How Kubrick Made 2001: A Space Odyssey - Part 3: The Lunar Surface (TMA-1)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 авг 2024
- Everything you’ve ever wanted to know about the making of Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey. In Part 3, we follow Floyd to the Clavius Moon Base to investigate the Tycho Magnetic Anomaly (the monolith). Every bit of information in this video was available for free on the Internet and from the Bluray of the film. I explored what was available on the Internet and found tons of great information from a wide variety of sources concerning the special effects, music, costumes, set, and several of the actors.
Part 1: The Dawn of Man - • How Kubrick made 2001:...
Special thanks to:
www.2001italia.it/
www.cinephiliab...
blog.tvstoreonl...
www.satkinsoncr...
Patreon: / cinematyler
Twitter: / cinematyler
Facebook: / cinematyler
Tumblr: / cinematyler
Zero Gravity Toilet instructions -
i.imgur.com/wPV...
Credits:
This video essay was written, edited, and narrated by Tyler Knudsen.
Sources:
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968 Dir. Stanley Kubrick)
Aries 1B artwork by Simon Atkinson - "2001: Filming the Future"
www.satkinsoncr...
Adam Savage and Chris Hadfield at ComicCon-
• Adam Savage Incognito ...
The Making of Kubrick’s 2001 - Edited by Jerome Agel (special thanks to La Familia Film)
issuu.com/lafam...
A vintage article from American Cinematographer by Douglas Trumbull on creating Special Effects for 2001 A Space Odyssey
cinetropolis.ne...
DOUGLAS TRUMBULL | Master Class | Higher Learning
• DOUGLAS TRUMBULL | Mas...
Stanley Kubrick | 2001 A Space Odyssey (1968) | Making of a Myth
• Stanley Kubrick | 2001...
2001: A Space Odyssey -- A Look Behind the Future
• 2001: A Space Odyssey ...
Space Station Model in dump
www.cinematogra...
American Cinematographer - Douglas Trumbull
cinetropolis.ne...
Aries Auction -
www.usatoday.co...
www.ign.com/art...
Brian Johnson Interview -
blog.tvstoreonl...
Bryan Loftus Interview -
blog.tvstoreonl...
Fred Ordway Interview -
blog.tvstoreonl...
Ivor Powell Interview -
blog.tvstoreonl...
Fred Ordway Retrospective -
www.visual-memo...
Music:
“I Am Running Down the Long Hallway of Viewmont Elementary” by Chris Zabriskie (chriszabriskie....)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0
creativecommons...
![How Kubrick Made 2001: A Space Odyssey - Part 4: Jupiter Mission [A]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nxDA_PL-XzA/mqdefault.jpg)
![How Kubrick Made 2001: A Space Odyssey - Part 4: Jupiter Mission [A]](/img/tr.png)
The special effects in 2001 are maybe the most realistic i've ever seen. Because of no CGI everything looks much realer. Other movies from this time just look unrealistic because of the behavior of the models. Stanley Kubrick and his team did master this part close to perfect. This is just amazing in every way. Thank you Mr. Kubrick!
I love how creative they had to be to solve some of these visual effects concepts. I wish there were more experimentation with practical effects nowadays.
Surely, Lucas was influenced by By Kubrick.
2001 interiors look more futuristic today than most of CGI models in today's scifi movies
Still, they didn’t manage to simulate lunar gravity.
@@winomaster Same special effects team.
Crazy how they made all of this in an era before computers, digital compositing and CGI. How many people had to work for so long for those VFX.
It isn't crazy a tall. Cameras and filming techniques were evolving. Computers were already being used on battleships during WWII to calculate trajectories and bombers had computers to calculate airspeed and distance for firing automated machine gun turrets at enemy fighter planes.
TTTMusic You probably mean computer graphics. No computers in the 1960s? Get a grip!
Yeah it kind of stumps the mind. I saw it 20 years past the era it was made in and still marveled at the accuracy. Nevermind the narrative... the tech seemed to be bottomless in detail.
@@FIREBRAND38 Computers are used in film for more than animated graphics. Computer motion control wasn't pioneered until Star Wars, filmed in 1976, ten years after filming of 2001. Yes, computers did exist in the 1960s, but they were primitive compared to what we have today - basically glorified calculators, and not capable of producing the graphics we see in the film. If you watch Part 2 of this series, you'll learn that all of the on-screen computer monitor animations were done photographically, by hand. Computer-assisted scene compositing wasn't a thing until probably the early '80s. @TTTMusic is correct when he says that this film was a remarkable achievement, especially considering that it was made without computer assistance. Everything you see on screen was done by hand.
