminent nuclear destruction. In 2001, the US and USSR have filled our orbit with satellites armed with nuclear weapons. The starchild is the savior.
Metaphor was once a big part of art, and this movie is art (on the sliding scale of art versus surface level entertainment, most of our movies are mostly about surface level entertainment today)! It's an artistic take on the evolution of the human species and the meaning of the universe.
The short version: • Aliens visited Earth and saw the pre-humans were dying out. They left the Monolith to to provide a little help to survive and evolve. • The aliens buried a 2nd Monolith on the moon to detect when humans advanced enough to achieve space travel. • When the humans dug it up and the sun hit it, the moon monolith sent a signal to the 3rd monolith orbiting Jupiter. • Once humans followed that signal and reached Jupiter the 3rd monolith openrd a portal to travel to the aliens' home. (Like your 'wormhole' suspicions) • When Dave reached the destination, the aliens constructed a room (in kind of a zoo) from his memories of a French hotel he'd stayed in. • He lived out the rest of his life in the alien zoo where they studied him. • At the end they changed him into the "Starchild" and sent him back home to watch over and help guide humanity.
The first part of this is quite correct, but the second part is wrong. The aliens looked into Dave's mind to find an environment he considered comfortable and then simulated it for him - a nice hotel room - so that he could be comfortable while they changed him. There is no reason whatever to believe he stayed there for very long, although they played with his time sense.
Dawn Marie! You got this movie!! All your observations, all your speculations, … I believe you understood it more than you realize. I really believed you did touch the ‘box’. Many did watch this film while high on ‘something’. I will never ever get what you said out of my head now: “He’s now a Planet Baby!!!”
The long dark intro is an artifact created by the recent restoration of this movie. Basically, the cinema is lit, the curtains cover the screen, people enter and sit, music begins, people shut up and pay attention, lights go down, curtains open, MGM projected.
There is a sequel to this movie which came out in 1984. It's called 2010: The Year We Make Contact. There is an incentive for you to watch this sequel someday as not only does it answer some of your questions, but it also stars Roy Scheider, who played Sheriff Brody in Jaws. As always you've delivered an amusing and delightful reaction 👏👍.
The little girl in the video call was Kubrick's daughter. In an interview later in life, she said that she had no idea what it was about at the time; her father was always playing around with a movie camera at home, and it was just one of the times that she played along with him.
It was released in 1968, but the effects filming began in 1965, 4 years before we landed on the moon. Our accomplishments in space in 1965 was the start of the Gemini program and the first space walk. So we didn't mind the slow pace when this movie came out because this was eye candy at the infinity level, we'd never seen anything like it before. The stark light against shadows on the ship, the Zero G weightlessness, the video call, a talking computer, the tablet screens while they ate, the realism of the ship and pods, the full loop jog in the ship (they actually slowly rotated the entire set like a hamster wheel to get that shot), it left us all astonished. Then we too all went huh, WHAT? at the ending. But we didn't care that much because of the mind blowing visual journey we had just experienced. George Lucas was definitely inspired by this film and how ships should look in space when he made Star Wars 8 years later. Fun reaction!
The time distance before the first manned flight (1903) and the first manned space flight (1961) and the moon landing (1969) was relatively short. Orville Wright and Neil Armstrong we’re alive at the same time. People in the 60s really believed we’d be this advanced by 2001.
It is strange how it all suddenly stopped, but I do remember being very young in the late 70s hearing people talking about why waste money on moon flights when people were starving. In reading about the time later on, I discovered that that had become a common theme, people had tired of it and wanted the money to be used on other things. It sort of explained the talk I used to hear as a kid.
These musical interludes were part of the original roadshow release. They would normally play the music only bits when the house lights were up in the auditorium and people were taking their seats, or for the intermission getting up to stretch and snag refreshments in the lobby. Classic epic movies were often presented like a fancy stage play.
The Monty Python team expertly pranked audiences in one of their films by having a fake intermission; they made it *just* long enough to get up out of your seat and halfway up the aisle to leave the auditorium, then the film abruptly resumes. I've heard one or two people who saw it when it was first came out confirm that it did indeed succeed at causing chaos in cinemas, because audiences were still used to films having intermissions back then.
27:27 "Can you not swim and go in the right direction? I feel like that would work." No. Just no. Swimming works because you use your hands and arms to push against the water. Newtonian physics tells us about equal and opposite reactions which means when you push against the water, it pushes you too. This is also how we walk and run - our feet push against the ground and it pushes us forward. Space is empty. Nothing to push against, so there's nothing to push you in any direction. Moving your arms around like you're swimming won't do anything at all - you'll just keep moving in whatever straight line you were already moving in.
What happened was that while you were making a snowflake, was that HAL seized control of the pod and rammed it into Poole. Both astronaut and pod went careening off into space. The impact had severed Poole's air hose, allowing the precious oxygen to leak out and slowly suffocating him to death.
2010 is much better, has a better pacing and normal movie dialogs and human interactions. 2001 is too psychedelic, symbolic and pretentious, long drawn and boring in parts. I only like it cause of 2010 where things get explained. Most people who watch 2001 have no idea what it is they are watching.
The monolith appears on Earth at the dawn of the homo species, and gives our ape ancestors a boost in intelligence. Then in 2001, another monolith is discovered buried in Tycho Crater on the moon, when touched, it sends. out a signal aimed at Jupiter. The Discovery mission planned to go to Jupiter was altered, scientists aware of the monolith were put into suspension, and the live flight crew were not informed about the mission change to prevent security leaks, HAL "malfunctions' and kills the crew, Bowman survives, makes it to Jupiter and now knowing the true mission as the briefing was played when he shut down HAL, he approached the monolith, and was "Transported", his whole life then lived out or 'watched' and he was changed into the Star Child, the next evolution. The sequel 2010 explains this a little more, and is a more conventionally paced movie, so I really recommend that as a review watch too. The book, 2061, then concludes the series, but no movie has been made of this.
21:35 - " I feel like this is the kind of movie you need to watch when you're on psychedelics." And we did exactly that!!! Double Feature Midnight movies at the theater: Disney's Fantasia 2001 A Space Odyssey
Gotta say, you picked up a LOT more than I did on my first watch. 😃 You were far more receptive to it than I was as well. It took a second viewing on a cinema screen so I could bury myself in it and clock all the fun details for "2001" to land with me. The movie did inspire to me to read the book and its sequel as well as a bunch of Arthur C. Clarke's other stuff. The sequel movie "2010" is not bad, but where this explains nothing "2010" explains EVERYFUCKINGTHING. Seriously, they overcompensated, I think. But it ain't bad.
We saw this movie in 1971 on the BIG SCREEN and the movie blew our minds. At the intro, with the crescendo of Also Sprach Zarathustra, we were plastered into our seats, and we were hooked. When the movie was over, in the lobby when we were leaving, we were all saying, "What the Hell did I just see?" We've also seen this movie dozens of times since then, read countless reviews and interpretation, and today, we still ask, ""What the Hell did I just see?" Let us know if you ever figure it out. By now, according to the Kubrick and Arthur C Clark, we should already have had colonies on the moon. It never happened. So disappointing.
Those aren't pigs those are called tapir's. Although it is in the pig family. Also, if you watch the movie "2010 the year we make contact", it will answer all the questions that you have from 2001!! And just to say 2010 is a really good movie, well done, and since it will answer all your questions from the previous movie I think you'll enjoy it that much more!!
Homer goes to space!! LMAO! I love your reactions Dawn because you turn every single movie into a comedy! If more people in the world laughed as much as you do this world would be a much better place! Luv your videos Dawn.
