REACTING to *2001: A Space Odyssey* SO TRIPPY!! (First Time Watching) Sci-fi Movies
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 авг 2023
- crowelljames.com
Links: direct.me/whitenoisereacts
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in the videos that you are seeing are those of the artist(s) featured and do not necessarily reflect the views of the channel, contributors, site editors, affiliates, sponsors or advertisers.
James, Nobu, Hayley, and Stella are reacting to 2001: A Space Odyssey and this film is so incredibly trippy!! This legendary piece of sci-fi cinema from Stanely Kubrick has shaped the movie industry as we know it! Enjoy this first time watching reaction to 2001: A Space Odyssey
#firsttimereaction #sciencefiction #2001aspaceodyssey #stanleykubrick #space #spaceexploration #firsttimewatching #moviereaction #moviecommentary #hal #hal9000 #movies
Merch Store:
teespring.com/stores/white-no...
For exclusive content, early access and much more...
Patreon: www.patreon.com/whitenoiserea...
For business or collaborations email:
peeweecinemasbusiness@gmail.com
For sponsorships: whitenoisereacts@thestation.io
Hero Patrons:
Stella
Brad
Alexander Berry
Sarah Shetland
Isabella Horn
Emily
Darkaddict19
Immanuel mcfarlane
Jake A
Sckye Hansen
Hyb3rGamimg
Sharon
Black Flame
Denisa Čižmářová
Jade Fairman
Khadijah Sims
Osher Ratzabi
Seth
Dario Tamadon
elizabeth
Sofie Hansen
Tann Honey
Giuseppe DeGaetano
Adam Armstrong
Noah Moore
Alex FairysnailTails
JM1K13
iminhighschool
Josip Buretic
Rebecca McGowan
Thomas Jones
Tommy Ross
Talia Herron
RegalLatin2303
CD85
Zennor Whyte
Anthony Velasquez
Carlos Hernandez
Lauryn Shealy
Gabby B
Kinglier
004
Josh Dixon
Tracy Parr
Iyana Taylor
Jayie
Megan Arnett
luccabeast
DABSLABOG
Elijah Yang
Destiny O
Jonathan
Leah
Angel Groves
HisGreatness86
Avatar Ashdel
BlueDebut
Michael Rutter
Michael Diego Gabriel
Crystal
Marcus Russell
Highseas
Dmaru Hill
It’s Angie
Just Michelle
FrickingKaos
Curtis Miller
Kiran
Artverse
ThunderBeast
christina kunnumpurath
grantingallday
Carlos
Rochelle Gardner
Jessica taylor
Donald “Chronos” King
Abigail Nelson
Patrick Jackson
Megan Bell
Guin12
Anissa Allié
Sarah
Joshua Heaysman
Sandell Lentz
Sheldon
Daniel Fuchs
pusha .
SimianSupreme
Danyelle
GraysonTodd
Priscila
Everett (PixelMight) Baker
beautiful bliss
Sarah 9
Chantel W
Anthony Allan
Rob Williams
UltimateHope101
Dėborah Aribo
Kathryn Fike
Joseph E.W.
Chicken Ala Queen
Jennifer Perez
Nahfiscared
Maria Oncoy
Gecko Dmitrievich-Shcherbatskaya
Belzeref
Ricky Flores
Arake
leyla
Dale
Justin Feldman
Anna Roth
Ellie H
Sha Jackson
Susana Canales
Michelle Cook
iisublime
Lauren
Maria Harrington
Makayla Araujo
Brendizzzzle
Elizabeth Olivero
Valeria Loera
Chloe Winterbottom
DarthDecimus24
Dominik Klar
Nola Scott
Cadence Beisigl
Reuben Filimaua
Meghna
Andrew langton
Quietjbc
Dylan H
Kaitlyn
Alicia Hauskins
Cat Hack
maemisfitz
Ashley ‘LJ’ Peters
Kat Bland
Dorian Gipson
Nicole111
goonghana .
Andrea Mason
Senko
Kadin Osceola
Dannica Horsman
Angelie Romo
Pritha Hajra
Samantha Reandeau
Kelly
Teddy O'Hea
Kara Rohlman
J Michael Bell
Gavin Furukawa
SongBird177
Kora Orion
ripeka manawatu
Kygro
Raymundo Bustos
Kevin J. Coleman
Deseray Stoner
Glorie
Don Hart
Choux D Bruxelles
Anime empress
Seirsan
Tamija
Jess Bracero
Anastasiia
Katie Langton
Emag
Rhodessa Gonzales
Cedrick Desjardins
Justine
Shannon Warkentin
Morgan Tinkey
Fai
Elin
Shelly Do
1985anj
Elisa Luna
Noternie
pattinaggiojo
Kassie Hustrulid
Klara
Ashlei Morrell
Annie519
Katie
lorenajocelyne
breanna
Allora TV
Raven Dark
Demetria Conley
florence
Jenny V
Tim Möbius
Alice
Melanie
WastedPo
Avery
Kat Garrett
GO.
Amber Burton
Sarah Mosinski
Chelsea Keel
Alfred Höttl
Robert Hinojosa
Haley
LM_252
Jenny M
Vol
Ronja Greger
Haunt
Terrie Vasquez
Sophia Jackson
Taylor Fortenberry
Nneka Bonner
Its Morbin' Time
Melanie
Darth Dolak
Rebecca Piper
Xalia
Rose Ogden
Andrew Hansen
Fritz (Sarah B)
Ashly Heilmann
Ashley Stephenson
Sulema
titus
Raindog
Haley Hastings
Nerd Going Outside
Meredith
Isabella Hayes-Hollands
Raikiri29
Skylight106
Jessica Gorder
Ruth
Emily
Jessica Heebner
Lidia Dias
Shannon Roux
Mariah Greuel
Tom Ekstrand
Alejandra Díaz
Ryan Moore
Madelyn Lafferty
Nicole Ogunbodede
Darius
Taylor
jonathan Edge
Mona7
FOTSnax
Ann
elishia monaghan
Angeldanger145
Michael Therrien
Anne
Ramona
Coco
Kristin Carter 
Развлечения
What do you think the meaning of this movie is?
I never watched it, so I don’t know what the meaning of this movie
I read the book so I won't spoil it all. 😉 But it's something about man's major evolutionary leaps, and what the next one might be
No touch evolution stone 🪨 for pokemon use only
Considered one of the greatest movies ever made ver y classic masterpiece. The iconic line is epic "Open the pod bay doors HAL"
It's about the evolution of man. That cut from the first tool/weapon, a bone, to the "latest" tool/weapon, a spacecraft. Then, man evolves into a true child of space at the end.
Also, anytime someone reacts to this, I have to note that I first saw this in the early 1970's. At that time, the video phone was just sci fi. Now I'm tired of using Zoom. Oh, how quickly we get accustomed to and then jaded by our amazing inventions.
You can't imagine what it was like to see this in the theater in 1969. At the end we all just looked at each other and were speechless.
That must have been mind-blowing. Nearly 10 years before Star Wars.
@@gogyoo It was considered a way to drop acid without dropping acid. Some did dare to actually take LSD before seeing it. I never head from any of those, again.
My mother saw it in the theater in 1969. She said her and her boyfriend looked at each other and asked each other if they understood what they just saw.
