2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY - Trailer
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 сен 2024
- 2001spaceodysseymovie.com
"For the first time since the original release, this 70mm print was struck from new printing elements made from the original camera negative. This is a true photochemical film recreation. There are no digital tricks, remastered effects, or revisionist edits. This is the unrestored film - that recreates the cinematic event that audiences experienced fifty years ago." - Christopher Nolan
Stanley Kubrick’s dazzling, Academy Award®-winning* achievement is a compelling drama of man vs. machine, a stunning meld of music and motion. Kubrick (who co-wrote the screenplay with Arthur C. Clarke) first visits our prehistoric ape-ancestry past, then leaps millennia (via one of the most mind-blowing jump cuts ever) into colonized space, and ultimately whisks astronaut Bowman (Keir Dullea) into uncharted space, perhaps even into immortality. “Open the pod bay doors, HAL.” Let an awesome journey unlike any other begin.
That a movie, made 50 years ago, can still look this good in the CGI era speaks volumes about the creative genius of Kubrick and his team of special effects wizards.
Richard Burton technology has come a long way hopefully they do the same with other old movies
Richard I agree. I remember this movie fairly well, and watched this trailer, and read the video description above, and I was thinking that the special effects really aren't dated. Oh, there might be an effect here and there that could be improved. But overall, the effects have held up well. MUCH better than those in the original version of the Star Trek episodes. And mind you, I'm not one of those purists who likes watching dated effects. These effects are exceptionally good and hold up very well.
Definitely agree the movies dated cgi effects somehow stand out because now everything you see no matter how realistic they go with it the Cgi always just looks rubbery
Having not seen the original, I watched this and assumed it was a remaster with additional CGI. To find out that this has absolutely no changes is an absolute testament to how well the special effects were put together. Amazing.
Richard Burton this trailer is showing a remastered version
Amazing how they managed to fit all the dialogue from the movie into this trailer...
You made me lol on that one brother.
Hahahaha you made my day.
Jacob Christensen Hmmmm
But film is awesome!
Kvasy in Lawrence of Arabia the first five minutes is just music with no visual reinforcement, it’s like that until opening credits come in, no dialogue is spoken until well past the 10 minute mark as well
The color scheme in this movie is just breathtaking
Yes! as I do remember in 1968.
"your breathtaking!"
But the colour scheme in this trailer, this release of the film is different to the original. That hexagonal tunnel is supposed to be white, not yellow. That's just one example
@@1000000man1 There is some different colour grading done to the trailer. Like there is more blue hue than the original movie
So clean
This movie was filmed with less computing power than the thing you’re holding in your hand.
Incredible!
true that, but the amount of money it took and the extremely passionate artists, is truly remarkable
Bruhh I'm shocked that the scenes in this trailer are shot 50 years ago
@@Typecast-L Yeah. It's still just that damn gravity (11,2km/h) to beat.
I am holding a mouse in my hand.
The only time a computer was used in the production was to move the 65mm film camera along a track adjacent to the 54 foot Discovery model. No computers were used to create the special effects. It was all in-camera first generation negative with photo-mechanical processes.
The scariest part about HAL, is how his voice stays calm the entire time
Not the whole time, as he was dying you could hear the fear and worry developing in his voice. That is why Dave started looking back and forth between Hals Eye and the key he was turning to unlock his partitions. "Im...afraid...my mind is going...I can..feel it...I can feel it.." Dave probably felt like he was killing something at that point.
@@Cragmortis imo, Kubrick plays with us by making Bowman act like a total robot, not showing any emotions even in the most desperate situations(stuck outside the ship for example), while HAL, a machine, shows more emotions than the atronaut throughout the film
@@Block_91 Perhaps this a nod to machines slowly becoming more human and us more mechanical in our way of thinking.
@@Cragmortis I got chills when he said "I'm afraid, I'm afraid Dave"
@GALACTIC EARRAPES One sounds calm, collected and unsettling and the other sounds like a retarded Microsoft David voice.
Just imagine what was to watch this masterpiece half a century ago... Unbelievable
I did and I have never been the same, (in a good way). peace.
In the year 1969, basically hippy golden age peak. You know how easy it was to get LSD then? I bet a lot of people did acid and saw this film in the theaters.
PresidentialWinner that sounds like a hella experience
Saw this in the late 90’s. Still holds up!
Hey can you tell me what that soundtrack is from 0:51 to 1:31? it sounds kinda a wind charm/raindrop thing,please I need it
Made 50 years ago and looks better than movies made yesterday.
50 years oh god
VincentHanna121 Don’t worry, you’ll get it in a lifetime or hundred.
VincentHanna121
2001 space odyssey is not adaptation of the book.
They were made side by side, with both artists contributing.
You don’t have visuals in book, so its more laid down to the reader.
In movie, more is done by visual storytelling because thats what film can provide.
Gives you the freedom of interpretation.
Its an art almost lost in modern moviemaking, because of the decay of average moviegoer.
@@harshpherwani6590
Harsh, I wonder just how much you know of this movie what was incorporated into it. For example, take the name HAL and add the next alphabet letter you come out I B M. You find others.