I mean just for the “computer screen”-contents some guys worked a year
Did you know that Kubrick directed the Moon landing? However, few know that the production costs were ridiculous because he insisted with filming everything on location
Haha, that's great!
I'd heard that, too. His method of shooting take after take meant that the budget for filming the moon hoax on the moon shot up due the cost of the thousands of oxygen tanks which needed refilling.
He learned from those mistakes and kept the budget of "2001" down by shooting the film on location near Mars rather than insisting on a more expensive shoot near Jupiter.
moon
He really wanted the authentic Moon look, but he didn't want to leave England, so he had them bring part of the Moon to Pinewood.
And he wasn't happy with the first few takes of the actual launch so NASA had to abort the mission 5 times and reset everything each time... and being Kubrick he drove the astronauts insane because he wanted better acting performance over and over again...
Fun fact. The zero-gravity toilet is only a joke on the surface. It actually plays into the themes of the film, namely that the human race is, so far as space-faring species go, are extremely infantile and childlike. The three things babies need to learn before they can advance to the next stage of development is how to walk, eat and poop. We see people having trouble with all three during the Floyd sequence. People can't really walk in zero-g and depend on velcro shoes, giving them the unsteady gait of a toddler. Space food is eaten through straws and strongly resembles baby food. And the zero gravity toilet shows that waste disposal in zero-g is not for the faint hearted and takes some practice.
this is why i love kubrick - there is so much to discover and nothing we see happens out of coincidence.
I never thought of it that way but it's absolutely correct. Great films make subtle points subconsiously - you kind of sense what he is doing but aren't totally aware of it because your attention is being drawn to so many other details. You can even argue that seeing the Earth child form of Dave's consciousness at the end of the movie is where Kubrick was going with this.
Some people react to 2001 like it's just a huge yawn fest. They're expecting human on human back and forth, character developent etc. but 2001 is taking us into an existence where the humans have become more secondary to their own future.
HAL keeps repeating emphatically that no 9000 computer has ever committed an error - it's literally beyond human ( to err is human ). What does that mean for other human pursuits like music, art, religion, ethics, filmmaking ? Do human emotions become vestiges held on to indefinitely or do they gradually fade away the way we still have old supersticions and pagan beliefs or do these emotions evolve into a more god like sensibility - do more people develop the capacity for something that is kind of saint like? Is this what we are seeing when Dave's spirit appears at the end of the movie as an Earth child ?
PassiveSmoking I thought Kubrick was using the space food as a way of showing the sacrifice you will have to make if you engage in this activity. You wouldn’t want to be in a prison which is surrounded by the most hostile place known to man. In other words you would have to be insane to think space travel was a good idea. No beaches up there people, in other words just a wasted effort for mankind.
@@barcaleicleic7781 Wonderful insight. You hit the nail by pointing the analogue between space travel and prison. Sometimes it occurs to me too. People tend to associate space travel with adventure (like in Star Wars or Star trek), but within the realms of technological plausibility we have currently, living in space is indeed like living in a prison. You have nowhere to escape. You have to stay there and be responsible with everything pertaining your life until your time (i.e. end of the mission) comes. You can't just flee somewhere because you got bored. Being confined in such small space for a long time might take a toll on your mental well-being yet you have to endure.
i know how to poop...
Amazing how these visuals hold up through the years.
Dude, you put nearly as much effort into your videos as Kubrick did into 2001. great job!
+dnns Thanks! That really means a lot!
Just a fantastic job!
@@CinemaTyler Thank you thank you thank you for these marvelous brilliant documentaries am on the third viewing what makes these so grand is every time you learn something new model building was a great occupation as a child assembled the Moon Bus after seeing the film all the best
Nope, that does not mean, these are not well made btw
@@yt-sh that's what your parents said when you were born
There'll probably never be a director that put so much time and effort into his films as Kubrick.
He definitely was one of a kind.
Just like everyone else.
It is hard to imagine such a thing happening again.
George Lucas is a contender.
@@dannydaw59 lol.
Also, there probably will be another eventually. History is long.