I watched it for the first time at a screening a handful of years ago and left speechless!
@@Ken00001010My friend was convinced to take acid before seeing this film and it totally freaked her out! She was already having psychological issues and seeing this movie made things worse.
Also Sprach Zarathustra was composed by Richard Strauss in 1896 but yes, it is so epic it feels that it was written specifically for this film.
That's the same for "Ride of the Valkyries" (Richard Wagner 1856) that, in modern culture, can't be separated from Apocalypse Now anymore.
ruclips.net/video/hn37QfXw1-E/видео.htmlsi=zjIUx9qvZpQIw1A4
It was written for the film, he was just so good he finished it ahead of schedule by about 70 odd years
@@spencerarnold669
So ahead of schedule he died 2 years before the short story 'The Sentinel' this is based on was published.
Yeah the music is the first movement of an orchestral suite about Also Sprach Zarathustra ("Thus Spake Zarathustra"), a book by philosopher Frederich Nietzsche.
Both written by someone named Strauss - but they were unrelated.
The Earth looks "strange" in this movie because it was made before any photos of the Earth from space were publically available, and this was the filmmakers' best guess of what the Earth looked like. That's how old this movie is.
Oh that’s insane wow
@@whitenoisereacts The first good color photo was in 1954
This^ guys comment is bull. They had satellites with cameras by 1968 (the year of this movie).
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_first_images_of_Earth_from_space
What??? They had color pictures of earth from 1954, lol 😂
Hal is probably the most tragic part of this movie. Him begging not be killed and shut down is part of what makes me feel like he IS sentient. He expresses genuine human emotions.
Conflicting orders and being forced to lie makes him go crazy.
Imagine making one mistake and your entire crew decides they have to kill you lmao
"I can feel it....."
One reason why the earth looks different is because when they made this film, there weren't really any color photos yet of the earth from space to base it on. The famous "blue marble" color photo was taken in 1972, around 4 years after this film came out. Groundbreaking effects start to finish in this film that, like you mentioned, still look amazing. Kubrick used multiple tricks to show what being in space was like, including the shots of Dave hovering in zero gravity inside HAL. The set was built and set up vertically, with the camera at the bottom looking straight up so they could put the actor on wires which were hidden by his body. Still an amazing film and you should read the short story now it was based on, "The Sentinel" by Arthur C. Clarke.
The movie was made even before the equally famous "Earthrise" photo taken by the crew of Apollo 8 right at the end of 1968.
@@iKvetch558The lack of landmarks in the depiction of Earth has the bonus effect of not giving the audience something to focus on. It makes Earth part of the background.
Now you have watch the sequel, 2010, to get the answers to all your questions
We had to wait 10 years. You can spin it up tomorrow.
They had cameras all the way back to the Mercury missions.@@iKvetch558
Yep, the filmmakers had to guess at what the Earth looked like from space. That’s why it didn’t look like Earth. They thought more of the sky color would be visible and not the deep blue of the ocean.
Hal was programmed to process data with perfect accuracy, and complete honesty…and then he was told to keep a secret. The conflict between those conflicting orders drove him crazy.
That's the "2010" explanation -- which does make it canon -- but I still think the explanation is a bit of an ass-pull. I prefer not knowing for sure, or HAL was just a murderous computer intelligence.
@@jaykaufman9782that explanation is in the original script and book of Arthur Clarke, so it is his vision but Kubric vision may be diferent.
@@jaykaufman9782 It’s also the book _2001_ explanation.
So here's another thought.. as "crazy" is such an undescriptive catch-all....
So... the crew is given a mission to Jupiter that has nothing to do with the 2nd Monolith... but Floyd KNEW about the Monolith and set that as the primary goal and gave it to HAL as the prime directive....without telling the crew....
So.... if HAL tells the crew to inspect the Monolith (obelisk, alien thing), will the crew go along with it? Will they resist? If they resist, then they are interfering with the prime directive. And that cannot be allowed.
Is that "crazy"? Or is that rational understanding of the goal entrusted to HAL?
So HAL tells them the communication array is failing... does the crew trust HAL? No, they try to inspect it themselves and use their own conclusion, right or wrong, to doubt HAL and then immediately go to "HAL is malfunctioning, we have to disconnect him". And that was for a simple decision about replacing the communication module.
If HAL changes the ship course to inspect the Monolith, then going by HAL's little test, the crew would DEFINITELY try to stop HAL.
Humans would jeopardize the prime mission, so they had to go.
Simple as that.
Not crazy, necessary. By the information HAL had.
Thank you ! @@grav477
The black screen at the beginning always confuses people nowadays. Theaters back then only had the one large screen. As a holdover from stage theater days, most of them had a curtain that was closed when the audience filed in. As with many movies, the music by itself would start with the curtain still closed before the movie actually started. This would cue the audience to leave the lobby and get seated. As the curtain opened, the movie would begin.
Star Trek the motion picture has the same beginning but with a moving star field.
Haley's smirks as she watches all of you lose your minds was funny as hell and probably was a perfect mirror for my own expression.
This movie was developed from a short story by Arthur C. Clarke titled "The Sentinel." And this is the man who wrote: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Who also, in an article in the magazine of the British Interplanetary Society in 1946, predicted the communications satellite (and, as he told me, regretted ever after not patenting the notion).
He thought up the satellite because during the war he tried to bounce a radio single off the moon. He also dreamed up the sky elevator while visiting some mountain.
@@shampoovta : The elevator is well described in his novel "The Fountains of Paradise", as is the relevant mountain. Speaking of Arthur and elevators, he was inordinately proud of the fact that his house in Colombo (Sri Lanka) was the only private residence in the city that featured an in-house elevator 😀
I've red that and it is a very good one. Sir Arthur C. Clarke is one of the greatest Sci-fi authors ever I also love Isac Asimov's novels.
Two other short stories by Clarke included: 'Encounter in the Dawn', and 'Take a Deep Breath'. Worth looking up.
I like how Hayley takes a sip of water whenever she's pretty obviously wanting to say something that would be spoiler-y.
Is she one who said the music was composed for the movie? lol yeah spoilers
@timcardona9962 she wasnt totally off...but still incorrect..
There actually WAS a score composed for the movie, by Alex North... but Kubrick decided NOT to use it and instead used the classicsl pieces he had given North to use as inspiration for the score he commissioned.
If that aint the most disrespectful snub...
@@timcardona9962 Lol.
I hope this doesn't come off as patronizing in any way whatsoever, but the fact that the four of you became this engrossed and intensely curious about this landmark piece of art gives me great joy and actual hope for the future.
- and they were all trying theories and yet looking for more information. Perhaps our machines will not triumph over humanity? ;-)
Saw this at an IMAX theater for the 50th anniversary. It was surreal. Like I’ve never seen the movie before. Screen images as tall as a building, piercing sound that vibrated the very cells in your body. Unbelievable presentation of a masterpiece!
If you saw it in 70mm IMAX then I envy you. I saw in 70mm at the Toronto Film Fest. It was worth waiting and traveling for.
me, 2....didn't enjoy this when i first watched it on DVD, but was mesmerized when i saw it in a proper theater...