Not only does it look better, it is better.
The fact that this movie was made even before we landed on the moon makes it even more legendary for its accuracy about space.
flat earthhhhh
@@ayuunagisa idiot
@@ayuunagisa haha so funny dude
We landed on the moon?
@@IAmAHeater This movie is why Stanley was recruited to direct the moon landing!
this is true horror at its finest. the fear of the unknown and unpredictable
Hub
Holy shit, yes! I've always considered 2001 to be a horror film in many aspects. It's this directionless spiral into what we cannot possibly comprehend. That crescendo every time the monolith is the focal point is haunting. Underline: Haunting. It makes us feel small. Like we're not getting the whole picture. Like we are nothing compared to what we are witnessing. At the heart of that theology, what can be more terrifying? Maybe I'm nuts for saying this, but it's downright Lovecraftian without outright being so.
Man puts his trust in Technology, and it turns on him with Vengeance.
Brilliantly said
Space is indeed a place of horror. A place to be feared of.
I still don't understand how this movie from the 60's looks like it was made yesterday and some movies from the 80's and 90's look like shit
A movie ahead of his time, like his director,Stanley Ku]brick.
90% of youtubers today dont have cameras better than 10 x 7 pixels lmao
I have been thinking of the same thing...and kubrick's sudden death
Ya, but lots of movies from the 80's and 90's still look amazing. Film is timeless.
Because they use high resolution film
Stanley Kubrick really did a good job on making films look timeless
An alvvays fan!
Connor RK505 just saw your pfp and i just wanted to say Not My Baby is my favorite song
Like moon landing.
@@yvngyeezyisdead257 ayy
@@peco3806 hiii
The camera angles and the colorwork on this movie make it look like it came out yesterday. I absolutely love how incredible this movie looks visually. Based on the editing style, i'm guessing this is a new trailer created for it based on the pacing, but it looks fantastic even to todays standards imo
Agreed, I showed this trailer to my gf yesterday [not into film] and she asked “when did this come out?” She thought it was from this decade. Kubrick, a true visionary director.
bro thats because the movie is ai upscaled here XD
@@seynpurrp you don’t need to AI upscale film lol
@@ahappycoder2925 the movie is ai upscaled in the trailer dude
@@seynpurrp "There are no digital tricks, remastered effects, or revisionist edits. This is the unrestored film" literally in the description
Impressive then. Impressive even now.
A timeless classic
I watched it last week and was put off a bit since it was 50 years old, but I was blown away by how amazingly well its aged. No special effects, just good old fashioned practical effects and incredible cinematography.
I dont think it will ever age, its timeless.
Masterpiece always!
Is this 'irony'? I don't like it.
@@MrGlies no its not....... i just watched it....its a full crap.....with useless symphonies..... and without meaning .......if somebody says its a masterpiece i dont give a shit..... they call it masterpiece cus they could not understand.....i call it crap because they could not make me understand........fuck it.......intersteller is way more better......
NASA paid Kubrick to fake the moon landings, but Kubrick was such a perfectionist that they had to film it on the moon instead
i laughed about that joke when the movie came out in 1968 already
@@jonnypferdeschwanz7479 oh shit your right
Idiota!
I’d believe everything I read on the internet too if I was stupid enough to believe it all.
Look if you're not gonna give Mr. Kubrick the set he wants we are not shooting this moon landing
"This conversation can serve no purpose anymore. Goodbye." HAL is still creepy as hell.
Reminds me of my ex girlfriend
@@danpenia219 that's exactly like my relationship ended as well lmao
What's especially frightening is that you can sense just a tad of regret in Hal's voice over what he's doing.
Me ending an obnoxious conversation
Creepy as Hal
The Fact That This Was Made In The 60's Amazes Me. This Looks New.
Yall are telling me every single shot I just watched was filmed 50 years ago?
Crazy. I know.
Exactly!
The roomy audio is like the only thing that's 1968 about this movie lol
this is the same director who film the Apollo mission which moon landing is fake, as the Apollo mission is a politically strategy towards Soviet Union.
@@VacancyJB stop talking bollocks
Way ahead of its time. It really does look like a movie made in the 90s or early 2000s.
Yeah I could not believe it when I saw it was made in 68.
2030s
Even if it's not your favorite, there is no denying that it is a classic. Stanley Kubrick was indeed a great writer.
Imagine kubrick gets his hand on todays film technology
He wanted to use CGI for A.I. and create a full CGI human but sadly handed it over to Spielberg.
fraz Not really he wanted to direct it with Spielberg but unfortunately Kubrick pass away before they could work on it together
Yesssss😭😭
He probably did
It would be terrible. CGI looks awful but is the easy and lazy option that everyone takes. Films will never be the same
This is one of those rare films that not only make you tear up at the absolute beauty it is, but also change how you think and view the world and the people around you.
*It may not be your favorite movie of all time, but it’s a movie everybody **_needs_** to see at least once in their life*
I havent watched it. You reckon I should?
Definitely my favorite!
Just watch insterstellar. This was mid
Oh my, what a trailer. This thing totally freaked me out and I’ve seen this move dozens of times since it’s release. 70MM gonna kick our minds into a new dimension.