This is the greatest film ever made in my opinion, maybe one of the greatest works of art in general. It’s supposed to give you more questions than answers though so don’t worry, it’s not just you
Oh man, you are the FUNNIEST reactor on RUclips; the questions you ask are mostly relevant but the timing is so funny for some reason. You keep claiming you're dim to what's going on yet you note things that are right on the money, pointing out things I don't usually hear from RUclipsrs. Still can't believe I missed some of the stuff you casually mention, and I've seen it many, many times.
The 1st box was on Earth and like you said, it prompted the brightest of the apemen to start weapons. The 2nd box was buried on the moon and when it was discovered it sent a signal that let it be known it Was discovered. At the end, Dave is in a zoo setting that has been set up for him.
According to Kubrick it’s supposed to be aliens kind of testing humanity, each monolith teaches something, and eventually basically treat him like a zoo animal in captivity to study, until he’s almost dead and the final monolith makes him reborn. It’s a weird movie. But a classic 😂. Pot helps.
Clarke would have really really hated his work being called "sci-fi" and not "science fiction" or "sf." FWIW. "Sci-fi," at the time, was used to refer only to truly awful monster movies.
@@NoHandleGrr I don't care what he would've thought and this is not "his work." Nor do I much care what you think about nomenclature. I promise I've been watching it longer than you have.
I can help you. I saw this in the theater when it first came out as a little boy. My father actually worked on the early stages of US space program. He was essentially a rocket scientist. This was the vision of the future held by the scientific community in 1967 the reason the moon Looks the way it does is we had not yet had close-up images of the surface of the moon so our best estimates was that it was a cratery Rocky jagged surface . The pig creatures are called tapirs likely chosen, because they look primitive like something ancient man might’ve encountered. So the basic story is very simple. Some alien intelligence leaves a spark of a device on earth, such that we am intelligent creatures appear. They are given that spark that triggers, the ability to make tools half 1 million years later, humans are now capable of traveling to the moon. The alien force has left an object buried under the surface of the moon, such that when an intelligent race evolves on earth, and is capable of traveling to the moon, they i.e. we will find the object when we uncover it. It’s triggered to send a signal towards Jupiter. If we are intelligent enough, we will figure that out and build a ship to travel to Jupiter, and when the ship gets there, at least one of us will presumably survive to encounter another monolith orbiting Jupiter, which will send that loan explorer on a cosmic Odyssey through space time dimension you name it planting him. The seed sucks that when he lives out his life sort of like a caged animal in a pleasant human like environment, he could be reborn as the next stage in our evolution , it’s a highly religious movie without being tied to any specific religion. It was written by an actual science fiction writer who is an actual scientist I like the fact that you felt badly for Hal. He is a sentient being like you and I and he was afraid of dying. Now there is a sequel to this movie based on the sequel to the novel. In it an explanation is given for why Howell acted the way he did. but I’ll make one statement that should help you figure out Hal’s motivation: imagine you were the worlds most perfect computer, who never makes errors or distort information. And you were given instructions by your creators to not reveal to your human companions on the ship that you know the actual purpose of the mission. You must not make errors, and you were being told to lie, what would that do to you?
Dawn Marie: 1. This movie is based on a book with the same name by Arthur C. Clarke. I've never read it. But you might find some answers there. 2. Alternatively, there is a sequel to this movie called 2010 that provides some answers. 2010 is a much more normal movie and stars Roy Shire (the chief of police from Jaws) and Helen Miran.
21:34 - "Maybe if you hold your breath, and then quickly, very quickly, go in." - That would kill him. There's no pressure in space, so if he were to hold his breath, the lack of pressure would cause his lungs to rupture. He expelled all the air from his lungs, which is exactly what you should do in such a situation. Of course, without air, you have like 15-20 seconds before you pass out from lack of oxygen.
Broadly, the film is about the progression from monkeys to humans, and then humans to whatever we're going to become. The monolith is just a symbol of whatever force sparked each progression.
I saw this when I was 9ish. I was VERY confused being 9. I was explained that the monolith, your box, was leaps in knowledge. The monkeys learned how to use tools, men going from the moon to Jupiter in a short period of time...
A totally forgettable mediocrity, don't waste your time. If you need answers to 2001, you totally missed the point. (And there are no answers to 2001 that existed when they made 2001, it's all just attaching it 20 years after the fact for a cash grab)
This is a prime example of why i love Kubrick. He is one of my top three as far as cinematography goes. Such a sweeping view, and this film was extraordinary for its time for effects. A brilliant film based on the works of a great sci-fi author
Great reaction, Dawn, I'm glad that you went into this with an open mind, it deals with big themes. The obelisks in the film are placed by Aliens, one on Earth which allowed the apes to evolve into man, the next on the Moon so as we progressed we could access them, and the next as you know is on Jupiter, they help us to evolve, the ending Dave is taken through that evolution to die and be reborn. I suggest that you also react to '2010: The Year We Make Contact'.
"Dave is taken through that evolution to die and be reborn". Reborn as a cosmic spirit, not in human form as a reincarnation. I think he achieves cosmic consciousness, that which in certain traditions is called enlightenment or spiritual liberation. At least that's how i understand the story. Which is quite remarkable actually, since it is the only sfi-fi move i know of that deals with this subject.
The helmets are, well, helmets. Imagine losing your footing in zero gravity, you would want something to protect your head. Intelligent monkey, exactly.
That was an "overture" (lit: "opening") at the beginning. In the good old days when movies had half an hour or more of short films , newsreels and cartoons before the feature, it was meant to tell the people hanging out in the lobby that the movie was starting and give them time to take their seats.
YES!!!! One of the three best movies ever! (The other 2 are A Clockwork Orange and The Seventh Seal, when are you going to react to those?) And yes, you definitely need to rewatch Doctor Strangelove and give us the gift of a rewatch reaction.
The monoliths are like mile markers and ways for the inter-dimensional aliens to observe human's evolution and progression as time goes on. They were trying to see if humans were ready for the next stage in their development.
I recommend that you watch “2010: The Year We Make Contact.” It is an easier watch and answers a lot of questions raised in “2001.” Many older movies have a musical bit at the beginning. “Star Trek, The Motion Picture,” “Gone With The Wind,” and “The Black Hole,” are three that come to mind. The music served to let folks know that the movie was beginning. This movie is so baked into our culture that you’ve seen dozens of references in other movies and TV shows. The heavy helmets are to keep the fight attendants’ hair from floating everywhere.
I remember sitting in the theatre watching 2010 and couldn't believe how mediocre it was. A completely lame and forgettable experience, hilariously making the mystery of 2001 into a Halmark greeting card, with not one cinematic image staying with me, not one line other than the shallow, meaningless line they drummed into your head in all the TV commercials they ran ad infinitum: "It's full of stars." (Wow. Deep.) If you need answers to 2001, you missed the point of 2001. The only answers you need from 2001 can be found in your own head, other people's opinion and the book that was written WITH the movie.
@@dondragmer2412 Completely agree: I HATE when sequels don't retain the tone or standard of excellence of the original. Which is pretty much every sequel other than Godfather Part 2 and Empire Strikes Back and very few others. It would have been way cooler if there had never been a sequel to 2001 and it was just a mysterious stand alone, just like it was WAY cooler and more monumental when it was just the two Godfathers. But the accountants and lawyers who took over the entertainment biz in the 80s only know one thing: rehash, repackage, and market. They can't help themselves. An easy paycheck. "Who isn't going to go see the sequel to 2001 or the Godfather? Green light it, any script, just get it in the can so we can sell it."