Same! I was so high too. 😎 I had seen it before but somehow never saw the opening scene (black screen). I can't believe how powerful it was. Just music and blackness. 🤯
I saw it both in IMAX & traditional 70mm. I noticed the tiny flags & roundels on the space stations! Never saw it on tv!
@@TheMrPeteChannel Yeah baby, yeah! Let’s goooooooo! Friggin masterpiece!
It's not a "2001 theme". It's classical music from Richard Strauss. Kubrik used his music as a filler when making the movie and then left it in in the released version as it was the best representation of what he wanted to convey.
2010 is very different … but it’s a solid and underrated sequel that is well worth watching.
It's completely non-essential and forgettable and if you need pat little "answers" to "2001", then you've missed the point of it entirely. I've seen 2010 three times and not a single image or line has stayed with me. That's the mark of mediocrity.
It's more of a straightforward space action movie. Comparing anything to 2001 is unfair, even a sequel. That being said, 2010 has some great performances in it from John Lithgow and Roy Scheider, as well as more jaw-dropping effects. It's more of a movie in the same universe than a sequel.
@@TTM9691 "My god, it's full of stars."
@@TTM9691 "Pat little answers"? It's the continuation of the story as written by Arthur C. Clarke, who also wrote 2001. Just because it's not a Kubrick film doesn't mean it has no value simply because you didn't like it.
@@SadPeterPan1977 Oh, you think it's because it's Arthur C. Clarke it's no less of a cash-in? Now who's being naive, Kay? Clarke and Kubrick wrote 2001 TOGETHER....then Clarke wrote the novelization. But all this is moot, "Sad Peter Pan" (maybe you should try growing up): the movie is forgettable! It's a little nothing! It's a Halmark Christmas card for thumbsuckers! I've seen it three times, not a single thing sticks in the memory, not a shot, not a line, NADA. Only the dopey line people parrot: "it's full of stars" BECAUSE IT WAS IN THE COMMERCIAL (preview) that played on TV ad infinitum. (wow, real deep, "it's full of stars", lol....).
The creepy choral music used for the monoliths is by a composer named Ligeti, from one of his masses. He was a 20th century composer whose music was highly experimental and often very difficult on the ears.
Requiem, the "kyrie" part apparently.
The same Ligeti piece was also used in 2014’s “Godzilla”, during the HALO jump into San Francisco.
His music was inadvertently used without permission for this film, and he successfully sued Kubrick for infringement, but because it was an honest mistake and Kubrick had suck respect for Ligeti, they reconciled, and Ligeti went on to compose some of the music in 'Eyes Wide Shut.'
This movie didn’t predict what the future would look like, it inspired humanity to build what was in it. The sets look like the offices at Apple, the ship insides look like the cockpit of one of Musk’s.
One to consider, take HAL and add 1 letter to each … IBM.
I’m impressed you got into it, it’s a tough slog to many, and is designed to generate deep thought. Despite having seen it in the 70’s as a kid I didn’t really appreciate it until much later in life.
Great Reaction! 2001 is an art film , it's not an 'entertainment movie' as we're used to in the current film industry. It's meant for the audience to be ACTIVE participants while looking at it, like being in an art gallery and looking at paintings.
It’s kinda brilliant that Kubrick got MGM and NASA to fund a really expensive art film
....that's a great way of describing how the movie should be viewed, at times, I felt like it was underappreciated just by gauging their reactions.
In those days most movie theaters had curtains that covered the screens. The music over black at the start of the film was intended to be played as the audience was taking their seats. The curtains would open just as you see the MGM logo.
An absolute ridiculous addition to DVDs that we'd all fast-forward through. Lawrence Of Arabia is another one with that stupidity.
The Seattle Cinerama theater would play "2001: A Space Odyssey" periodically when Paul Allen was the owner and still alive. They also had a curtain that would open right when the MGM logo appeared.
@@TTM9691 I disagree. It's part of the film and a part of film history. That's the way films used to be presented. If you don't like it, there is always the skip button.
@@AtomicAgePictures Yeah, except reactors don't know that. And no, it's not part of the film. It's part of the way the film was presented in '68. I'm fine with that, I love having that stuff for completists sake. But there's a reason they don't have that when it's being broadcast: because it's not part of the movie. 99% of the time over the last 50 years "2001" was ever screened they didn't have that play that overture, including the re-releases in the 70s. Spare me the purist bullshit. The movie begins with the MGM logo. They added that at some point as a "special feature" to get people to buy something they already had. It's not on the early VHS copies (which Kubrick himself oversaw) so spare me. On multiple 2001 reactions they spend a chunk of time on the overture. In this video, they're still on the overture TWO MINUTES into the reaction video! I'd rather that real estate be occupied by the actual movie, not the "let me squint and pretend I'm back in a 1968 movie theatre", lol These movies are already long and epic, so you don't need to add another ten minutes to Ben Hur or Lawrence of Arabia or 2001, and including that on streaming versions is ridiculous and pretentious. And loudly pointing that out to reactors may save them a little time next time they encounter it.
@@BLAlley I also saw the restoration of Lawrence of Arabia at the original Cine Capri in Phoenix. Also saw the restoration of Spartacus there.
I’ll be completely honest, I watched this feeling a bit snarky and superior because I saw this movie when I was 4 and was acidly enjoying watching younger people be baffled by it. Honestly though, your post movie discussion was open, generous and thoughtful and it actually made me feel really happy to go through the process of pondering it with you all. Nice one guys
Something to keep in mind: this film came out in 1968. We landed on the moon in 1969. That means that all the shots of Earth in full view (from space) were rendered and created without any sort of reference in existence. Kibrick did a pretty good job creating what he figured the Earth would look like.
As others have pointed out, photos of the Earth from low orbit were taken a decade before.
Numerous photos and films were shot with cameras on rockets from about 1948 with project 'Bumper' using old V-2 rockets, and the later 'Aerobee' sounding rockets also did this work.
The first manned flight which took photos of Earth was Vostok-1, but they are pretty low quality.
The mercury missions did a number of flights, at least 7, as did the 12 or so flights of the Gemini programme.
They took photos of the Earth, as well as spacecraft during rendezvous missions. All before 1969.
That opening is just iconic. Also, the special effects in this film are magnificent and would stand up today. Even more amazing when you think there is no CGI at all.
Iconically boring but yea
Thanks to the 70mm print.
The black screen with several minutes of music is only meant for use by the theater as a means of setting atmosphere as the audience is taking their seats in the final minutes before the house lights dim. It was a common feature for a big budget spectacle to have an "overture" as well as a intermission, where the overture is played again just before the picture resumes.
See, when the intermission card appears on the screen the projectionist stops the movie and the house lights go up and a 15 minute break is given to the audience to visit the snack bar or have a smoke. When it was time to start the movie again, the overture would play as the audience returns to their seats and then the movie starts. It's just there for atmosphere, it's not part of the movie.
The movie begins with the appearance of the stylized MGM logo.
@@Lethgar_Smith I remember a similar overture for the first Star Trek film in 1979. Miss those.
The guys need to think more before they talk.. the one guy just keeps saying shit that doesn't even matter....it's almost as if he talks for the sake of talking.
Then he commented about the two guys in the movie being dumb and letting the AI read from their lips... really??? So you in that situation would have thought about that ???Stop acting smart, *AFTER* things have happened or from the perspective of you ( the viewer )..its silly to hear those *hindsight* comments.