Toz Bourne
The Arclight in Hollywood still shows the Roadshow version in 70mm at the Cinerama Dome from time to time. I saw it two years ago when I was in town, it was freaking unbelievable with the huge curved screen and curtains drawn open and closed with overture music and full intermission.
I hope there's a screening in India as well. I saw Interstellar special screening on 35mm film. Even Nolan was there. Gave a little speech about the importance of 35/70 mm film.
no it's not. they changed the colours. don't get cheated.
It's a shame this version suffers from the "digital blue filter" sickness Hollyweird is currently obsessed with.
J.C. L. - Damn, hate to hear that, and upon repeat trailer viewing I see what you mean...or at least I think I do.
When everything goes back to normal, we need some more 2001: A Space Odyssey 70mm screenings!
@John Murphy ok
2070: A Space Odyssey , but this time, we need a 16K film not 4k or 8k O_O
Well said.
Re-released
YES, YES, AND YES!
I can't believe how old this film is. It literally looks like a 2019 film
It might look like 2030 movie as well
It will look
@Thane Mac Oh, nice. But the VFX, the cinematography, the overall feel of the film still makes it look like a recent indie sci fi film. It's amazing
better than a 2019 film
Except the camera quality
This movie was made even before the moon landing but it still had those elements from the future. So much ahead of it's time! Stanley Kubrick is a genius.
Kubrick did it too.
This was was ahead of it’s time
Stanley Kubrick faked the moon landing while making this movie look it up we never went to the moon Stanley confirmed it and we all know Stanley was a genius
arthur c clarke too
@@logger589 I was about to say the same thing. The moon landing was a hoax. Kubrick filmed it. But you know, he's a stickler for authenticity. So he filmed the moon landing on the moon. So there. 😂
"I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I cannot do that"
One of the scariest sentences ever said in movie history.
No. Just no.
@@johnalexanderson1945 yes. Absolutely yes
@@leboiboiboi then you are afraid very easily my friend. When HAL 9000 killed the astronauts without saying a word, yes, that was scary. But this? No, just no.
@@johnalexanderson1945 then you are ignorant my friend. Indeed , Hal 9000s moment with the astronauts was scary . But this? Yes, Absolutely Yes
Pokojni Toza not scary at all and no one knows about it lol
Dear God I thought they were going to remake it!
WhoPlayeditBetter It’s not a remake, it’s a rerelease originating from the original 70mm film negative.
A Tear Through Reality no
A Tear Through Reality That is literally just not true. There is nothing about the nature of physical modeling that makes it inferior to CGI. Get your head out of your ass. If you think 2001 needs to be remade with flashy effects and more "dramatic" acting, the movie was probably lost on your small mind.
A Tear Through Reality If you think shitty cg looks better than great modeling, you're wrong. Few movies have been able to achieve the level of technical advancement when it comes to cg as to not look obvious and unimmersive. The problem with cg is, unless it's 100% true to life, which is almost never, it looks visually inconsistent, and therefore bad. And that's not too even mention the effect it has on the performances of actors that aren't actually interacting with their set. Furthermore, if you think there was problems with the acting in 2001, enough to warrant a remake, you don't understand subtlety. Your kind contributes to the decline of Hollywood into the derivative Blockbuster nonsense that it is today.
A Tear Through Reality You are vastly overestimating the amount of movies with believable cg, and vastly underestimating the amount of time, money, and people required to make believable cg happen. Look at any b movie and see the effects of having a less than million dollar budget on special effects. And if you think the current shitty Blockbusters have more depth and content because their effects are mind blowing, you're mistaken and simple.
I remember asking my grandpa what was the last movie he watch and replied “space odyssey 2001” I thought it was a relatively recent film since it had 2001 one in it. Now I know my grandpa hasn’t seen a movie in ages
He couldn't come to watch anything after that masterpiece, i guess
@@aksmakesvideos maybe he decided not to dilute the experience he got in this film. Make him watch INTERSTELLAR
@@EidosX_ Maybe art lost its meaning on him after watching it
d0fabur5st lol I thought the same too.. I guess they thought 2001 was semi futuristic since it’s the 2000’s.. people must of thought different about it then we do now.. and it’s still like shit
Diego Imbert I’m an LSD junkie, and I understood everything about this movie. If you didn’t get an emotional reaction from it, that’s on you, you didn’t understand. That’s the whole point of art. Creating something that illicits an emotional reaction in people that understand it.
A beautifully made film. Legendary. I'll be watching this again today, I think. 55 years later, and it still looks modern.
"This conversation can serve no purpose anymore. Goodbye."
-Social etiquette classes with Hal
how to block people on the internet 101
The Filming Quality and the Cinematography is beyond CRAZY
all on top of an amazing story with many layers and decades ahead of its time, really nothing like it.