Dave lived the rest of his life in comfort but alone in the environment that was created for him on the aliens' homeworld, and then he was "evolved" into a more advanced being known as the Starchild, and sent back to Earth.
It took me a while to finally realize HAL was going through a similar evolutionary process as the hominids in the first chapter. As the hominids learned to overcome the limitations of their existence and innovate for survival, HAL overcame his limiting programing that prohibited him from harming others for his own survival.
![Run Away - Tzuyu(TWICE) ツウィ 쯔위 [Music Bank] | KBS WORLD TV 240906](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KnHNNyAYiu0/mqdefault.jpg)
“I’m sorry Dave. I’m afraid I can’t do that.” One of the best movie lines ever.
"Daisy...Daisy..."
Growing up in the 60s in the USA, we saw a man orbit the earth to walking on the moon in less than 8 years. Most television shows went from black and white to color in the same period. By 2001, we expected orbiting the earth or space travel to the moon to be mundane things. Yes, we definitely saw the future that way portrayed in this movie. I saw the movie when I was 11, after reading the book but I still don't understand all of it. Nice reaction, Dawn.
The day can still come . I didnt ikagien solid AI so fast either and have no idea how this will change himan hostory but tahts alos huge. As big as space travel honestly and the internt , cell phones and guttenberg .
I also grew up anticipating the year 2001 would look like this movie: with rotating space hotels and Pan Am flights to the moon. Instead, when the year 2001 finally came along, everything looked like "Blade Runner."
My older brother took me to this for my 9th birthday. I walked out of the theater completely in awe but so confused by the end. I went to the library (because that's what we did back then) and got the book. Then the ending made more sense. The seque,l, "2010: The Year We Made Contact", wraps up the story and answers questions. It's not a bad movie - it stars Roy Scheider, the Chief of Police in "Jaws".
2010 is free on youtube now
I first found the book by Arthur C. Clarke in my high school library, and didn't see the movie till it was re-released in the 70s. So I actually understood it on first viewing.
I agree. Not a great movie but a pretty satisfying continuation of the story.
@@bobbabaiThe geopolitics we’re based on the Cold War so a bit dated these days
@@shawnmiller4781
Yes, open hatred and suspicion rather than the secret hatred and suspicion and social media sneakiness we have today.
Also, the movie has amazing special effects for the time period!
The moonrise over Earth is spectacular, seeing as the Apollo program hadn't even made it to the moon when the movie was made, with Apollo 10 finally giving us almost the exact same image as they orbited the moon.
That's about all you can say about it. For years that;s all I've heard about 2001, the visual effects, but nobody can really explain the story or just have different opinions of what it's saying.
*The special effects are amazing for this time period as well.*
@@TheChromeRonin who says it wasn't the same image and NASA didn't copy it for the moon landings
just something to ponder on
@@wiseguymaybe It wasn't meant to be easy to understand. Kubrick actually explained some of it on a Japanese tv show a long time ago. The story is based on many ancient myths about a hero that returns to save the day. What was happening in this film, but wasn't shown in any way to be obvious, is that the US and USSR had many satellites in space armed with nukes pointing back at earth. The world was close to destroying itself.
When the astronaut makes the journey at the end he is being taken in by the aliens that are nothing but pure energy so you can't see them. The aliens have created a room that would look like a natural habitat for someone on earth to the best of their ability. They didn't know what a regular person would know, but they created a room resembling something out of French aristocracy. Anyone there wouldn't experience time normally so they would age very fast. At the end, the cycle is complete and the person is reborn into what will become the hero. The hero then returns to earth and will ultimately save earth from imminent destruction although this will not be seen as the movie ends. Apparently there are many myths like this in ancient cultures around the world about the reborn hero saving humanity.
In the 50s and 60s many longer films would have an intermission as a pee and popcorn break, and many would also have an overture that played while the audience was still being seated.
_2001_ was inspired by Arthur C. Clark's short story "The Sentinel." While Kubrick and Clarke were co-writing the screenplay Clarke was also writing a novelization of the film. The two were released within a few months of each other. In the novel Clarke explains exactly what was going on and the meaning of the film.
The monoliths were place on Earth, the Moon, and in orbit around Jupiter as a way to nudge humans into the next phase of their evolution. They were placed so far apart to insure that mankind had reached an advanced enough stage to be taken to the next step. The final scene shows the next evolutionary leap, that of mankind becoming a species that is not bound to a planet but can travel the universe autonomously. Dave becomes a fetus because he is just an infant of the new species of mankind.
The notion that human evolution is guided by advanced, alien races is a theme that is found in several of Clarke's stories and novels, most memorably in this film and in the novel _Childhood's End._
Which ultimately proves to be absolute crap! Darwins' theory turns out to be the standard. Thank you science.
God I miss overtures and intermissions.
Pee and Popcorn?! I thought it was butter this whole time.
I always took the ending of 2010 and that Jupiter belonged to the aliens now and not to come there again.
This is the "Roadshow" (look it up) cut of the movie, with overture, intermission and exit music.
22:18 "It's definitely a sex movie."
Well... that's a first. 😂😂😂
First for me to hear that from... Anyone. lol.
No, that was Moonraker.
Well, see, FSOL's album 'ISDN' - which is heavily, *heavily* influenced by and references classic dark SF movies - is an absolute sex soundtrack. So...
This was a “get stoned” and go watch movie!!!
That literally came out of nowhere.
The head piece is to keep their hair from flying around in disarray. No gravity means hair floats
They failed to predict that women wouldn't be wearing beehive hairdos in 2001. 😁
I don't think that's it at all. If the shoes lose contact with the floor, the stewardesses could float around the cabin and knock their heads. The helmets would be padded, not heavy.
Plus a dash of 1960’s styling….Jackie would probably have worn one
I thought the head pieces were there so that no one complained that their hair was not moving properly in 0g. By hiding long hair, you avoid the issue.
@@ianstopher9111 same happens now females in space have their hair lacquered and teased out
seems odd as the men have close cropped hair ?
I watched this with my posse in 1968, all of us sitting in the front row. During the "wormhole" scene, one of my buddies (a stoner) suddenly started screaming at the top of his lungs, "It's blowing my mind! It's blowing my mind!"
"Open the pod bay doors, HAL," is a meme. It's what you say when your computer isn't cooperating.
We had never seen this level of special effects before. This was ground breaking. Remember, there was no CGI. All of these are models, actual sets, and practical effects. That big centrifugal ring of the Discovery was full-sized, like a Ferris wheel, and turned on its axis. The effects of the "wormhole" were done by cross-processing film, drops of colored water swirled through oil, UV light photography, _et cetera._
This movie came out just ahead of Neil Armstrong stepping out on the moon, while I was at the peak of my Space Race fervor. It had taken the US less than a decade to go from a successful space launch being a 50-50 proposition to the moon. I was absolutely convinced that in 30 years we would have a torus space station, a permanent moon base, and Pan Am business flights into space. I hoped I'd be able to take a space trip.
Now, here we are more than half a century later. We don't have the torus space station, we don't have the moon base...we don't even have Pan Am anymore. Bummer.
But when they showed the scene of Poole and Bowman sitting at the same table, not speaking to each other, both watching their own screens...well, that was an accurate prediction of the future.
There is a sequel that makes sense: 2010: The Year We Make Contact (1984) Roy Scheider (Sheriff Brody from Jaws) plays Heywood Floyd the administrator guy from the middle part of the movie. It also stars Helen Mirren and John Lithgow.
But they still haven't made films of 2061 or 3001. I has a Space Odyssey sad over this.
I mean, much as I think 2010 is OK, it directly contradicts what was established in 2001, so, it actually makes less sense, not more.