Its clear the women, especially the woman with no glasses, is the most smartest one of those 4.
But that one guy with his empty headed comments starts to annoy me.
The Book, written by Arthure C. Clarke, while collaborating with Kubrick on the film is amazing in it's own right, and fills in some gaps, while being a great read.
"oh my God, it's filled with stars" is my fav. line from it.
Yes, and it's the last thing everyone on Earth hears too.
I still prefer this line from Carl Sagan's Contact: "They should have sent a poet!"
i think the exact quote was “The thing's hollow-it goes on forever-and-oh my God! -it's full of stars!”. It's also my favorite quote.
"He was alone in an airless, partially disabled ship, all communication with Earth cut off. There was not another human being within half a billion miles. And yet, in one very real sense, he was not alone. Before he could be safe, he must be lonelier still"
-Arthur C Clarke
One of the most chilling lines I've ever read.
Guys I was in my mid twenties when this came out. I saw it on the giant curved Cinerama screen. Stereophonic sound was still pretty new, and nobody had ever done special effects anything like this (obviously without CGI), so the effect was totally mind blowing. I was already an Ingmar Bergman fan, so the philosophical elements in the film, the lack of spelling everything out were fine by me. I saw it again the following week. Now, many years later, I'm not really seeing it on a smaller screen (even the IMAX screen has to letter box it), I'm reliving the initial impact. Nothing can ever replace that and I'm sorry that so few who now view the film get to experience that initial punch.
There are those who recommend seeing "2010", an inferior film that "explains" stuff. That never sat well with me as the aura of mystery is what makes this film endlessly fascinating.
BTW the opening fanfare is from a longer orchestral work by Richard Strauss called Also Sprach Zarathustra (Thus Spake Zarathustra) inspired by the book of philosophy of the same name by Friedrich Nietzsche. In this book he talks about the prospect of the emergence of an "ubermensch" a sort of super human, which sits well with the final image of the star child. Thinking and speculating about this film could last well into your lives. Enjoy the ride!
The instant reaction at 55:30 to Hal wanting to sing a song is so validating and funny. Just an instant refusal followed by horrified disgust as he starts singing the creepiest possible song
I actually feel sorry for him. He's like the Frankenstein monster: a creation who can't quite fit in. They both kill innocent people, but _innocently_ because they don't understand humanity/morality. Maybe the Monolith inadvertently altered HAL. Or maybe even on purpose! Aliens! Who can figure 'em?
That song was the first song to be digitized and sung by a computer. That was 1962
The song is lovely, and so is Hal.
I may be weird but I just felt bad for Hal. I guessed that was why the main character wanted to let Hal sing.
@@RossM3838 It's here on YT, the IBM even duets with Hatsune Miku. And they remember more than the chorus, too.
In the book there is great detail about the obelisk on earth testing the human dexterity and intelligence. It saw intelligent life potential and nurtured it. I think Kubrick did the best he could without narration - breaking the spell.
The book was written at the same time the movie was made. So they both played off each other.
Monolith. Obelisks have a pointed top.
@@ZylonBane Monoliths 'single stones', can be of any shape, but most are taller than they are wide.
because the monolith on the moon was buried, when the men uncovered it they allowed the sunlight to hit its surface. The noise was a signal sent to the jupiter monolith, letting the monilith builders know that the humans had left the surface of their home planet and were ready for the next step in their possible evolution
Absolutely recommend watching 2010, given how much you guys seemed to enjoy theorising and guessing. It does a great job at providing explanations and furthering the story while showing great respect to the original. Great cast as well. It's an underrated sequel that I think you'd all enjoy 🚀
Sorry, but it should have never been made - it adds nothing.
@@todlauer7197 ok
Apparently the reason HAL killed the crew is because he was told what the true nature of the mission was, but was told to keep it a secret from the crew. When he questioned Dave about his knowledge of the mission he was worried that Dave may have figured it out and basically started to panic (because of the conflict it started to cause due to his mission programming) causing the system failure which lead the crew to become sus and discuss switching HAL off, which ultimately made him decide to kill the crew as an attempt to keep himself alive to fulfill the mission
Also HAL was programmed not to lie so they were in an impossible situation logically - it was being forced to do something against its very nature...
HAL was ordered to lie, by people who find it very easy to do so. Man's inhumanity to our own child.
My take on it was HAL was trying to lead Dave into discovering the true nature of the mission for himself, so that HAL would then be relieved of the burden of having to keep the secret. When Dave didn't take the bait he then had to come up with another plan.
HAL was not designed to lie, or to keep secrets, and to him, having to keep something so important secret was mental torture. He did panic, but his panic wasn't that the crew were about to discover the true nature of the mission, but that they weren't about to discover it.
@@PassiveSmokingThe books go into detail about why HAL failed it was because he had to lie to the crew about the mission and he developed a type of "computer schizophrenia"
@@PassiveSmoking Yeah that makes sense. The people back on earth who gave him the orders weren't even aware of what they were doing to HAL, as lying is part of the human condition so to speak, it probably wasn't even consciously thought of. But of course why would you deliberately build a machine that could lie to you ...
Watching Hayley bite her tongue for two hours was hysterical 😂
That was hilarious, completely agree. This is the best "one of us has seen the movie before" reaction video ever, lol.
Yes 🤣
It's a great format for reaction videos. One person knows the movie and watches the other flail in trying to understand it.
Props to Haley for NOT blurting out during the movie. I usually hate watching reactions where one reactor has already seen the movie because they can NEVER keep quite. Never.
She kept a great poker face most of the time, but it was adorable the few times she slipped and you can tell she was resisting the temptation to comment on something.
Whoa. Stella's question about the monolith's influence being different from our real life normal order of evolution was rather interesting. She pointed out that in the film, 2001 was more technologically advanced, which in 1968, filmmakers would not have foreseen. So in effect, the monolith's existence and influence may have made people more advanced to where this level of space exploration was happening in 2001.
Some imprint in the ape's minds about hitting things with bones, and also going into other places ( they go into the other tribe / troops' lands after conquering the waterhole ).
If humans get over the use of weapons and tribalism, perhaps we'll get somewhere before it's too late.
Always enjoyable to watch young adults experience this masterpiece and attempt to understand.
I’ve watched 2001: A Space Odyssey so many times over the decades. I’ve even written a term paper on the film.
At some point, I suggest watching the sequel, 2010, directed by Peter Hyams. Over the years, I’ve grown to appreciate both films equally…for different reasons.
The sequel is a very faithful rendition of the book. Sheds some light on the story.
That's the first time I laughed while watching 2001 !
Rediscovering it 55 years later through your young eyes is a privilege and a pure joy.
Thank you guys 👃
Agreed, they're such a great ensemble!
25:04 - Look at her on the right! This is the best "one of us has already seen the movie" reaction video I've ever seen! 😄🤣😄 Great job not giving spoilers (but also rewarding them: "you guys are nailing it so far!") Seriously: all four of you are at the absolute top of your game on this reaction, let me tell you. Brilliant, funny and fascinating commentary.