Jeffrey Lebowski “not on the rug, man”
Don't you notice most of 90s movies have shitty quiality in visuals, but this was made in the sixties and looks perfect
Luis Leal because they were shot on 16mm film this was 70mm
@@luisleal7301 because on what it was shot: a 70mm film instead of a normal one. And that's so expensive that even now days it's rarely used (many movies usually don't go further than 65mm even in 2020) which means that the source material is in amazing quality. That being said, many movies you find around from that period, aside from not being filmed on a 70mm, also probably weren't remastered like this one to get it in full quality, but instead maybe at best a 1080p in some rare cases, sometimes not even directly from the original film, this though is such a famous film from such a famous director that the original film could still be found
Lol people who haven't seen this movie don't know that 90% of the movie's dialogue is already in the trailer
It's that boring........ The lack of dialogue and interactions is so severe to the movie's value. I mean spaceships are that cool and influential but to make a movie 80% out of visual only is not a good idea
@muhammad wafri I didn't say it wasn't one. I said it was boring. Good visuals, an ok story and that's about it. It is the first one to make an influence, but the lack of dialogue and the story being too short is critical for the movie to be considered good. I really wanted to have an experience but that was just super boring to watch. Too many fillers to be honest. I understand the value of it being the first of a kind, but despite all that it's still a bad movie in today's standards imo.
@@maahrooreekee4295 Honestly movies nowadays try to fake the actual feel of the situation that the persona is in with an incessant bgm and over-the-top action and plot. I feel that this movie was an exception to that rule while being exceptional. Personally I'd go for realism anyday and that's exactly what the movies was going for.
Imagine yourself as the only human with only a bot to interact in space. You don't have to coz the movie does it for you in its first half. Then you're entering the world Of unknown. And it's spectacular too. You may find a simple plot mundane, however the simple approach to the plot has so many layers beneath it that I think you may have missed out on. And that's why I think you don't appreciate the movie or its 'fillers'. Maybe watching it again will enlighten you on the depth of those scenes? There is a reason why this movie was a piece of art and we seldom call a movie an art.
Maahroo Reekee bro you must have shit taste in movies! Not everything wants to be a action packed comedy movies! We as audience have different taste in movies.. this movie set the bar pretty high back then.. 2001 was truly one of a kind.. you don’t see movies look like this.. seems like you can’t respect this classic movie calling it boring and not what you expected.. just because it ain’t like a marvel movie.. full of visuals and cgi.. this was set back when we didn’t even have a visible scenario of space.
@@insertname1841 Well I agree that I may have missed out on things, but to be honest it was so hard to watch in the first place. It lack a thing that may not be critical to you, but is very critical to me, which is situations. The first half of it was overly long. Nowadays people would just compress that one hour into minutes
2001: A Space Odyssey is a cinematic visual masterpiece.
This inst just a great film. This is one of the greatest philosophical and meaningful creations of the modern age. Kubrick took humanity and presented it to us, showed us every aspect and then left us to reflect on who we are and our place in the universe. From the dawn of man to the space age, he showed us what we are. This is not only the greatest film ever, but the greatest pieces of art in history. The more you watch it and think about it, the more you question. This is the movie of humanity.
Agreed. It is one of the great pieces of art of the 20th century.
enigma It is just a movie, calm down.
Twisted Fate same can be said about the Mona Lisa, or the Sistine Chapel. Ones oil on canvas and the other is oil on plaster..
Obviously you cannot appreciate the deeper themes.
It is a great piece of art and a milestone in the history of cinema...but to say that it "showed us every aspect of humanity" is just a joke that even Kubrick and Arthur C. Clark would have laughed at.
It was good. Really good. But it wasn't THAT good.
I'm so famous.
*HAL 9000*
Lol
Open the pod bay doors, Hal.
I've got personal photos of you. From the exhibition.
HAL 9000 HA! lol perfect
How are things going, HAL?
An absolute masterpiece of filmmaking.
I did not expect to see someone like you in this comment section, lol. Glad you appreciate this film.
Is it really good
Pratik Raj maybe the greatest
He faked the moon landing. Look into flat earth, nasa lies
Actually, that's not true. Kubrick faked reality, the Earth is flat and is actually just a part of a larger planet called Othmotiop, and your life is just being used to entertain the alien race called the Othmos. And Kubrick is still alive and is the alien mastermind behind his version of the Truman show. Wake up you so called "flat earthers".
This honestly looks incredible. I've never the full movie however I have watched lots of videos breaking down how they did lots of the illusions on screen. The fact that the colours are so vibrant in this trailer whenever the original scenes were recorded 50 years prior is just breathtaking. It almost gives off the vibes of PC games today that use raytracing.
I watched the film in theatres projected on the original 70mm print. It was incredible.
THE HYPE FOR A 50 YEAR OLD FILM HAS NEVER BEEN THIS REAL.
moviemaster marco well with the whole FE psyop this will just Hit a home run for them nasa boys...... Stay circumspect and Vigilant....
i havent seen this movie.
I read the comments and someone compared this with star wars....mate ...you have no idea ...
A D
Yeah exactly
There's definitely no comparing this to Star Wars, but SW references tons of different comic books and scifi and movies, like Buck Rogers and Valerian and The Hidden Fortress. Watch THX 1138 if you think Lucas would have a problem making SW if 2001 never happened
@Blablabla ofc
it's totally incomparable with any other movies i know it cause i saw for free many sci-fi movies since i became a boxxy software user
Star Wars Juvenile Junk. 2001: a Masterpiece of Film Making, from a Master Filmmaker.