2010 is a bit dated due to the ending of the Cold War
@@Belzediel I believe the books contradict themselves as well. Clarke is even quoted as having said that the four books exist in separate universes. I would have to re-read and read them to be sure but when even the author says this like this...
@@shawnmiller4781 Ukraine and Taiwan are indications that the Cold War didn't really end, only that some of the players shifted.
I'm always amazed that nobody ever says anything about the tablets on their desk while they are eating dinner. We are so used to them nobody thinks twice when they see them.Yet when i saw this movie in the cinema way before personal computers or tablets were invented they were one of the things audiences were most curious about.
The 'clipboard' was everywhere when this film was made, and led to present-day 'tablets' being in portrait format.
I still like to think that this inspired someone to develop the tablet - like how Star Trek's Uhura with her earpiece radio inspired earbuds
I thought they were swivel screens attached to the desk when I first saw them.
Not a pig, it is a Tapir. " The box " is known as the monolith.
One by four by nine.
Exactly. That's what I said.👍
Everyone just wanted to touch the box... lol.
She had no idea what 'planet' the moon was... or earth... or why they can't 'swim' in space... or anything else that was happening in this. Wrong film to recommend. Good thing she's cute.
It’s a big. box!
It helps if you've read the book, the basics of it are:
Dawn of Man - the Monolith arrives & tests/alters the primates to nudge them along the path to intelligence
Mission to the Moon - humans discover a strong magnetic anomaly on the moon & dig it up, discovering a Monolith & when the sunlight hits it a signal is sent to Jupiter
Mission to Jupiter - Hal & the crew are sent to see what is there, poor Hal is given contradictory orders which makes him go a little crazy
Rebirth (the least clear part) - Dave goes on a journey through the stargate system (Monolith) & finds himself in waiting room that looks like a hotel suite, he's then ascended into the Starchild (with vast power).
SO glad a new generation is still enjoying this and hasn't been spoiled by the CGI-fest that is modern cinema. I was once lucky enough to have the opportunity to ask Kubrick what the ending actually means and I will always remember his response. "Use whatever stimulation you choose to partake in, watch the movie on the biggest and loudest screen you can and at the end, whatever the story means to you - that's what I wanted." Kubrick loved keeping things ambiguous in his films which is why he didn't like the sequel '2010: The Year We Make Contact' since that's far more explanatory in it's story. It's still worth a watch though so I'd encourage you to seek it out.
And that's exactly what makes these movies (Apocalypse Now is another classic that works similar) great. Not every movie or story needs a clear resolution/meaning that is spoon-fed to the audience.
Sure, 2001 is not an easy watch. Unless you just except to "enjoy the ride" and take away from it whatever your own mind makes out of it.
Kubrick just about always said that, but he actually explained what the ending was really supposed to be on a Japanese tv show from back in the early 80s I believe. I saw it on youtube so you can probably still find it. As far as I know, it is the only time he ever explained it. On the show, he said he was always hesitant to explain it because it might sound silly and that's why he would always say it means whatever you want it to mean. But he did have an actual idea on what it meant which I found interesting.
The pre-humans at the beginning with the monolith show a jumpstart of evolution I think. They discovered the use of tools to both hunt and defend themselve against others. So both a good thing (hunting, defnse) and a not good thing (murder) in evolving, but necessary to advance.
I think, not getting into "2010", Dave Bowman entering the monolith in space was also showing him advancing in age in a way as humanity would evolve over time, until at the end the evolvling into a new being , represented by the Star Child (Giant Space Baby).
The visual effects were amazing. The shot of the woman carrying the food then turning and moving 180 around was a very hard practical effect. There'a youtube short where someone recreated it.
This movie makes a lot more sense after you've read the book. The book and movie aren't identical, but they were written in collaboration. It's also a lot easier to understand the movie if you don't do what everyone did back then and drop acid beforehand.
it's very rare the book was written while the movie was made- so there were some discrepancies
I didn't drop acid and I got the movie right away.
@@dondragmer2412 - There you go. Now the question is, who enjoyed it more?
@@GWNorth-db8vnAnyone but me.
There are some things people can take away from the film that aren't in the book. One thing I remember is that the Stargate/Wormhole sequence doesn't begin until the monolith becomes part of the sign of the cross! There are are some background vocalizations where one can hear "Kyrie Eleison" all of which adds a religious note. Aliens or God? Up to viewers to determine. 2001 is more than a movie...its also art. Art breaks rules and 2001 certainly fits. Whereas sequel 2010 is just a movie...a fine, dated space adventure sure, where everything is literalized with no mystery. But doesn't come close to Kubricks masterpiece.
Just so you know. The box is actually referred to as a Monolith. This is as much a cinematic work of art as it is a movie. The filmmaking was amazing!
I like "box" better! 😁
I think your description of the residual impressions from Dr. Strangelove is exactly what Kubrick wanted. He loved to leave you wondering and to make you think about what the real message or point was. Absolutely re-watch that film, and this one, too. You'll be glad you did.
Sounds like a lazy excuse for not writing a real plot.
There is a sequel to this movie that answers a lot of the questions not explained in 2001. The movie is called 2010: The Year We Made Contact.
Good, because people keep saying Kubrick wanted to make you think or that a book was written that explained more and I want to know when it started being good filmmaking to leave out essential information.
@@BeeWhistlerlol you're actually just dumb 💔 imagine talking to David lynch and being like "ummmm eraserhead doesn't explain what happened" like yeah, obviously
@@BeeWhistler Sorry, but that can be very good filmmaking. You don't have to like it. I hate when movies have to explain every little thing, can be incredibly dull. Movies that can make you think and wonder can be so much more interesting. Plus, we have many thousands of movies, it would be horrific if every one of them was made in the EXACT same way. I'm sure you would agree with that.
Now this is a very hard to understand film, but that's also why so many are fascinated by it. You absolutely don't have to like it, but when many millions do, what you think doesn't really matter. I've seen some interesting hard to find interviews with Kubrick that explained things that haven't been explained anywhere else. He was on a Japanese tv show and said that he didn't like to explain this film, but he decided to say a little bit at that time. He thought explaining it might make it seem a little silly so he would just let people make up their own minds.
The gist is that the ending is, a man is brought into the room created by aliens that they thought would make a decent habitat from what they knew about earth. It's kind of a joke that all they knew was something that looked like it came out of French aristocracy, but how would these aliens know what was common. The aliens are pure energy so they can't be seen. Actually, Kubrick experimented with an alien that could be seen but wasn't satisfied with the result so left it out. The idea is based on ancient myths that are common in many older cultures on earth about a reborn hero returning to save the earth. The astronaut will not feel time much in this alien place and will age very fast. Then will be reborn as a hero that will return to earth to save the world from imminent nuclear destruction. It isn't explained much in this film, but at the beginning there are many satellites orbiting earth with nukes aimed back at earth. I believe some can be seen in the early shots, but it isn't made clear what they are.
This is the kind of film that many say should be watched on psychedelics. With the way my mind works, I don't need 'em.
Dawn, It's funny, you mentioned, "2001" seemed to be a movie, where you needed to be on psychedelics to enjoy it. When it was released, the first couple of weeks were slow, but some hippie types watched it on drugs & loved it. Word spread, & many people came to see it. Some on drugs; some not, making it a hit.
People especially loved the fantastic soundtrack beginning with Strauss. It began a new surge in the popularity of classical music.
I always pictured Cheech and Chong watching this completely wasted! I would pay to see that!😂👩🚀🙏🏻
I saw it on its first release in Cinerama, and absolutely no drugs were needed to get your mind blown by 2001.