What i find amazing is that this special effects are better than most best cgi today
The round Aries Shuttle inside the Moon landing scene really blew my hair back when I saw this in the theatre at 10 years old! I'd never seen anything as amazing in my life!
What I love about the monolith is that it isn’t some intricate, beautifully designed, abstract device. It’s just a black rectangle. And that’s all it needs to be
I saw this when it first came out when 9 years old. Had a huge impact on me. I went on to earn a BS in chemistry but ultimately ended up being a commercial photographer. Back in the old days, I built a front projection setup based on what I learned from the making of this movie to do composite images. Of course, digital came along, and I was one of the first photographers in the region to use Photoshop (V2 beta)
The level of creativity employed by all of the people who made this film (not just Kubrick) is almost beyond belief.
Beyond that, let's not forget it is a compelling story that leaves the viewer to interpret much of what they've seen, which is quite unusual. It ask the viewers to participate, not just be passive observer. Truly not just an amazing film but a serious work of art.
BTW: Thank you very much for this series. Obviously a huge amount of work to produce.
Kubrick KNEW his craftmanship like hardly anyone else and could really shoot a scene in his mind from a certain position and KNEW how it would look like with a 16mm lens with an aperture of 3.5 or with a 50mm lens with an aperture of 8.0 or 1,8. This man always did his homework and even thou Warner Brothers (for which he made most of his movies) always gave him the time, money & freedom to do his projects, Kubrick always wanted to deliver something good to EARN himself that privilege.
Brian Johnson's work on Space 1999 reminded me a lot of the work done on 2001ASO
how the hell don't you have more subscribers? This is some of the highest quality content on RUclips!
+Mason Brown Thanks! Feel free to spread the word, hehe.
definitely, top notch work, I tip my space helmet to you.
CinemaTyler Sure, bro, it deserves it!
Tyler you have put so much thought and work into your videos it is on a par with some of the programmes I have watched on BBC TV.
You deserve all the credit you receive sincere thanks 👍
Dude, this man stole your rug man. The video is just like a distraction man.
this is an amazing look behind the film, i can only appreciate 2001 more. thank you for this!
Glad you liked it! Thanks for watching!
How refreshing to know someone has equal wonder and awe of Fine Cinema of the Golden Years of Film: 1931~1969.
This is a great explanation of the sequences.
There was something I noticed recently after years of watching the film: During Ligeti's Requiem, at a particular part, there is a kind of mid-pitched hum (the specific instrument that generated it eludes me, might just be a cello's natural harmonic), and the way Kubrick edited the scene of Floyd touching the monolith and the music, the hum actually starts when he touches the monolith, and ends as he pulls his hand away. It's very subtle, but mind-blowing when you discover it.
Thanks! I never noticed that before! It seems too perfect to be an accident.
its a shame that stanley died before 2001
its a shame he died period
I think he was killed... for making eyes wide shut
@@251Trioxin bur
Devil took him
@Phil Ill why do you care about what I watch mind ypur own business and fuck off
Wow - how is this documentary not in the millions of views? Young people do not appreciate the genius of Kubrick!
First of all, great series!
There is a detail in the film I find to subtle and rather remarkable: in the novel version, the monolith is described as having a completely non-reflective black surface, to the point of absorbing light pretty much entirely. In the scene where the astronauts visit the excavation scene, Kubrick seems to take great care in showing that there are powerful floodlights on all sides of the monolith, using the perspective of the hand-held camera, as well as frequent reverse angle shots. But the surface of the monolith facing the camera is always dark and in shadow, and the only (unavoidably) reflected light is on the edge, which defines the monolith's form and enhances the dramatic moment when Floyd touches it. I marvel a little at that every time I watch 2001.
It just goes to show the perfection of this movie that I genuinely was feeling uncomfortable watching the scenes with the Monolith in it, even with the eerie music gone. It just perfectly turns a slab of wood painted black into one of the most unnerving objects in cinema history
At 26:36 the liquid would probably have slid back "down" or into the straw, because the container would have to give like a balloon in order to keep the liquid from simply floating out--to include capillary action. It should also function this way in a space (microgravity) environment to spare liquid getting on controls, etc. Stanly would think of this.
In addition the vacuum created inside the container from sucking would draw the liquid back in.
@@epe1238 Yes!