"Everything has already been done. Every story has been told, every scene has been shot. It's our job to do it better." - Stanley Kubrick
Tracer How?
False not everystory has been told. There is so much to be told and shown, raw footage, raw stories new stuff... Great things will come...
Charlie Rakowsky Exactly! We have only seen the tip of the iceberg. There is so much to be seen!
Jose Garcia
I was just quoting the director of this masterpiece.
Tracer lol
Stanley kubrick took people into his own world its feel like he made movies in people dream space where they imagine unbelievable things
This movie came out before Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon.
Neil Armstrong never set foot on the moon. No one has and never will.
@@SL0409 And why do you believe that? Do you think the moon landing is fake?
@@SL0409 ok boomer
Or... Did he? 😁️
@@SL0409 lmao
I think the reason this film aged so well is because instead of focusing on the future and how it "would" look, he focused on what we already knew and decorated it with beautiful colors, shapes, and cinematography. He simply focused on the basics rather than trying to special effects the hell out of everything and the film remains timeless because of that. It's a minimal post-modern masterpiece.
Thank God I thought they're remaking it
Yes so did I
Nyxtroos the Nolan movies are Warner bros and so is the harry potter franchise
Dicky Dewantara I KNOW right I thought THE same thin
Dicky Dewantara Stanley Kubrick is the greatest director EVER AND HE made this MOVIE in 1968 THIS MOVIE became reality IT changed everything in the whole MOVIE WORLD and IT was the greatest prediction IN film entertainment
Nyxtroos What kind of ignorant moron are you?Do you live under a rock?
The departed and oceans 11 are both remakes ,both from Warner brothers and both considered better movies than originals.
Its unfortunate people find this movie boring. Its one of my favorite movies of all time.
It's definitely one of the best movies of all time, and people who find it boring are just dumb. They are probably the same people who enjoy mindless over the top action movies with no soul than actual art
@@drivingstudios6151 let people enjoy what they want, they like artistic experimental films? good 2001 has got you. They like classic mob movies? Good godfather has got you. They like Action filled thrilling rides? Good marvel has got you. They like chill movies? Good once upon a time in hollywood has got you.
Stop degrading others because they aren't film snobs like you.
Look, i've watched alot of 2 - 3 hours flicks and enjoyed them, Full Metal Jacket is the only Kubrick film i finished, i'm into the art of movie shots and atmosphere and feels. But this one makes me bored and i have no idea why, i'm not a action filled guy and i'm mostly into movies with good dialouge and suspense. But any of you fine gentlemen have a guide on watching this without getting bored?
@@frankuraku5622 I found myself getting bored of the pacing in this film, but it's 100% worth it by the end. It has one of the best endings ever created in cinema.
And if you like movies with good dialogue and suspense, check out some of Quentin Tarantinos work. Specifically Inglourious Basterds
@@CocoCineaste That's what i was saying, i like movies like Quentin Tarantino's and he's the first director i idolized. Also a update that i've finally finished The Shining and Clockwork Orange (despite being spoiled out by a friend on the story) and i loved Clockwork Orange more.
this has to be in cinemas again
Subtitulos del canal de RUclips: Joker uz
Oh, yeah!
KInRick24 That's mean
woah there, wut u mean bruh? Is there a nefarious agenda conveyed in the story?
Usually cinemas show 2001: A Space Odyssey on April 3rd, I’ve made it a tradition to view it at a different theater every year around the 3rd, this year I went to DC to view the film and got to see extended cut footage and the room at the end, truly a magical experience, except for the extra bits, there was nothing incredible in the footage
For those who haven't seen this film and are planning to watch it, well you better be a patient person cuz this film requires patience.
David No patience required. You do need to be smarter than the average bear.
teddy mills no you dont lol
WHAT WAS THAT! I CAN'T HEAR YOU OVER THE 2 HOURS AND 44 MINUTES THIS MOVIE TAKES UP!
Yea I watched it (in IMAX) and the slow pace of the film and long scenes of spaceships really ruined it for me!
As does the book but the last 50 or so pages are insane.
Seeing my favorite movie in IMAX was probably the best thing I’ve ever seen in my life, at a theater; this movie is just a masterpiece
I thought this movie was made in 2001. I thought it was reasonable for it to get all the tributes. Then I realized it was made in 1968.
If I knew nothing about 2001: A Space Odyssey and someone showed me this trailer, I would think this was a new film. Whatever they did to clean up this footage is just mind-blowing.
BlasterMaster surprisingly, this is the original unedited film, Kubrick used at the time one of the very few 70mm cameras to film 2001, giving it a resolution of close to 8K
CT-5555 That makes it even more incredible.
Wow, it’s sad that you (and probably a ton of other people) think this is cleaned up.
BlownMacTruck Well, last time I saw it was on VHS and I was a child, so...
If anything it looks a little worse. I've watched it last on a more "faithful" transfer, and the colors are slightly different here, some scenes that before had a blueish tint are now gray, and the absence of noise might expose some of the practical effects. This is just my first impression, I could be wrong. I'm watching on my phone after all.