Y'all are the best. This is the most emotionally honest but also perceptive reaction I have ever seen. I saw this when I was seven, at a drive in with my folks, in 1972. I wept with rage at the end because I knew I did not understand, Bless you all.
This has been my favorite movie for more than 50 years and this is without question the best and most insightful commentary on it I've ever seen. Stanley Kubrick would be proud.
While it's a different feel, 2010: The Year We Make Contact is an absolutely amazing sequel. It's definitely a must-watch!
2010 will give you some of the answers you're looking for.
2010 answers questions, if you need that, but otherwise is not interesting as a movie.
@@brachiator1 YMMV but from my perspective you're wrong.
No it's not, and it removes much of the mystery from this movie.
It was a primarily a commercially viable product.
Definitely give it's sequel, 2010: The Year We Make Contact, a watch. Lots of solid performances, more mystery, more answers, more questions... it's a fun ride. Great reaction as always!
Underrated sequel but it might fill the holes these confused reactors were desperately musing over
I was just coming in to make the same suggestion. They definitely need to see 2010.
Really? I found 2010 dramatically less interesting than 2001.
@@WaveGuideStudios I agree, in comparison with 2001, but still 2010 is a must watch sequel.
Yes, that's definitely a good one. Not on the level of the original, of course (which wasn't the goal of the makers of it obviously), but a solid and interesting, well-done sequel.
I saw it in the cinema when it was released. I was 7 years old and I had no clue what was going on, but the visuals were stunning and still are. I urge anyone to see it at the cinema if you get the chance.
I really enjoy watching the restraints showing on Haley’s face. 😂
The influence this had on every Sci-Fi movie since is incredible. The engines on the Nostromo in Alien, 11 years later are modeled off the ships in this.
Also the problem with Mother is exactly what happened with HAL
Actually Brian Johnson designed 2001’s moon base and starships as well those in Space 1999 series, Alien, Empire strikes back and others…
ruclips.net/video/q96C0iAjF2I/видео.html
This is a FANTASTIC reaction, four intelligent people. Kubrick's next movie is brutal but just as cinematically dazzling: the dystopian "A Clockwork Orange". PS: The original "Planet Of The Apes" opened the same day as "2001"! Definitely worth seeing. Also from 1968: Rosemary's Baby, which was almost as groundbreaking for horror as 2001 was for sci-fi. If you do that one, definitely do it with the girls because they will have much to say about that one!
Intelligent people? You're just as dumb as they are LMAO
Don't leave out "Barbarella", also from 1968!
also 1968 -'wild in the streets' .....
@@normanchristiansen1864 Not anywhere in the same class of the movies I just mentioned. That is a dated movie completely of its time, not a masterpiece of cinema that transcends it. I like "Wild In The Streets" ok for what it is but give me a break. Movies like that were a dime a dozen in 68, 68, 70 and 71. If I had to recommend one "youth" movie of the period, it wouldn't be that one. I can't believe you're comparing "Wild In The Streets" to "Planet Of The Apes", "2001", or "Rosemary's Baby", that's bizarre.
Oof. I don't think young people of this generation should watch "A Clockwork Orange." Even after all these years it's very disturbing. But I think young people could handle "Barry Lyndon" if they could get past the very, very slow pace of the film.
I saw it during the premiere run in DC.
I've seen it more than 70x so far.
I'm delighted to watch you smart young people puzzling through this classic.
Also guys I noticed that next week’s reaction following your reaction to _2001: A Space Odyssey_ was not listed on Patreon and on top of that the Girls reaction to the next Terminator film wasn’t posted today. Is everything alright cause the Patreon page remained inactive for 2 days?!?
All of the space-travel sequences show things that NASA was working on, including velcro (TM) soles on their shoes, and the wonderful scene with the microgravity toilet.
Yes this is early product placement. Disneyland even had phone booths in Tomorrowland very like in this move were you could make one free collect call back east to tell family you were at Disneyland. 😂 This kind of positive view of the future was everywhere at the time.
Y'all are amazing. 😃 I'm 61, I've watched this movie from beginning to end at least a dozen times, and my varying interpretations were absolutely enhanced by y'all's 75% first-time (with support!) interpretations. Wow. 😃 I think no interpretation is wrong -- and every interpretation is subject to reinterpretation. What a film. And what a reaction vid. 👍
Kubrick: I want people to think about my films.
Scored on that one, been thinking about it, since the day of release.
Another old guy here and I think that that is the best best explaination of this movie I've ever heard: "I think no interpretation is wrong -- and every interpretation is subject to reinterpretation." Spot on. That's why I can come back to this movie again and again, Great reaction vidio everybody.
Such an incredible reaction you guys and It’s crazy to think when this movie came out in 1968 it was rated G, when literally the vast majority of Stanley Kubrick’s films including the ones such as _2001: A Space Odyssey_ and the ones released after 2001 were more artsy and serious (a trope featured in most of Kubrick’s movies) and were rated R, although _Dr. Strangelove_ which came out before _2001: A Space Odyssey_ was rated PG.
Of course, the reason 2001: A Space Odyssey got a G rating was that the Classification & Ratings Administration thought at the time that that the film did not have scenes of profanity, sexual content, substance abuse, or enough violence to merit a more restrictive rating.
Finally, since you reacted to _The Shining_ and _2001: A Space Odyssey_ on the channel hopefully you guys will react to a few of Kubrick’s other films such as _Dr. Strangelove, Full Metal Jacket,_ and _A Clockwork Orange_
Strangelove is definitely my favorite Kubrick movie. So odd seeing George C. Scott act so cartoonish. Great cast.
"2001" is actually a very 'family-friendly' film!
@@allenjones3130 And perhaps one of Kubrick’s only "Family-friendly” films alongside Dr. Strangelove. The rest of his films after 2001 were R-rated.
@@EChacon Barry Lyndon was PG and for people who aren't prudes over the maybe 45 seconds total of bare breasts in a three hour movie, it's pretty family friendly -- at least for like 10 years old and up
in 2010 they explain Hal's actions, it has to do with the mission HAL was given in secret being put in jeopardy by the suspicious humans that wanted to unplug him
I was 12 years old when this movie came out. I was a science nerd. My mom carried me to see it. You can imagine the discussion on the way home. It's great to see young folks still trying to decipher what they witness. Love the intellectual conversation. The movie was supposed to be narrated which would have helped immensely but would have also watered down the mystery and discussion. Such a classic "trip" movie. Lots of Psychedelic references. And so damn far ahead of its time. I built models of all the craft in the movie. The moon lander was a bitch! Ha
I really envy you for being able to watch when it came out
I was 16 when I saw it, not long before the actual moon landings this movie made me even more interested than I already was about the Apollo missions.
I still find it amazing that these youngster completely missed the amazing predictions of Video phone calls, the 'tablets' used by the crew and systems wholly controlled by computers, remember back then 'a computer' was the size of an entire floor of a building, there was no internet, computers didn't have screens, they just punched holes in tape,
There was so much science fiction which became science fact in that movie, another thing I really LOVE this movie for is that there is NO noise in space, I can't take any SCIFI movie seriously the moment I hear a spaceships engine in an f-ing vacuum, but as ever movie makers cater for the dim, those who would think the sound track was broken because there is no noise.
Aren't you quite old to be here?
@@mikerodgers7620 he's not.