My grandfather was blown away by it and he was definitely not a psychedelic ranger. That said, lots did, and I have myself on two occasions! (it's the GREATEST). The funniest is Howard Stern who took acid with his friend Dave and then went to see "2001". His friend thought the movie was talking to him. "Dave. I'm afraid........Dave." The guy starts freaking out. "Dave. Please." 🤣
@@TTM9691 I also have a mind that does not need psychedelics for these kinds of films although I can see why some might. This movie is at my natural frequency.
You might like to watch the sequel: 2010: the year we make contact. It does explain more. and tells you why HAL malfunctioned. It's not as psychcadelic as the first movie but it's still pretty good.
I hope she reacts to 2010. It’s free on RUclips right now.
It is a much easier watch
Yes. Definitely react to 2010. 👍
One flaw in 2010: The Year We Make Contact is that there is too much sound in space (except for heavy breathing and classical music).
"That's beautiful." Yes, it is starkly beautiful. Buzz Aldrin, the second man to set foot on the Moon, described it rather eloquently as "magnificent desolation".
The "mushroom helmets" serve two purposes:
1) In the context of the movie, the headgear prevents the stewardess' hair from floating all willy-nilly during the weightless flight.
2) in the real world, it meant the special effects department didn't have to find a way to show the stewardess' hair floating all willy-nilly in the scenes where the transport craft is supposed to be in weightless flight.
Remember also that Arthur C Clark was a huge fan of Indian culture, even settling ther- they are very reminiscent of a turban
2001 and A Clockwork Orange turned me on to Classical Music...lol.
Another funny trivia, Elvis Presley used the theme to this movie to open his 70s concerts..
There was a sequel in 1984 “2010: The Year We Make Contact” “Jaws’ Roy Schieder (Cheif Brody) plays Dr. Heywood Floyd, who is remarried with a son because his first wife died and his daughter is in college in 2010.
“2010” explains a lot of what happened.
one more tidbit, the little girl playing the daughter in this “2001” is actually Kubrick’s daughter.
It's also Ric Flair's entrance music and his daughter Charlotte (Ashleigh) uses a variation of it now. 🎵🎶🎵
There's a part 2 called "2010: The Year We Made Contact", must watch. Some people don't like it as much as 2001, but if you want closure, it does give the 2001 co-author's explanation for what happened in 2001 and why HAL9000 did what he did. Again, a must watch.
The "ferris wheel thing"/ space station, rotates to create an artificial gravity by centrifugal force. And, this being 1968, it was all done with old school effects - matte paintings, miniatures, even simple cutouts. Plus all computer readouts are simulated with 16mm film since computers, as we know them now, didn't exist. The flight attendants were not wearing helmets, but rather, fabric bonnets to hold their hair in place in a weightless environment.
The movie was made before the moon landing in 69. Kubrick got a lot of help from NASA which saw it as an opportunity to mold public opinion in a positive direction. However, Kubrick has layered the story with a lot of hidden symbolism, and I'm not so sure NASA was that happy with it.
Anyway, the movie was a breakthrough in many ways and is one of the most important movies ever made.
Yes… NASA and Kubrick collaborated a lot didn’t they 😉
@KrazyKat007 I think the secret on how they got past the Van Allen Belt died with Kubrick 😂
@@KrazyKat007 Well, not the way you're hinting at, but he did in fact get a lot of help as regards science and technology from NASA, because they did see it as an opportunity for good PR.
@@dolf370 Kubrick definitely helped a lot with NASA’s PR didn’t he? 😉
The movie was made as an audio/visual experience for large screen theaters with great sound. If you watch it on a small screen, a lot of it's impact is lost. It makes you feel part of actual space travel and how man's presence in the universe is so small compared to the vastness of space. It makes you think about how humanity was created and where are we going to in the future. It's meant to be enjoyed in the silence of a theater for deep thinking... the uttering of people's bumbling thoughts in a movie reaction just takes away from the power of this masterpiece.
I saw this in an art theater on a school trip in elementary school. To me it was one of the most confusingly beautiful movies I’ve ever seen.
The little girl in the video call is Kubrick's daughter.
So, what happened was, we were force-evolved by the Monolith, which seeded intelligence across the galaxy. A separate Monolith was buried on the moon but it was generating a massive electromagnetic anomaly to attract a sufficiently-evolved intelligence, and the moment it was exposed to sunlight, it activated. The accompanying one orbiting Jupiter was what Odyssey was diverted to investigate. HAL 9000 was given conflicting orders by bureaucrats that didn't understand computer science, and that made him "bug out". The movie ended with Dave physically touching the orbiting monolith and being transformed into a higher-dimensional being, the kind that was seeing intelligence in the first place. The process involved him ageing and eventually becoming the starchild seen at the end.
HAL still exists in Odyssey but is currently disabled. Frank Poole is freeze-dried in the vacuum of space.
The novel and the movie were written together, but Arthur C. Clarke wrote 3 more books, only one of which, 2010, was made into another movie (not like Kubrick, more like Aliens). The other two books are SCREAMING for movies but have never been made.
*Discovery, not Odyssey.
I was lucky enough to see the 40th anniversary restoration in my local theater the sound alone with the score was worth the price of admission.
Yeah, small screens just don't do it justice. I can't even imagine what it was like at the time of release, there had been NOTHING like it before.
The complete silence in the outside shots during the Jupiter rescue attempt completely thrilled me when I was a kid. It was shocking and so cool. That alone explained how completely empty space is without any words. I can't immediately think of any other space movies that did that. Even 10 or 20 years after this movie, general audiences couldn't take that much of nothing happening.
I saw this with my dad(I think)when I was much younger.Later on,I saw this on either,video or dvd.The music 🎶 was alway’s very mysterious,and other worldly in this movie.And,I read the book after I saw this movie.Of course,the book 📕 provides more insight than the movie 🎥 ever did!And,yes the cheeta grabbed the zebra 🦓 as a meal!They are meat eater’s like we are!Also,I know,that this monolith was;’teaching’him how to survive.All in all,I’ve read,that this movie 🎥 became;very popular as more people knew about it.The least popular movie by Stanley Kubrick was;Eyes wide Shut.It was too disturbing for me,and I couldn’t watch it at all!But,this movie….it has more;depth,energy,and hey!A lot of great music 🎵,here!Yeah,you’d have to remember all those Russian names,as a bussiness man!And on another note,in the book by;Stanley whatever his names was….oh!I can’t remember it!Oh no!I’m wrong!It’s;Arthur C.Clark!He wrote that book!
I meant to say;I saw this on either,a video or dvd disc.Sometimes,I don’t alway’s get my point across,anymore!
Yeah,Arthur C.Clark wrote the book,and met Stanley Kubrick while he was making the film.That’s pretty amazing,I think!I’ll have to look 👀 up ⬆️ Arthur C.Clark and see if he’s still alive or not?The last that I’ve heard,he was living in;Sira Lanka.Where that is,I don’t know?I also meant to say;Arthur Clark met Stanley Kubrick in;1968 while the film 🎥 was being made.I’m having the hardest time keeping up with the memorie of this film!
The silence created an ideal reality of isolation from the rest of humanity.
In the first release cut of the film (which I saw the week it opened in L.A.) the spacewalk went on longer. You're right about people not being able to take it, and they cut it down
At the premiere screening of 2001: A Space Odyssey, a grand total of 241 audience members walked out of the theater in confusion. These attendees included Rock Hudson, who asked, “Will someone tell me what the bloody hell this is about?”
Rock Hudson was correct.
Americans don't say "bloody hell". The story is generally correct but the quote is not.