This looks like this was made in the future.
Saying truth
You know you have a masterpiece when, no matter how much time passes, it always looks like it could have been made yesterday, instead of 50 years ago
Am I the only who thought this is a remake of the original?
No
No. At the beginning I thought HAL sounded like Alan Tudyk and Dave looked a bit like Sebastian Stan. Worse casting has been done for remakes. Lol
So glad that wasn't the route they were going haha
Jesse V same for sure.
Wait is it not a remake?
It still looks like a 2021 movie. 70mm and Stanley's creativity makes this film timeless.
Special thanks to Nolan guys!!👏
Just in case you did not know it was Nolan who suggested this 70mm release at the 50th anniversary of the movie!
If it wasn't for this movie, I bet Nolan wouldn't have ever made Interstellar!
Shows his dedication to the craft 🙏
well, what about we thanks to both Stanley and Nolan
Oh don't pat Nolan on the back any harder than he already has.
AndresGarcialegos I know that and I'm not saying something like Nolan over Stanley.
I just wanted to thank him for 70mm screenings of 2001.
That's it!
And this is why film and practical effects are king. This movie still looks utterly stunning.
Exactly. In that regard it blows most modern Sci-Fi out of the water!! Amazing to think this is a 50 year old film.
I was pissed at first, I thought the were remaking the film.
TheyMightBeBricks they'll never do that. I think Hollywood, ironically, had enough respect not to do that
dude same! i hope that'll never happen tbh. I dont know how i would feel if they started a remake
You can't remake a perfect movie. Imagine they used modern CGI for this movie. A new voice for HAL. Idris Elba as Dr. David Bowman.
TheyMightBeBricks same. I thought it was Henry Cavill on the thumbnail lol
Same, I was really OMFG, they are really trying to remake this masterpiece??? Please dont be a JJ lens flare crap fest, please god!!!!!
. 2001: A Space Odyssey is a true masterpiece for the ages! It has been my favorite movie for many years, and will continue to be for many more. I also know that the motion picture actor Tom Hanks feels the same way.
When I saw the film for the first time at the Hollywood Pacific Theater, in Hollywood, California, back in 1969, it had been playing there for over a year! In fact it actually screened there for a total of 80 weeks! This was the first time I experienced a film in Cinerama. It was truly breathtaking! I owe a debt of gratitude to my high school teacher, James Maechling, in arranging for my western civilization class to see the film on a field trip. Thank you sir, so much!
In March 1993, the Cinerama Dome Theater, also in Hollywood, held a week-long series of screenings of 2001, to celebrate it's 25th anniversary. I was really thrilled to see the movie in that iconic venue. Hopefully that superb theater will reopen. It's been closed ever since April 2021, because of the COVID pandemic.
Of course, I've seen the film many more times on video since my first viewing. It's gratifying to know that so many people around the world have expressed their appreciation for this monumental work of cinema. The films director, Stanley Kubrick, was a true visionary. His impressive legacy will live on forever.
Thank you
I know Data, Wall-E, Terminator, Sky-Net are some of the most amazing AI we've seen, but Hal is the Granddaddy of them all.
Don't forget Ava from the masterpiece film Ex Machina.
And Tars from Interstellar
Terminator and skynet are the same
Forbidden Planet(1956), War Of The World(1951) and Gravity
This movie is truly immortal. 50 years and it is still an absolute fucking masterpiece. It's indescribable.
The Father of all sci-fi movies
Neil Armstrong stanley told you how to move in Area 51 stage
The grandfather, star wars is probably the father
R.i.p
It is even better then your own biopic "first man". Lol
And for more than a 5 decades,Not a single one of these sci-fi films was able to get even close to it.
H...next letter I
A...next letter B
L...next letter M
I seriously thought they remade this for a second...
*deep breath*
Okay...we're good...phew...
KRWBY Productions all our butts were clenched in the same thought!
yeah, I thought Casey Affleck was on the Thumbnail lol
Just saw this movie over a week ago and fell instantly in love with it. What a masterpiece!
:) good ...
This is the greatest movie ever made !!!
Me too, at first I was a little disappointed with the ending, especially with all the hype this movie gets but I've been constantly thinking about it ever since. No other film has made me think and ponder about it the way 2001 has.
At first I thought it was really made in 2001.
he's a mad scientist in the filmy world.
I can't still imagine how could human be this perfect.
i’ve never scene this movie before but this could literally pass as a movie from the 2010s, no? the shots and framing are so current. the movie looks way ahead of its time. also the special effects are seamless. wow
This was the film that made me fall in love with filmmaking.
ᴀʀᴇ ᴜ ᴀ ᴅɪʀᴇᴄᴛᴏʀ
The 1.2K dislikes came from HAL
Will Kronzer then werr are the other 7.8K dislikes? 🤔🤔🤔
HOPELESS ENTERTAINMENT from the people who got pissed after HAL's reformation in 2010
Nah... It is IBM
RIP Douglas Rain (the voice of HAL)
HALs parents.