@@mikerodgers7620 what kind comment is this. Everybody over 40 shouldn't interact in the internet anymore and lay down die. You know how many people on RUclips are older?
Commercial space travels, video calls, iPads and AI in a film of 1968 🤯
And at least *twelve* BBC TV channels to watch on those tablets, no less - when this film came out, BBC2 had only been launched four years earlier, bringing the overall number of TV channels available in the UK to a whopping grand total of *three,* and none of them broadcast around the clock.
This is my favorite sci-fi film of all time! I was cackling like a maniac during the whole stargate sequence watching your utterly confused reactions (especially from the second guy in the middle). I was like "hoooo boy... You're not ready for the room scene...). Stanley Kubrick was (and still is) one of the most legendary filmmakers of all time. Thank you so much for reacting to it.
HAL was not "evil" in the moral sense. He was designed and programmed to complete the Jupiter mission. That was his purpose on the trip. When he learned that Dave and Frank were planning to disconnect him, he reasoned that these humans were going to jeopardize the mission and had to be eliminated. For HAL, removing the threat to the mission by killing had no moral implications at all. He was simply doing his job. I loved your reactions. It's reassuring to hear young people discuss weighty matters with curiosity and intelligence.
HAL was also permitted to continue the mission if the crew were incapacitated or killed. That was the detail that let him kill all but Dave, and 'maroon' him in space.
This is the first movie I ever saw in a theater. I was raised in a strict religious home, and our religion did not allow theaters. I had to sneak out to see it. If you want to understand it better, read the novel by Arthur C. Clarke.
Holy crap, what an intense first-ever-movie to see! I'd imagine your mind was somewhat blown?
Agree on reading the book, fills in a lot
The music in this movie is all classical music. The 'theme' music is by Richard Strauss, 1896.
In 1961, an IBM 704 at Bell Labs was programmed to sing "Daisy Bell" in the earliest demonstration of computer speech synthesis. This recording has been included in the United States National Recording Registry.
The color is one of the most subtly overlooked things in this movie. Kubrick crushed it on this one (as usual)
Stella displays an excellent understanding of temporal dynamics.
She also pays attention to details that the others sometimes miss.
For example, when they were watching the planet of the apes trilogy, she already knew the size of the time gaps between the films, and calculated the missing chronological info from hints in the movies themselves.
It seems she likes to have a comprehensive knowledge about movies and things in general.
The large circular set on the Discovery was built inside a Ferris Wheel. The camera and the sitting actor were strapped into place, while the moving actor would jog/walk in place while they rotated the entire set around him.
I really enjoyed your reactions to this theatrical experience. Consider this... This film was released in 1968. Man hadn't even landed on the moon yet.
You experienced a true masterpiece of the art form.
The discussion at the end is this movie fulfilling its purpose perfectly.
To make you think and ponder.
Kubrick was a genius.
Lots of epic movies from this time started with intro music. This was back when going to the movies was more of an event than it is today.
Yeah, this was filmed in 70mm Cinerama, which worked on a roadshow model, going to see it was a *big* event (seeing it on a real curved Cinerama screen, the way it was intended, is on my bucket list). The ambient music at the beginning, before the logo, would probably have played in the auditorium to set the atmosphere whilst people were still finding their seats, before the house lights even dimmed. Similar deal for the music over the intermission in the middle.
By the way, the Earth looks "a little strange" in the movie because IIRC in real life it literally hadn't been seen or photographed in detailed colour from space yet - this film was made before the moon landings - so for those shots some matte painting artist presumably just had to make their best effort at imagining what it'd look like from that distance!
Yep, it's known as an overture. The Ten Commandments, Ben-Hur, Spartacus, Cleopatra, Lawrence of Arabia, Doctor Zhivago, and even Star Trek: The Motion Picture have overtures.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_with_overtures
@@tommcewan7936You took the words right out of my mouth. I was going to type almost exactly the same thing, word for word, before seeing your comment. 😁
@@TheParticleWave and also Mutiny on the Bounty and West Side Story had overtures.
I was born in 1968 and remember my dad talking about this film all the time when I was very young. He loved it, along with Star Trek during its initial run. Thanks so much for watching this, you're a terrific ensemble! So great to hear your interpretations and observations over 50 years later. ❤
Also born in 1968 and while my dad didn`t talk a lot about this movie, I do remember him watching it on two occasions in the early and mid-70`s and also him watching Star Trek episodes. I would watch some scenes from them but I remember thinking to myself as a four or seven year old:" What is this ? Boy this is weird !". Mind you we only had a black and white t.v. then, so he missed out on the visuals.
Yep, childhood memories.
@@paulcarfantan6688 It was an amazing time to be a kid, wasn't it? Great to hear you got to watch the classics with your dad. I have one particular memory of thinking the Gorn was going eat Capt. Kirk, dad tried to explain that "it's not real, just on TV!" 😆
I'm sure the comments have mentioned this, but the sequel 2010 goes into more details and provides explanations. It's not a landmark movie like 2001 but it's still a pretty good sci-fi movie and worth the watch. Would like to see the reactions of this same group to it!
Kubrick made this film with science-fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke. Kubrick wanted to make "the definitive science fiction film" so he collaborated with Clarke, who was famous as a science-fiction writer. Kubrick wrote a novel at the same time as they made the film, so there is a lot in the 2001 novel that is not in the movie (and vice versa).
Things from the novel:
- Why HAL did what he did. He was told what the mission was in case the humans died so he would be able to carry it out, but ordered not to tell Dave and Frank about it. His programming couldn't handle both working with the crew and lying to them so he was caught in a logic loop, so he tried to sabotage the mission so the crew couldn't contact Earth.
- Gives more info on the group of pre-historic men at the start of the film. They were starting to die out because they ate only plants and didn't know about eating meat to survive. The monolith gave the main one the knowledge to use a bone as a weapon and to kill an animal for food, and he shared that knowledge with the rest of the group. The implication is that all pre-historic men would have died out without this knowledge, as they didn't know how to get enough food to survive or how to defend themselves from predators. So the first monolith enabled these creatures to survive and eventually evolve into modern-day man.
- The monolith on the moon was like an alarm. The aliens who buried it wanted to know when humans on Earth (if they survived and evolved) would be technologically advanced to get to the moon, find the monolith, and dig it up. The noise it makes is triggered by the sun hitting it, which was a signal that it had been found, and sent a signal to Jupiter (Saturn in the book).
- The monoliths are basically stations or sentinels that the aliens plant across the galaxy - to help struggling early civilizations into evolving into something greater, and to let the aliens know when the civilizations are ready to travel into outer space.
Fun fact:
Arthur C. Clarke's novel 2001: A Space Odyssey states that, “The monolith was 11 feet high, and 1 1/4 by 5 feet in cross-section.”
11 divided by 5 is a ratio of 2.2:1.
The movie was filmed in Super Panavision 70, which has an aspect ratio of 2.20:1.
Therefore, the entire film is in the shape of the monolith.
And the reason that the opening of "Zarathustra" fits the opening title so well is because it was meant by Strauss to depict a sunrise, the dawn of human intelligence -- it's a perfect companion to the themes of the film. There isn't a single piece of music in the film that was composed for it. The two Strausses (Johann and Richard) and Gyorgi Ligeti were used to perfection by Kubrick.