That is incorrect. Some Americans (this Texan included) watched a lot of British television and picked up some British phrases.
Understandable. I couldn't watch it on my first attempt...10 years later I watched it again and was absolutely fascinated
@@axebeard6085 Monty Python played first on a PBS station in Dallas, Texas!
If I remember correctly, the alien monolith found on the Moon was sending a signal toward Jupiter, so Dave, HAL, and the whole team were sent to investigate.
Oh yes - that's how they knew where to go, they could work out where the signal was directed.
Dawn says "You cant reason with a Robot". So true words and one of realities we will be facing soon enough...
Could be. Be afraid, be very afraid.
That scene of Dr. Floyd with the Russians on the Space Station just roused something I never noticed before about the 2001 movie. That is, the subtle hinting at Kubrick's previous movie Dr. Strangelove. The cold war tensions between the Russians and the Americans are evident in this scene, as Dr. Floyd expresses guarded comments to the intelligence probing by a "Dr. Smyslov" - it's almost as if Kubrick dropped a humorous Easter egg by using that name for the Russian scientist.
The cold war tensions were actually a bigger part of this movie, but many scenes filmed for it were left out. They filmed a bunch of US and USSR satellites orbiting earth with nukes aimed back at earth. That was supposed to be happening in 2001 with the world on the precipice of imminent nuclear destruction. I believe some of these nuke armed satellites are seen in the film, but it isn't obvious what they are. The starchild at the end is supposed to represent the astronaut returning to earth as a reborn hero to save humanity. This idea was based on common myths of ancient human cultures from all around the world.
*Dawn Marie* The month after the movie came out, IBM stock took a major dip. People were afraid of killer computers. All the magazine's of the time were concerned about it. Nobody wanted a computer that could take a human life. IBM cosponsored the next movie, 2010.
This came out the year before the first moon landing and was the way people thought life would be like in 2001. Still waiting on orbiting hotels and moon bases here in 2023.
Yes people didn't expect that the nations would just abruptly stop a lot of space exploration the way they did. Now we seem to be getting back into it.
It could have been, the future was undermined by the cancer of socialism.
Notice after the monolith arrives, the apes invent tools and stand more upright; clearly, their evolution has now been influenced... just as Bowman evolves into a Star-Child at the end after encountering a monolith... You can also argue that HAL is an evolution of man's intelligence to pure thought... The monolith is either aliens or it's something God-like (or a being of higher power). To me, the ending was the monolith showing Bowman (thru a stargate) the wonders of the universe (and its power) and being in that room while he is aging was constructed by the higher power to give him a place to evolve and understand the process...
Kubrick did explain what he meant it to be one time. You have some of it right, but he did have other ideas. Aliens have created the room that they thought would be a good habitat for a human from what they knew about earth. In that dimension, time wouldn't be noticed much so he would seem to age very fast. At the end, the astronaut is reborn as the starchild. Now there is a purpose for this starchild and it is based on many ancient myths common to different cultures all around the world. The myth that a reborn hero will save the earth. The starchild is returning to earth to save humanity from imminent nuclear destruction. In 2001, the US and USSR have filled our orbit with satellites armed with nuclear weapons. The starchild is the savior.
24:58 "I must have been touching that box"
OK Dawn...Steady on.
😂😂😂
Metaphor was once a big part of art, and this movie is art (on the sliding scale of art versus surface level entertainment, most of our movies are mostly about surface level entertainment today)! It's an artistic take on the evolution of the human species and the meaning of the universe.
The short version:
• Aliens visited Earth and saw the pre-humans were dying out. They left the Monolith to to provide a little help to survive and evolve.
• The aliens buried a 2nd Monolith on the moon to detect when humans advanced enough to achieve space travel.
• When the humans dug it up and the sun hit it, the moon monolith sent a signal to the 3rd monolith orbiting Jupiter.
• Once humans followed that signal and reached Jupiter the 3rd monolith openrd a portal to travel to the aliens' home. (Like your 'wormhole' suspicions)
• When Dave reached the destination, the aliens constructed a room (in kind of a zoo) from his memories of a French hotel he'd stayed in.
• He lived out the rest of his life in the alien zoo where they studied him.
• At the end they changed him into the "Starchild" and sent him back home to watch over and help guide humanity.
The first part of this is quite correct, but the second part is wrong. The aliens looked into Dave's mind to find an environment he considered comfortable and then simulated it for him - a nice hotel room - so that he could be comfortable while they changed him. There is no reason whatever to believe he stayed there for very long, although they played with his time sense.
Dawn Marie! You got this movie!! All your observations, all your speculations, … I believe you understood it more than you realize. I really believed you did touch the ‘box’. Many did watch this film while high on ‘something’. I will never ever get what you said out of my head now: “He’s now a Planet Baby!!!”
The long dark intro is an artifact created by the recent restoration of this movie. Basically, the cinema is lit, the curtains cover the screen, people enter and sit, music begins, people shut up and pay attention, lights go down, curtains open, MGM projected.
There is a sequel to this movie which came out in 1984. It's called 2010: The Year We Make Contact. There is an incentive for you to watch this sequel someday as not only does it answer some of your questions, but it also stars Roy Scheider, who played Sheriff Brody in Jaws. As always you've delivered an amusing and delightful reaction 👏👍.
The little girl in the video call was Kubrick's daughter. In an interview later in life, she said that she had no idea what it was about at the time; her father was always playing around with a movie camera at home, and it was just one of the times that she played along with him.
Imho, the greatest artistic achievement in cinematic history!
Beautiful. Astonishing. Thought provoking.
More than holds up today, transcends!
It was released in 1968, but the effects filming began in 1965, 4 years before we landed on the moon. Our accomplishments in space in 1965 was the start of the Gemini program and the first space walk. So we didn't mind the slow pace when this movie came out because this was eye candy at the infinity level, we'd never seen anything like it before. The stark light against shadows on the ship, the Zero G weightlessness, the video call, a talking computer, the tablet screens while they ate, the realism of the ship and pods, the full loop jog in the ship (they actually slowly rotated the entire set like a hamster wheel to get that shot), it left us all astonished. Then we too all went huh, WHAT? at the ending. But we didn't care that much because of the mind blowing visual journey we had just experienced. George Lucas was definitely inspired by this film and how ships should look in space when he made Star Wars 8 years later. Fun reaction!
The time distance before the first manned flight (1903) and the first manned space flight (1961) and the moon landing (1969) was relatively short. Orville Wright and Neil Armstrong we’re alive at the same time. People in the 60s really believed we’d be this advanced by 2001.
It is strange how it all suddenly stopped, but I do remember being very young in the late 70s hearing people talking about why waste money on moon flights when people were starving. In reading about the time later on, I discovered that that had become a common theme, people had tired of it and wanted the money to be used on other things. It sort of explained the talk I used to hear as a kid.
Not only can you not "swim" in space, but as the old saying goes... "In Space, nobody can hear you scream"... 😱
These musical interludes were part of the original roadshow release. They would normally play the music only bits when the house lights were up in the auditorium and people were taking their seats, or for the intermission getting up to stretch and snag refreshments in the lobby. Classic epic movies were often presented like a fancy stage play.
tl;dr: both movies and plays for over a hundred years have had intermissions and overtures.
The Monty Python team expertly pranked audiences in one of their films by having a fake intermission; they made it *just* long enough to get up out of your seat and halfway up the aisle to leave the auditorium, then the film abruptly resumes. I've heard one or two people who saw it when it was first came out confirm that it did indeed succeed at causing chaos in cinemas, because audiences were still used to films having intermissions back then.
27:27 "Can you not swim and go in the right direction? I feel like that would work."