Just saw this at the theater for the first time on sunday april 21st 2024, it was awesome and loud! If you like the movie, you owe it to yourself to see it on the big screen.
I've always liked 2001... and it's fascinating to see the behind-the-scenes as to how it was filmed. I even was able to see a 70 mm theater version once. Great movie!
This series of videos is as intense as the movie. So much research, just like Kubrick did.
Absolutely mindblowing how they made these scenes
And the smile on the Aries spacecraft!
This is just so good. You have leavened the 'how it was made' material (all compelling) with genuine insight into shot composition, blocking, etc. I can't tell you how rewarding this is for a cinephile. Bravo!! Heading over to Patreon shortly.
Your videos of Kubrick's movies are the best.......ever.
Kubricks only cameo his reflection on the helmet @ 23:40 wow! Never knew that.
Very well put together. Both pays respect to kubricks dream geography and adds to this with your selection of production stills revealing the behind the scenes elements for many of the important shot setups in this perhaps his most seminal film. Well done
23:23 I read that Stanley Kubrick himself was holding the camera for the handheld (more like body-held) shot filming the walk down the ramp, because he knew the look he wanted and he just felt like doing it himself.
These pieces provide a fascinating insight into the making of 2001: A Space Odyssey. Just one thing I noticed- Douglas Trumbull says he built the models and "dirtied them up" to make the look realistic. However, as most SF fans will know, Derek Meddings had perfected this technique as early as 1961 - Just take a look at the panels on Fireball XL5. In addition, Brian Johnson, who used to be Brian Woodcock, worked on many of Gerry Anderson's series, including Thunderbirds, and would have been very experienced in this technique long before production started on 2001. None of this detracts from what remains the most incredible Science Fiction film ever made but it does show how one development leads to another. I am left wondering if Gerry Anderson felt compelled to move to live action in "UFO" after seeing 2001.
Glad I found this site My memories of 2001 come as a 14 year old going alone to the theater, (seen on a 150 projection screen). I was just blown away as a kid, and is still is one my favorite movies. Thank you for presenting this!
Kubrick was simply 30 years ahead of his time. Even now, this film would not look out of place with more modern offerings.
This is brilliantly put together. I can't understand why you don't have waaaay more views. Keep it up. Love this.
+Another RUclips Pooper Thanks! Feel free to share it with anyone you think might like it. Part 4 is on the way!
+CinemaTyler No problem. Posted it to Facebook. Can't wait for Part 4.
Another RUclips Pooper Thanks!
Love this series. Can't wait until you talk about the next part. Be sure to mention that Hal's 'eye' is actually a camera lens lol
+Namek O. Thanks! I'll have to make sure to include that!
C. McCoy HAL’s eye is actually the inspiration for the terminator’s red eye, believe it or not.
How can this "eye" work with a yellow light smack dab in the middle?
I'm not a film student,or have any urge to make films,but do enjoy movies,maybe more than most,but I'm amazed at the amount of work and things that a good director has to consider in making a movie.I shall continue to watch all of these videos,and apart from enhancing my understanding of the film,and the film making craft,I know they will enhance my enjoyment of many other well crafted movies.Thank you for all the work you must have done to produce these videos.
Excellent work. I hope there'll be a part 4.
+Akaaraq Hansen Thanks! Working on Part 4 now!
Incredible . . . You even found a legible print on how to use the loo. Always wanted to read those and never did until now. Your dedication and attention to detail is amazing.
+Otravez 39 Thanks! I was so excited when I found that!
Ironic that they spent so much time and money on stars when in real life, the contrast is so great that you don't see stars if you can see the Earth / moon / spacecraft. This is why so many people wonder why there are no stars in the Apollo photos.
it's 2020 and still no moon base and lunar hotels and cites?
+Brian Kent Pirrie Such a shame.
Bush II wanted to go back and have a permanent base by 2020; Obambi thought otherwise and now the US doesn't even have its own manned space program anymore.
Brian Kent Pirrie the title wasnt meant to be taken literally, it was meant to be a benchmark, a calling for the new millenia. Thats part of why i find 2010 the year we made contact so insulting as a title, plus shouldnt it be 2011? idk it gives me a headache how much they ruined with that movie.
Elon Musk .
Elon musk is working on it
I cannot wait to see you working in the industry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A plea - no music, audio backing or whatever, please! I can't believe I am the only person who finds it a distraction rather than a complement. That aside, wonderfully informative, thank you!