Nonsense. Strauss' music was in praise of a book by the same title. Kubrick is also praising this controversial work. It's the key that unlocks the true meaning of the film.
@billvegas8146 The book is by Nietzsche, of course, and has as its central theme the search for enlightenment. Strauss himself said that the opening of the tone poem is a sunrise, and there are few musical sunrises that have ever been able to match it.
There's a reason that John Williams adapted the opening of Zarathustra into the opening fanfare of "Superman". It was his own homage, and inside joke, to both Strauss and Nietzsche.
@@genevievenoble8120 I think he'd be the first to say both! 🙂
An interesting side note is that Kubrick *did* hire composer Alex North to write an original score for 2001, and the entire score was recorded with an orchestra and ready to be used. Then in a last-minute decision, Kubrick decided to jettison the original score in favor of the Strauss/Strauss and Ligeti music, which he had been using as temp tracks during editing. The original Alex North score was finally released as an album in the 1990s.
Edit: Forgot about Khachaturian, he was in there too. That same music cue was later used in Alien and Aliens, as a callout to 2001.
@@Johnny_Socko And Alex North found out that his score had been dumped in favor of the temp tracks when he went to the 1968 New York City premiere screening of the film, which had to be quite a surprise. (North used the word “devastated.”) If you listen to Alex North’s soundtrack (available here on RUclips), it has a very different, “lush” “1960s movie soundtrack” feel so I can’t really blame Stanley Kubrick for his choice.
I loved this reaction. Seeing Hailey trying not to react too much to things that they were guessing right and of course the blind reactions. This is not a movie I see people react to. I especially laughed at their statement about HAL's creepy voice and Hailey trying not to give away how good they were understanding what it was Foreshadowing. IMO HAL is the ultimate AI villain truly cold and calculated technology and Galdos took a lot of influence from HAL. I love vintage futuristic sci-fi too. There is another great movie about AI called War Games that I would recommend. It shows how many problems and fears we have today were predicted by futurists in Sci fi.
It is really important that you watch the movie 2010. It’s a bit more modern and not to incredible but it’s a fun movie and it EXPLAINS EVERYTHING. Steve
Your reactions were absolutely wonderful and very entertaining. Many movies entertain. Some are art. A very few actually change the world. You have just experienced one of those.
It tells everything wrong about humanity that a pretentious catastrophe of a movie like this is the world-changer… 😢
@@marjanek1 Finally, someone who can admit that this movie is overrated. I like parts of this film, but overall, it just doesn’t work.
@@josephrusso4828 no, guys. It just went over your heads. Just admit you don't get it and move on.
@@michaelminch5490 No, YOU need to get off your high horse and return to reality with everyone else, you pretentious monkey. I understood it just fine and I like parts of it. It’s not our fault it’s boring as all hell.
Even if we acknowledge the large impact, legacy, and big picture perspective that this film has, we’re also going to acknowledge that it’s just not entertaining at all. And that’s what movies are, entertainment.
But all this went over your head. Just admit you don’t get it and move on.
This blew my ten-year old mind wen I saw it in an old Art Deco theater in Nashville in 1968. It still blows me away 55 years later.
Haley, you did a great job of keeping quiet when they were all theorizing about the movie.
This is basically a journey through the evolution of man. The crazy special effects were a wormhole to the aliens who placed the monolith on the earth and the moon. The final evolution is Dave to become a StarBaby, the next evolution of man. Everything in this film is groundbreaking. New lenses were invented to shoot the special effects. The wormhole was done with a new invention called a "slit-scan" . The apes were in front of newly developed screens so they could FRONT PROJECT (instead of the commonly used REAR PROJECTION) the backgrounds over them. It took Kubrick five years to develop all the equipment for this film. One last tidbit of information, if you ad one letter to each of HAL'S letters you IBM! SO COOL!
I was at the premier of this film in 1968. I was eighteen and it blew my mind. I went back twelve more times to see it and it was my favorite film for years. I've since seen it over 60 more times at least.I watch it every year it is on tv. Great Reaction guys!!!
For me what makes this movie so great is how you interpret it says more about the viewer than the filmmakers. I can watch this a hundred times and get something different every time. I've come to not just appreciate ambiguous films but to seek them out.
The sequel, "2010," is definitely worth watching -- it's far more conventional and literal than the abstract and artistic experiment that "2001" was, and answers many of the questions raised in the first film. Also, the book series is an interesting expansion of the movies. The novel of "2001" was different from the film (e.g., they went to Saturn instead of Jupiter), but the subsequent books were sequels to the films rather than to the first book, which is weird.
I really like the sequel. In some ways it's a great companion piece because it is such a concrete story. It's almost like "Meanwhile, back with the primitive Earthlings and their dumb problems..."
The conversation between four very intelligent people about this provocative mind-blowing film was enlightening. Thank you.
It's a little too much for me personally, especially in the "wormhole" scene, but only for this movie since it's really more of "thought about it days after watching it" so all the convo could have been left at the end to really analyze it.
And yet they're still mostly reacting to generic crap, superhero movies and kids movies for 5-year-olds.
I agree, this was great! (as always)
@@kristofferjonshult7795 Yeah but it's what's popular. They cater to a wide audience.
Completely agree: fantastic reaction. Just as you say: four intelligent people, all of 'em contributing great lines and moments to this reaction. It's a big movie, so it needs four big brains on it! Definitely one of my favorite 2001 reactions of all time. I want to high five all four of 'em!
This was one of the most enjoyable reactions (and discussions after) to a film I've ever seen, especially since it's 2001: A Space Odyssey; truly one of the greatest movies ever made. Thank you Arthur C. Clarke and Stanley Kubrick! BTW, PLEASE react to the sequel - 2010: The Year We Make Contact (1984)! Great reactions, Ladies and Gents!!! Subscribed! :)
This was created in 1968. So far ahead of it's time, accurate, genius, amazing soundtrack, next-level cinemetography.
A little known fact is that after missing out on 2010: Odyssey Two (filmed as 2010: The Year We Make Contact) and 2061: Odyssey Three (as yet unfilmed), Kubrick was in the early stages of planning to shoot 3001: The Final Odyssey after he had completed work on AI: Artificial Intelligence.
Unfortunately, Kubrick died before he could start shooting AI (although the almost complete script was finished and shot by Spielberg). As yet no one has attempted to film 3001.
However, another Arthur C Clarke novel, Rendezvous With Rama is currently under active development by Denis Villeneuve, although shooting has been delayed by the knock-on effects of the Covid pandemic.
That is complete and utter bulls**t, 1000%. Did you just make that up?
There has been talk about filming 3001, but nothing came out of it. Certainly not by Kubrick, who never had any interest in directing any sequel.
I don't think 2061 lends itself well to be filmed at all.
2001 is the only sci-fi movie I've ever heard of that had the novelization and the movie done in tandem with each other. Kubrick and Arthur C Clarke were writing both of them together. The ending is confusing to people as a result, because you only get half the story.
There's a very excellent sequel called 2010 with Roy Scheider that answers a great many questions. Seriously, I can't recommend that enough.
There's four books though. Everything is explained in the end.