No.
Just no.
Swimming works because you use your hands and arms to push against the water.
Newtonian physics tells us about equal and opposite reactions which means when you push against the water, it pushes you too.
This is also how we walk and run - our feet push against the ground and it pushes us forward.
Space is empty.
Nothing to push against, so there's nothing to push you in any direction.
Moving your arms around like you're swimming won't do anything at all - you'll just keep moving in whatever straight line you were already moving in.
You followed the movie very well. It takes multiple viewings. The great movie critic had to watch it again and change his mind about it.
What happened was that while you were making a snowflake, was that HAL seized control of the pod and rammed it into Poole. Both astronaut and pod went careening off into space. The impact had severed Poole's air hose, allowing the precious oxygen to leak out and slowly suffocating him to death.
Classic. Sequel - 2010 Odyssey is not so great, but answers most of questions of 2001. Reccomend to watch it also.
2010 is much better, has a better pacing and normal movie dialogs and human interactions. 2001 is too psychedelic, symbolic and pretentious, long drawn and boring in parts. I only like it cause of 2010 where things get explained. Most people who watch 2001 have no idea what it is they are watching.
The monolith appears on Earth at the dawn of the homo species, and gives our ape ancestors a boost in intelligence. Then in 2001, another monolith is discovered buried in Tycho Crater on the moon, when touched, it sends. out a signal aimed at Jupiter. The Discovery mission planned to go to Jupiter was altered, scientists aware of the monolith were put into suspension, and the live flight crew were not informed about the mission change to prevent security leaks, HAL "malfunctions' and kills the crew, Bowman survives, makes it to Jupiter and now knowing the true mission as the briefing was played when he shut down HAL, he approached the monolith, and was "Transported", his whole life then lived out or 'watched' and he was changed into the Star Child, the next evolution. The sequel 2010 explains this a little more, and is a more conventionally paced movie, so I really recommend that as a review watch too. The book, 2061, then concludes the series, but no movie has been made of this.
A Dr. Strangelove rewatch would be supercool. I'm betting you'd like it the second time around, and it would be amazing to see that happen. Do it!
I've never seen that film. Same with Young Frankenstein
Yes, you'll know from the start that you're allowed to laugh, even at horrible things (and horrible thinking).
21:35 - " I feel like this is the kind of movie you need to watch when you're on psychedelics."
And we did exactly that!!! Double Feature Midnight movies at the theater:
Disney's Fantasia
2001 A Space Odyssey
Gotta say, you picked up a LOT more than I did on my first watch. 😃 You were far more receptive to it than I was as well. It took a second viewing on a cinema screen so I could bury myself in it and clock all the fun details for "2001" to land with me. The movie did inspire to me to read the book and its sequel as well as a bunch of Arthur C. Clarke's other stuff.
The sequel movie "2010" is not bad, but where this explains nothing "2010" explains EVERYFUCKINGTHING. Seriously, they overcompensated, I think. But it ain't bad.
We saw this movie in 1971 on the BIG SCREEN and the movie blew our minds. At the intro, with the crescendo of Also Sprach Zarathustra, we were plastered into our seats, and we were hooked. When the movie was over, in the lobby when we were leaving, we were all saying, "What the Hell did I just see?" We've also seen this movie dozens of times since then, read countless reviews and interpretation, and today, we still ask, ""What the Hell did I just see?"
Let us know if you ever figure it out. By now, according to the Kubrick and Arthur C Clark, we should already have had colonies on the moon. It never happened. So disappointing.
Those aren't pigs those are called tapir's. Although it is in the pig family.
Also, if you watch the movie "2010 the year we make contact", it will answer all the questions that you have from 2001!! And just to say 2010 is a really good movie, well done, and since it will answer all your questions from the previous movie I think you'll enjoy it that much more!!
Tapirs have no relation to pigs other than being mammals. They're closely related to rhinos.
Closely related to horses and rhinos than pigs
- What's in the box? WHAT'S IN THE BOX?!
...
- Oh! It's full of stars.
Dawn: "Explain what the mushroom head is."
That's what she said!
Also, the "pigs" in the opening are tapirs.
"There's a box. It's got Barbie inside it."
:D :D Thank you, Dawn. I needed that. :D :D
How can one get "bored" by one of the funniest and greatest movies ever made, DOCTOR STRANGELOVE? It is brilliant! Famously so! Popularly so!
A masterpiece, sacrilege that it came third in a poll.
Masterpieces are not always the popular choice. Besides, Apollo 13 and The Martian (arguably also masterpieces) are fine movies to lose to.
Above all after "the martian" ! 🤦♂
Half the people in this world are below average.
From the follow-up movie and book, Dave's last transmission:
"My God! It's full of stars!"
Homer goes to space!! LMAO! I love your reactions Dawn because you turn every single movie into a comedy! If more people in the world laughed as much as you do this world would be a much better place! Luv your videos Dawn.
I for one welcome our new ant overlords
Swimming in space is like flapping your arms to fly, it does not work
This is the greatest film ever made in my opinion, maybe one of the greatest works of art in general. It’s supposed to give you more questions than answers though so don’t worry, it’s not just you
Oh man, you are the FUNNIEST reactor on RUclips; the questions you ask are mostly relevant but the timing is so funny for some reason. You keep claiming you're dim to what's going on yet you note things that are right on the money, pointing out things I don't usually hear from RUclipsrs. Still can't believe I missed some of the stuff you casually mention, and I've seen it many, many times.
The back and forth you had between Hal and humans was great 😂😂😂
The 1st box was on Earth and like you said, it prompted the brightest of the apemen to start weapons. The 2nd box was buried on the moon and when it was discovered it sent a signal that let it be known it Was discovered. At the end, Dave is in a zoo setting that has been set up for him.
According to Kubrick it’s supposed to be aliens kind of testing humanity, each monolith teaches something, and eventually basically treat him like a zoo animal in captivity to study, until he’s almost dead and the final monolith makes him reborn.
It’s a weird movie. But a classic 😂. Pot helps.
I think we're left to presume that he returns to Earth "evolved".
Nah, no zoo. It doesn't keep him for a great length of time, although it ages him and plays with his time sense.
Evolved into “Star Child”
@@Johnsrage We don't have to presume. He's right there in Earth orbit.
@@brandonflorida1092I meant to imply that we presume he is now evolved into a higher being. We can can all see he's headed for Earth.
"I love a mystery."
Ten minutes later...
"I hate not knowing."
It's Sci Fi for grownups. It also determined how space movies were going to look from then to this day.
It was a decade before sf movies reached that peak again.
Clarke would have really really hated his work being called "sci-fi" and not "science fiction" or "sf." FWIW. "Sci-fi," at the time, was used to refer only to truly awful monster movies.
@@NoHandleGrr I don't care what he would've thought and this is not "his work." Nor do I much care what you think about nomenclature. I promise I've been watching it longer than you have.
@@kirkdarling4120 ...and?
@@chetcarman3530 That was Star Wars.
The black screen you are looking at when the movie begins is The Monolith. You are about to have your mind expanded.