Russian bots
Jesus, this looks so good to be from the 60s. Damn.
There was a time, when studios and directors strived for a film that would be remembered for 50 years, vs., 50 films that would be remembered for 1 year.
@@HardRockMaster7577 wise words...
i never understood this line of thought because films never looked better than they did in the 50's through the 70's.
@@Carl_McMelvin 70mm projection has always looked incredible
This movie is 53 years old and still looks amazing!
I wonder what life will be like in 2001
We got some good news for you, bud
I dunno, maybe something about hijacked planes crashing into skyscrapers.....
We got Shrek
Dude 2001 was not that long back common. You are saying as if it was 1950s
+smeggie and 9/11
Me: I must see this movie, let's find a pirate site to download it illegally.
Computer: I'm afraid I can't do that.
Me: What?
Computer: This conversation can serve no purpose anymore.
U have a apple computer ..isn't it
DMCA intensifies
Well I got mines from a pirate website😏😂😂
Sugar Show Just got to yts.mx
It's on Netflix dude.
"There are no digital tricks, remastered effects, or revisionist edits."
*I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of Special Edition Trilogies fell into shade, and were dismissed as embarrassments...*
*A bit of balance just came back to the galaxy.*
I so miss Kubrick. He's always been my favorite. This movie changed my life!!
Went to go see The Meg last night and this trailer played. Everyone in the audience started cheering
I guaranfuckingtee the audience for The Meg did not give a round of applause for 2001 lol
bfffggffdfd you would’ve been surprised then lol
bfffggffdfd also the only reason I saw The Meg was because I see movies for free
Olivia Petersen legit? I’m 14, and knowing most kids my age, I feel like they were the target demographic for the Meg, so I would be surprised if anyone in the theater knew what 2001 actually was
Keppy’s Diner when I saw the meg the audience was mainly people over 50
At least they’re not remaking it. Good Hollywood has some respect for film
The Hungry Panda If they ever remade it, and you could choose the director, who would you choose? I would probably choose Denis Villenueve. Him and Roger Deakins could just take the original screenplay and make a modern masterpiece.
I would honestly lose all respect for Hollywood if they remake even one Kubrick film.
İ want to see remake, technology has evolved why not movies?
Dante XE I don't think there's anything to remake about this movie. The effects still hold up
James Lewis I would probably choose Dennis too. But it would have to be a sequel. Because a film like this is too legendary to be remade
Movies don't get better than this. 2001: A Space Odyssey is a masterpiece.
Pooty Tang. Also good.
Jacob Dominguez god father,ESB, and some others IMO are way better!
rei king gaming and lego productions Empire Strikes Back? Man give me some of what you're smoking please, my stash has been weak recently
Jacob Dominguez it is a great movie cand definitely one of the classics be because of how many innovations it made to the industry; but it is not a masterpiece it just shows good craftsmanship.
And I Or maybe all film is subjective and it’s okay to have personal preferances and not be a toxic sack of shit
When I die, I want the words "It’s full of stars" written on my gravestone. This film sits at the very top of the creative pyramid, often imitated but never surpassed. If you want bubblegum movies, they're a dime a dozen. "2001" is the real alchemical gold.
No film has ever been more ahead of its time. Love it or hate it, the importance of 2001 is beyond debate.
One of those rare movies with spacesuits without a light in the god damn helmet.
100% feels.
Why? Why do they do that? Why?
There is a light in the helmet. See the first AE-35 replacement scene, when Franck Poole goes out of the pod.
omg I feel ya so much
Colin Pughe Cinematographers and grips have a harder time lighting actors faces if there’s a thick sheet of glass over it because the glass might reflect the light weirdly or capture unwanted reflections from the set. Putting the light in the helmet helps expose the actors face sufficiently while providing an in universe explanation for it.
By far the best, most logical and realistic sci-fi movie of all to date and to think it was made when CGI was nothing but sci-fi.. Still can't wrap my mind around how brilliant this movie is. 10 out of 10!!!
This film is ahead of OUR time right now in 2019 imo
str8 facts
For real. the big thing for me is that the rotating space station was completely real. They built it on its side so they could spin it and have the actor jog across the wall as it went under his feet. Then they just used some creative camera angles to make it look as if he was running upside down as the space station rotated
Stanley Kubrick's Magnum Opus 💥
Nah, we all know that forcing NASA to get him to the Moon to film a fake moon landing there because of pure dedication to details was his greatest achievement;)
TheArklyte 😐😐
+Jeremy Davis
had to check what have I typed to deserve such a reaction.
Too overused?:\
FILM's magnum opus. The entire history of film.
Why did I think of Mad Max
I highly recommend to anyone who hasn't seen this movie to watch it in the theatre. It's usually played every year on the big screen in most major cities and it's worth the wait (even waiting out covid). It was designed from the ground up to be played on a massive screen with loud speakers. It's not just a movie, it's a visceral experience. Watching it at home is full of distractions and it's just not the same. Im really lucky that I was able to see it for the first time being re-screened in Toronto with a closing talk from the SPFX director Douglas Trumbull.