This is a model for how such videos should be made. Lots of otherwise hard to find photos, many references. Such a good job.
Its amazing that you are putting so much effort in replying to almost all the comments. Great Work !!!
+shishir jha Thanks! I really appreciate all of the comments people take the time to leave on my videos. So far, the volume of comments has been manageable and it has been a great way to connect with other film-lovers. Thanks for commenting!
This is just stunning. Thanks man. How many hours have you been working on this?
+TheVideo96 Thanks! Too many hours, hehe. Took me two months just to write Part 4. Just started recording voice-over today!
CinemaTyler And I'm pretty sure, that the most difficult part is yet to come. You'll have to try to explain the Monolith.
TheVideo96 It's crazy how much info is out there just on the Jupiter Mission sequence. I split it into two halves so it wouldn't take so long to upload and each half is going to be over 30 mins long. I'm still certain that I'm leaving something out. BTW the first half comes out tomorrow!
I truly want to thank you for making this. It has to be the best series I've seen on RUclips. I love filmmaking and Stanley Kubrick.
I'm loving this series so far! I can't wait for the next part.
+eclipsesonic Thanks!
2001 is my favorite movie, I saw it in 1968 and have watched it nearly every year since home viewing has been available. Even my son, who has Downs Syndrome, was transfixed by it! This video was great (even though much of it went over my head, LOL!).
+if6was929 Thanks! It's such a unique film and it really shows the possibilities of cinema. Glad you liked my vid!
CinemaTyler I subscribed because you obviously know a lot about the cinema. You pointed out perspectives that I'd never have been aware of. Full disclosure, I was 18 years old when I saw 2001 for the first time and I was tripping on LSD. The visual effects were remarkable under those conditions but the emotional impact of the film, the mood it created as well as how it represented the possibilities for the future, the enormity of its scale, etc.; it seemed to make the future so hopeful to me. Over the years I've found this movie to be a type of Rorschach Test where its meaning is different depending on the viewers social background, intellectual capacity, cultural nurturing, etc.. I think that any negative opinions about 2001 are more representative of the viewers limitations than anything having to do with the movie. I'm not trying to comment on viewer's intelligence as I certainly didn't fully understand the movie for years after I first saw it but I read everything I could find about the film in an effort to better understand it. I think for some strange reason the movie just doesn't have much of an impact on some people. It's amazing with all of todays advances in technology how this movie still creates a sense of awe in so many viewers who are seeing it for the first time.
+if6was929 Thanks for the kind words-- I really appreciate it! I have always been interested in filmmaking and I wanted to make this channel to share what I learn with other like-minded people. I think the beauty of film is that it is impossible to be an expert. The most interesting thing that I've found while researching 2001 is that there seem to be quite a bit of story details that are never explicitly stated. Not just the subtle details that enrich the world of the story, but substantial plot details. I totally agree with you about the Rorschach Test-- the film almost leaves certain spaces that it allows the viewer to fill. The brilliance of it is that you don't really notice that it's happening. It is certainly unlike anything else I've seen and it feels like that concept hasn't really been carried forward or explored much at in contemporary film. To me, the concept (from a filmmaking standpoint) still feels vague and shapeless. It's really something I want to ponder on more. Thanks for sharing!
p.s. I can only imagine what it must have been like to see 2001 on LSD!
Funnily enough, Arthur C Clarke recounts a story of someone pushing something into his hand and disappearing. On opening it, he found a white powder and a note thanking him & explaining that this was "the best stuff". He didn't try it.
This is genuinely the most interesting shit I've seen on youtube so far. This is my favourite movie and Kubrick hands down my favourite director. Great work!
In part of your narrative, you speak about pit scene where the astronauts are around the monolith. Floyd walks up to it and touches it. This directly relates the scene where the apemen are encircling the monolith while one of them approaches and touches it. It’s virtually the blocking in both scenes. BTW, your 2001 series is brilliantly presented.
Nice seeing the monolith scenes without the soundtrack. I never could stand that stressful piece of music
You can tell your critics that it was not gravity that pulled the food back down the straw but the negative pressure now inherent within the carton as a result of the straw being sucked.
My Great Great Grandfather and I encountered this same phenomena when we travelled to the moon to celebrate the coronation of Queen Victoria in 1838, though given the date our 'straws' were glass, obtained from the village druggist!