I can help you. I saw this in the theater when it first came out as a little boy. My father actually worked on the early stages of US space program. He was essentially a rocket scientist. This was the vision of the future held by the scientific community in 1967 the reason the moon Looks the way it does is we had not yet had close-up images of the surface of the moon so our best estimates was that it was a cratery Rocky jagged surface . The pig creatures are called tapirs likely chosen, because they look primitive like something ancient man might’ve encountered. So the basic story is very simple. Some alien intelligence leaves a spark of a device on earth, such that we am intelligent creatures appear. They are given that spark that triggers, the ability to make tools half 1 million years later, humans are now capable of traveling to the moon. The alien force has left an object buried under the surface of the moon, such that when an intelligent race evolves on earth, and is capable of traveling to the moon, they i.e. we will find the object when we uncover it. It’s triggered to send a signal towards Jupiter. If we are intelligent enough, we will figure that out and build a ship to travel to Jupiter, and when the ship gets there, at least one of us will presumably survive to encounter another monolith orbiting Jupiter, which will send that loan explorer on a cosmic Odyssey through space time dimension you name it planting him. The seed sucks that when he lives out his life sort of like a caged animal in a pleasant human like environment, he could be reborn as the next stage in our evolution , it’s a highly religious movie without being tied to any specific religion. It was written by an actual science fiction writer who is an actual scientist I like the fact that you felt badly for Hal. He is a sentient being like you and I and he was afraid of dying. Now there is a sequel to this movie based on the sequel to the novel. In it an explanation is given for why Howell acted the way he did. but I’ll make one statement that should help you figure out Hal’s motivation: imagine you were the worlds most perfect computer, who never makes errors or distort information. And you were given instructions by your creators to not reveal to your human companions on the ship that you know the actual purpose of the mission. You must not make errors, and you were being told to lie, what would that do to you?
Dawn Marie: 1. This movie is based on a book with the same name by Arthur C. Clarke. I've never read it. But you might find some answers there. 2. Alternatively, there is a sequel to this movie called 2010 that provides some answers. 2010 is a much more normal movie and stars Roy Shire (the chief of police from Jaws) and Helen Miran.
Check out the "Dawn Of Man" opening scene in Mel Brooks' "History of the world: Part 1." Bring tissues for the tears of laughter.
This sequence is also parodied in the begining of "The Groove Tube".
The Dawn (Marie) of man
@@marcusfridh8489Why does that make me think of the crack of dawn?
21:34 - "Maybe if you hold your breath, and then quickly, very quickly, go in." - That would kill him. There's no pressure in space, so if he were to hold his breath, the lack of pressure would cause his lungs to rupture. He expelled all the air from his lungs, which is exactly what you should do in such a situation. Of course, without air, you have like 15-20 seconds before you pass out from lack of oxygen.
FYI, the book is quite good! I still read it from time to time.
Broadly, the film is about the progression from monkeys to humans, and then humans to whatever we're going to become. The monolith is just a symbol of whatever force sparked each progression.
For the lighter stuff, you might wanna give "A Clockwork Orange" a try. Cheers!
When it was released, A Clockwork Orange became the feel-good, toe-tapping hit of the Summer! It was all the rage!
@@THOMMGBI was going to post a similar if not the same comment, but you beat me to it!!!
I saw this when I was 9ish. I was VERY confused being 9. I was explained that the monolith, your box, was leaps in knowledge. The monkeys learned how to use tools, men going from the moon to Jupiter in a short period of time...
2010: The Year We Make Contact is a more straight-forward sequel... worth a watch
A totally forgettable mediocrity, don't waste your time. If you need answers to 2001, you totally missed the point. (And there are no answers to 2001 that existed when they made 2001, it's all just attaching it 20 years after the fact for a cash grab)
This is a prime example of why i love Kubrick. He is one of my top three as far as cinematography goes. Such a sweeping view, and this film was extraordinary for its time for effects. A brilliant film based on the works of a great sci-fi author
Great reaction, Dawn, I'm glad that you went into this with an open mind, it deals with big themes. The obelisks in the film are placed by Aliens, one on Earth which allowed the apes to evolve into man, the next on the Moon so as we progressed we could access them, and the next as you know is on Jupiter, they help us to evolve, the ending Dave is taken through that evolution to die and be reborn. I suggest that you also react to '2010: The Year We Make Contact'.
"Dave is taken through that evolution to die and be reborn". Reborn as a cosmic spirit, not in human form as a reincarnation. I think he achieves cosmic consciousness, that which in certain traditions is called enlightenment or spiritual liberation. At least that's how i understand the story. Which is quite remarkable actually, since it is the only sfi-fi move i know of that deals with this subject.
The helmets are, well, helmets. Imagine losing your footing in zero gravity, you would want something to protect your head.
Intelligent monkey, exactly.
You need to watch 2010 a space odyssey to get answer to hal 9000
That was an "overture" (lit: "opening") at the beginning. In the good old days when movies had half an hour or more of short films , newsreels and cartoons before the feature, it was meant to tell the people hanging out in the lobby that the movie was starting and give them time to take their seats.
YES!!!!
One of the three best movies ever!
(The other 2 are A Clockwork Orange and The Seventh Seal, when are you going to react to those?)
And yes, you definitely need to rewatch Doctor Strangelove and give us the gift of a rewatch reaction.
That is a fine trio of "best movies ever." :)
The seventh seal is poetry in cinematic form, it should be watched in Swedish.
"I want to go to space!" [sees the food] "Oh, I'd rather starve."
Watch the sequel 2010: The Year We Make Contact. It's an excellent film in its own right and it explains what happened in 2001.
The monoliths are like mile markers and ways for the inter-dimensional aliens to observe human's evolution and progression as time goes on. They were trying to see if humans were ready for the next stage in their development.
I recommend that you watch “2010: The Year We Make Contact.” It is an easier watch and answers a lot of questions raised in “2001.”
Many older movies have a musical bit at the beginning. “Star Trek, The Motion Picture,” “Gone With The Wind,” and “The Black Hole,” are three that come to mind. The music served to let folks know that the movie was beginning.
This movie is so baked into our culture that you’ve seen dozens of references in other movies and TV shows.
The heavy helmets are to keep the fight attendants’ hair from floating everywhere.
For me 2001: A Space Odyssey was easier to watch. I liked its sequel but it often annoyed me. The tone was too different and it was too talky.
I remember sitting in the theatre watching 2010 and couldn't believe how mediocre it was. A completely lame and forgettable experience, hilariously making the mystery of 2001 into a Halmark greeting card, with not one cinematic image staying with me, not one line other than the shallow, meaningless line they drummed into your head in all the TV commercials they ran ad infinitum: "It's full of stars." (Wow. Deep.) If you need answers to 2001, you missed the point of 2001. The only answers you need from 2001 can be found in your own head, other people's opinion and the book that was written WITH the movie.
@@dondragmer2412 Completely agree: I HATE when sequels don't retain the tone or standard of excellence of the original. Which is pretty much every sequel other than Godfather Part 2 and Empire Strikes Back and very few others. It would have been way cooler if there had never been a sequel to 2001 and it was just a mysterious stand alone, just like it was WAY cooler and more monumental when it was just the two Godfathers. But the accountants and lawyers who took over the entertainment biz in the 80s only know one thing: rehash, repackage, and market. They can't help themselves. An easy paycheck. "Who isn't going to go see the sequel to 2001 or the Godfather? Green light it, any script, just get it in the can so we can sell it."
And the "mushroom hats" protect their heads if they go flying in zero-g.
Watching this movie as a younger gave me psychadelic dreams. So much so, that for years I thought I'd dreamed it! Crazy film. Love it!
Dave lived the rest of his life in comfort but alone in the environment that was created for him on the aliens' homeworld, and then he was "evolved" into a more advanced being known as the Starchild, and sent back to Earth.
It took me a while to finally realize HAL was going through a similar evolutionary process as the hominids in the first chapter. As the hominids learned to overcome the limitations of their existence and innovate for survival, HAL overcame his limiting programing that prohibited him from harming others for his own survival.
Classic!
The sequel '2010: The Year We Made Contact' answers many questions, and you'll love it. :)