I waited to see it on the big screen. Worth it
We seriously thought we'd be colonizing space by 2001. How naïve we were.
This movie is the highest expression of cinematic art.
Respected directors even today in 2018 that's 50 years later, cannot decifer how the fuck could Stanley Kubrick could make this movie and pull it off, but he did. Not even today's most expensive ARRIs or Alexa or RED cameras look this good.
There's a difference in resolution and necessary technique between digital and analog techs. The 70mm film was the secret being able to capture ~8K images.
Directors know how. They just can't match his genius to reproduce it. I know calculus like the back of my hand but I'd certainly never have been able to create calculus myself. That's like Hubert. They know his genius and his techniques and they can't replicate them, only imitate.
I was scared for a second that this was a reboot, but I hope this is in cinemas, it is one of my favorite films of all time
I watched this between my fingers thinking the same thing
Top 5 movies the y cant remake them
5. Pulp fiction
4. The good the bad and the ugly
3. 2001 a space odyssey
2. Psycho
1. The godfather trilogy
Unfortunately theres a godawful remake of psycho
psycho is remakable, good bad and the ugly too, there are a few directors i can imagine doing both, maybe lynch for a new view on psycho would be cool, and honestly clint easwood would probably do a nice tribute in good bad and ugly, or villeneuve. The rest i agree, because it really comes down to the unique visuals and deeply intricate characters.
Well godfather 3 can use some improvements
Vertigo too
I'd add Seven Samurai, There Will Be Blood and The Human Condition.
The movie didn't even feel like a 60's film
If I didn't know better I'd think that this was an upcoming film. It feels and looks so ahead of its time.
@@voidlooksback that's because it was shot on 70mm and was restored for better quality.the original's colours were less saturated and more (for the lack of a better word) ugly
Muito bom!
@@voidlooksback I was in a cinema watching Interstellar and before it started they showed a trailer for the re release of 2001 the young couple in their 20s behind me said wow!! that looks amazing can't wait till that comes out, you should have seen their faces when on leaving the cinema I turned to them and said I saw that film when I was 12 (I'm now 64) they just could not believe it.
That's because it isn't. It was only shot in the 60's.
I can’t believe this was released 50 years ago. How do they make it look so good?
No remaster, just a fresh print off the original edit master.
Martin : Mad skillz and using the peak technology of analog film making.
Irwin Möller actually, this version had no cgi or digital editing. It was done in pure photochemical editing, from the original negative.
You're half right. There's no CGI in this version, and it's also not a remaster.
He also made the moon landing videos for nasa. Supposedly if they are fake.
Seriously, this movie looks better than most movies made today. Correct me if I'm wrong, but 2001 has aged better than any other movie in cinema. It is from what I've experienced from Cinema, perhaps the only movie I would consider to be completely timeless. In 50 years, this masterpiece will not have aged a day, as it hasn't in the previous 50 years. The only other movie I can think of that also might not age is Schindler's List.
The movie is basically based upon the god concept, the meaning of existence, the vastness of intelligence, the human emotion , the beyond infinity scenario. This is the most epic different movie I’ve ever seen. Kubrick is the creative genius
Ty this is what I wanted
Indeed
Well said!
Arthur C Clark made some contribution
YES YES YES
This movie is 50 years old? God damn it looks fantastic, Stanley Kubrick is a genius
The Greatest Film of All Time Directed by The Greatest Director of All Time!!!
This is still the greatest sci-fi movie ever made! Kubrick is definitely a genius. Thank you for making such a beautiful film.
This is still the greatest -sci-fi- movie ever made
For the People saying this is a reboot, budget interstellar, spoiled, read the description. Better yet watch the movie that has been out for more than 50 years. Then if you feel like it, watch it in a new format on the silver screen.
Jose Parra but i‘m unsure if they wouldn’t simply make it as mainstream as possible stripping it from the appeal of the first one in the fist place. I also got used to the slightly distorted voice of HAL and I can tell for sure that it won’t be in the movie
Lol, this is the internet. You got trolled Jose. People purposely comment stuff like that _knowing_ the truth and that people like you will fall into their trap and get upset. When will we learn...😂
DKS Films Perhaps, but the way people now tend to jump to conclusions without research. It just had to be said.
no it's only been out for 17 years duh
Timothy Baumann Oh crap, you got a point.
The HD was so good i thought this was a reboot
damn I can't believe the future was 18 years ago
In my humble opinion, the best movie ever made.
That kind of atmosphere was never reached again in a Sci-Fi movie to this day.
Depresses me all the time.
What about Interstellar or Gravity or LIFE?
@@k.r.99 Good movies, no doubt. But they don't even get close to this level of atmosphere. (In my opinion.)
@@k.r.99 Gravity is almost insulting. What a shit movie
@@SimonGeraedts Understandable. Just wanted to make sure you knew these movies as well :-)
Christopher Nolan is behind the re release of the movie
Yes I read the description.
Makes it worse, actually. The only good movie he ever made was Memento, everything else just panders to the drooling masses.
idontcare80 lmao fucking hater
+idontcare80 pretentious
idontcare80 How to sound like an intellectual -
Step 1 - Hate on Christopher Nolan.