Great uploads Sir.
🇬🇧🏆🇺🇸
Thank you for all the trouble you took with the CC subtitles. As I did here, I wish I could go back to a part and look at subtitles to hear whatever I missed, in every other video.
+Daniel Rosa Thanks! It takes a ton of time to transcribe all of the clips and manually set the timings for most of the subtitles. I bet that it largely goes unnoticed, so it's great to hear when someone appreciates it!
Extra amazing to me that there was SO much detail and consideration put into all these shots back in an era when there simply was no available way to see this movie ever again once it had left theatres! The technology simply didn't exist at that time to see these films again, certainly not at home....Nor did anyone imagine there realistically would be at the time (until VHS in the late 70s / 80s completely revolutionized this mentality, even mid 80s before most homes had a VHS recorder to be able to do this)
All movies back then were just assumed to be 'watch at cinema then gone forever'
(You *might* catch it on TV, a decade later......On a cruddy little B/W screen, and full of soap commercials every 10 flippin minutes)
So the fact that these artists put SO much detail into something most ppl thought of as
a 'one and done' product format really is extra surprising to me!
- Back then folks just generally *assumed* that you couldn't, without much thinking about it,
in exactly the same way as we now assume *that we can* (without really thinking about it)
Stanley really knew how to use the huge screen 70mm format. There were absolutely no compromises made for small screen viewing.
The stark harsh light on the spaceships is something nearly all other Sci Fi films have failed to capture.
It emphasises the stark severe environment and the vulnerability of the astronauts.
With their noise and slightly tinted yellow visors the space scenes in star wars look like indoor studio shots despite the attempt to convey scale.
1:30 lol, I love that photo of Kubrick facepalming, there's someting so adorable about it like yeah he's human, too
There is another mistake in that the pilots of the Aries should not have been able to see the surface of the Moon when they were landing as their cockpit was pointing upwards @5:18
Following Kubrick's mind on whether to display or not props at a NASA museum is so subtle. I think he was correct from what this doc makes available. He had an empathetic relationship to people and the audience received the same attention.
He understood about the corrosive nature of memes before we began perceiving and playing around with them. An artist defending the intent of a film as a statement while protecting the poetic impact the same film will have on so many people psyche.
Seeing the ships in the exclusive context of the movie is part of the effect Kubrick worked so hard to achieve. The sets have to be discovered within the movie's narrative.
thank you for making these, they're excellent.
This is a fascinating series. Loads of interesting photos and footage.
Thanks!
I really enjoyed these presentations about Kubrick's 2001.
+Jorge Albarran Thank you!
Great stuff! Fan of Kubricks for years but this is some of the most detailed analysis of 2001 I have seen. Shared on Twitter and Facebook and just waiting for Part 4
+Mark Brennan Thanks for sharing! Glad you liked it!
Terrific tour of this iconic movie - thank you!
Excellent video! You certainly put a lot of work into these documentary pieces. Learned a lot of new facts and gained a greater appreciation for Kubrick's masterpiece. Your narration and editing is perfect for this material. Great job! ~
I'm a bit puzzled as to why the gravity during the boardroom scene is identical to Earth's despite taking place on the Moon. The photographer and Floyd move with extreme confidence in a lower gravity environment.
It is to cover up that they would be walking with a two step gait on the moon landing shots only a year later. :)
You ahould notice, that they did not properly account for the lower Moon gravity on any scene: Although the walk around the Monolith is slowed down, they still walk like under 1 G.
The thing is, they had no reference on how the walking will look like in real 1/6 gravity. Nor did the movie going public of that time. After July 1969, all this changed for ever.
Yeah it’s very unrealistic. Clarke tried to convince Kubrick that gravity on the moon would only be 1/6th g, and he said that Kubrick eventually believed him, but said that the scene wouldn’t have the same seriousness if people were bouncing around the room
2001 was the last major science fiction movie to be made prior to the first manned landing on the Moon, and about the last one to not have its lunar landscapes based upon photographic information gathered by the Apollo 11 astronauts or the Surveyor and Luna moon probes. The movie still depicts a very rocky, craggy surface as was thought it would be like by planetary scientists and visionary artists like Chestley Bonestell instead of the now familiar moonscape worn smooth by continual solar wind bombardment over the course of three billion years. The Earth does not have the appearance revealed by the famous photos and films/television views taken by both Apollo 8 and Apollo 11, both missions post-dating the release of the movie. It does, however, get right the detail that you don't see the distant stars from the lunar surface due to how the Moon's own albedo blots them out.
beautifully done!! thank you for your efforts on what was obviously painstaking data collection and accounts by those involved in what is in my opinion the most ground breaking and masterful cinematic endeavors in history! I love Kubrick and his work will forever stand the test of time...bravo!