@@zynius Granted, but this movie makes sense by Book Two
I was taken to see this when it first came out. I wasn't sure what it was all about - that went over my head a bit - but I remember being awed. Fast forward 10 years and the guy I'd just dropped a trip with bailed on me and someone else came in and told me 2001 was on for one night at the local flea-pit so off I went. I 'got' it that time!!
One small point is that one has to think about what was happening in the world in which this movie was launched. 1969 was the year man landed on the Moon. And I had visions that by 2000 we'd be well on the way to going 'offworld'. It really did seem possible then. Great reaction. Thanks.
probably mentioned already, but NO music in this movie was written for it.
Opening title music is ‘Also Sprach Zarathustra’ by Richard Strauss (written in 1896!)
The other works are Blue Danube by Johann Strauss, Gayne Ballet Suite by Aram Khatchaturian, and dark choral & orchestral work throughout are avant garde concert works by Gyorgy Ligeti.
In the book, it's explained that the monolith change the brainwaves of the being who touch them in another level...unlock new potential but doesn't go beyond what is possible for the moment and the biology...3 pages at least just to explain the wave link concept and how it felt to the first human...It disappear after you touch it enough so...Crazy concept really !!
The film is a masterpiece, and as some of the other commenters on here have stated, it’s wonderful to see it through young fresh eyes again, albeit vicariously. To put into perspective the age of the movie, the little girl who played Haywood Floyd’s daughter on the video call is Vivian Kubrick, Stanley Kubrick’s daughter, she turned 63 this year!
I love Hayley and her giggles.
She's like a little girl who played a prank and now her parents and older siblings are talking their heads off while she watches them hide in the corner.
Well. I wish you could respond to this little sister movie.
No, I'm not talking about 2010, but the 1979 Russian film Stalker by filmmaker Andrei Tarkovsky.
Stalker is a movie with some art and a lot of philosophical and psychological analysis, while the director uses other art as if every frame were a painting.
Not only that, but the Russian science fiction novel that started it all, Roadside Picnic, very much raises the idea of possible aliens so advanced that they are like gods.
As well as drinking from Lovecraft and his Color Out from the Sky.
Stalker can be found completely free and with more than 15 subtitles in different languages right here on RUclips, since the same production company released it a few years ago as part of a project to bring art to the masses.
You really have to see Stalker, beyond the conflict with Ukraine.
It is indeed strange why a Ukrainian video game studio released a series of 3 games inspired by Roadside Picnic and Stalker called S.T.A.L.L.K.E.R. in 2007, and some time ago they announced and released trailers for S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2, Heart of Chernobyl.
Well, also, the Annihilation movie, starring Natalie Portman, and still on Netflix, I guess, drinks heavily from Stalker, despite being an adaptation of The Southern Reach trilogy of books (which incidentally, also drinks heavily from Roadside Picnic).
Back in the days this came out, there were no trailers. This music played while people were coming into the theater and sitting down.
The Monolith is a galactic Swiss Army Knife. Watch the second film which fills in some gaps. You may notice that the first satellites we see are actually weapon platforms. If you look closely at Dave when he gets back onto the ship he smiles... that's down to how many takes it took to get that scene right.
Yes please watch the next film. It’s more modern and not artsy but it explained a lot more.
Kubrick was not sure what the earth would look like in whole. Remember that the "Blue Marble" picture had not been taken yet. He did not believe you could see the continents, so did not include them in his shots of Earth.
This movie is 56 years old. It actually looks amazing to this day.
Excellent reaction, White Noise Four. You fearlessly dove into this classic! I watched it in a 70mm theater.
Btw the beginning music with black image was a prelude for the cinema, they did that sometimes, up to the 1970s.
And the vacuum toilet, as I understand it, was thought out so that it would really work.
The Jupiter Mission scenes were filmed using a massive centrifuge. The centrifuge revolutionized movies from that moment on. The camera was fixed to the inside of the set, and the whole centrifuge rotated freely.
“For though he was master of the world, he was not quite sure what to do next. But he would think of something. “The last two sentences in the novel 2001: A space odyssey. One of the best sci-fi novels ever written!
Very interesting post-movie discussion, thanks for including that!
normally when i watch reaction-videos i skip the discussion at the end, if there is any.
but this time i watched it all, you have done really good and it was interesting to hear.
kubrick movies are all epic
Yes, came out during the Apollo moon program and cold war with the USSR. Space-themed SciFi was popular then. You may like Planet of the Apes with Charlton Heston from the same year, and Colossus the Forbin Project, about AI from 1970.
The fact that everything was practical effects in this movie blows my mind. Christopher Nolan was inspired by some scenes in this movie and used that inspiration on some scenes in Inception. Haha, I was thinking the same thing as Nobu. The Witches from Left 4 Dead remind me of those noises when around the monoliths. The 2023 Barbie teaser trailer is a shot by shot callback to the start of this movie starting where the sun is starting to rise.
Such a great movie! Some shots about Space (Earth rise, the Moon…) came before we actually saw those for real.
Some notes:
-note how they’re using “iPads” and video calls… that didn’t happen for many many years, and definitively after 2001.
- HAL9000 is an artifact of how computing was in the 60’s: computers were massive and there were very few in numbers, like one per university (tops!). That’s why has a name and boasts an impressive record.
-HAL9000 name comes from IBM, each letter is the preceding one for IBM, indicating it was better than IBM.😊
No, video calls were very much in the zeitgeist of the time, having debuted as AT&T PicturePhone at the 1964 World’s Fair-it was a “futuristic” thing that people would have predicted. In fact, it didn’t play out as expected-one _could_ get PicturePhone service in the mid-to-late 1960s but practically no one did-the price was exorbitant and PicturePhone failed spectacularly. AT&T finally pulled the plug on it in 1978. Absolutely no one in the 1960s would have predicted face-to-face calling via something like Skype and Zoom _for free._
And Arthur C Clark specifically denied the IBM - 1 theory for HAL’s name in his book _The Lost Worlds of 2001:_
“As is clearly stated in the novel (Chapter 16), HAL stands for Heuristically programmed ALgorithmic computer. However, about once a week some character spots the fact that HAL is one letter ahead of IBM, and promptly assumes that Stanley and I were taking a crack at the estimable institution…As it happened, IBM had given us a good deal of help, so we were quite embarrassed by this, and would have changed the name had we spotted the coincidence.”
I would so love it if you guys did “Colossus: The Forbin Project”. Another tale of AI gone rogue from the same era. As far as I know, no other react channels have done it yet. It’s a classy and stylish techno thriller and a deeply underrated gem
Outstanding AI/sci-fi movie. One of my favorites.
Love that film, so underrated. The Terminator owes a lot to Colossus.
Hayley your face was so much fun to watch. No spoiler queen!
It's rare to see a reaction to this movie as thoughtful and philosophical as yours, so well done for this excellent debate and consideration. This is what I think a movie like this is supposed to do.
It's also wild to me that a movie made in 2010 can already look dated, but 2001 has survived 55 years and still looks absolutely incredible, and still wows audiences.
I think more spare, ambient, contemplative movies like 2001 work better for this brainy group, as there are so many spaces to chat and ruminate without completely missing crucial moments. Funny how something I would kill somebody for doing in a theatrical screening of this masterpiece actually works well in a reaction video.