I would like to see the version of this movie with all the narration and the dialogues that were removed!
You read my mind!
Fabulous work Cinema Tyler.
Thanks for sharing with us.
Thanks for watching! Glad you liked it!
I love this video essay/documentary. So well made..
It surprises me that there aren't more youtube-documentaries like these.
+SyrzxiMifu Thanks! I've always wondered what went into making such an amazing film. I was really bummed when Douglas Trumbull's documentary got cancelled, so I decided to make the documentary I always wanted to see using whatever resources I could find online. Glad you like it!
My only issue is with the boardroom scene. Everybody seems to be moving as though they were in earth gravity. The camera man nearly sprints to the door when he's done talking pictures, which I don't believe would be accurate in moon gravity.
I'm a filmmaker and have long been a student of Stanley Kubrick, starting with 2001, which I saw in the theater in the '68. You are doing magnificent work, young man. Your film theory and analysis is outstanding and equally as impressive as your film research. Please keep up the sublime work.
It really is amazing how much work goes into this stuff
Fantastic piece, after watching the classic for the first time this was just what I was looking for!
Thank you so much for the entertaining presentation of your comprehensive research, it was great fun to watch.
Thank you very much!
Hi, hope you get it read this. Just wanted to thank you for putting together these videos, they're amazing. I can only imagine how much research you put into them. 2001 is one of my favourite films of all time, thank you for getting me excited about it again! Subbed!
Great work I was 12 I think when a saw 2001 did not understand it but I loved it I could not even pronouse the word Odyssey then . I came out of the cinema I wanted to go back in and see it again .After this I felt more religious more ito classic music and loved space sci fi I have always been interested in how it was made and I have seen other videos yours is very very good keep it up Thank You
+Imagineering100 Thanks for the kind words! 2001 has had such an impact on a lot of people. It makes me so happy to be able to share my love of this film with people like like you.
2001, the best non-nonsensical space movie, “The Day the Earth Stood Still” notwithstanding, and to this day the greatest movie ever made.
I know the video is very old, but I need to point out:
At 2.18 you say that the drink should not go down the stray in zero gravity, but I am sure it would, for when he suck up the liquid he create a low pressure and the air in the cabin will pres back into the container and suck the liquid down, and the container had been made so the liquid had go back down to avoid soda or coffee drifting around in the cabin.
That was amazing! I've been waiting sooo long for another part but hell, it was worth the wait.
+TaintedGrape Thanks! I'll try not to take as long for Part 4!
My favourite piece of non-HAL dialogue and symbolism is when they're handing out sandwiches on the shuttle, not long after the bone/space vehicle jump cut. Humans are off-planet millions of years later, and we're still eating tool-rendered pigs. Brilliant little detail amongst oh so many other details
What you're cool.
A very large amount of information had to learn and a lot of time spent on the creation of videos.
Thank you !
Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks for watching!
25:00 In fact, the reflection of the astronaut's glove on the monolith looks very much like an ape's hand with fur and all, which is quite amazing
Absolutely brilliant work! I recently watched 2001 for about the 20th time and am fascinated by Kubrick's art. Unbelievable insight and documentation of one of greatest movies of all time. I can't wait until Part 4!
+poiny 1965 Thanks! It's one of those films that just evolves and finds new meaning each time you watch it. I was lucky enough to see an original 70mm print at the Museum of the Moving Image recently and it was like watching it for the first time all over again. Mind blowing.
CINEMA TYLER ROCKS !! 😎
It's a shame Kubrick did not take into account the gravity on the Moon in the conference room shot. Much like any sci-fi from that era, the formula seemed to suggest "where there is breathable air there is Earth-normal gravity".
Tremendous quality documentaries, very well done.
+pgl3gh0rn Thanks! Glad you like them!
This is fantastic.
I'm wondering if you know anything about the low frequency electronic "tone" that occurs when Floyd touches the monolith in the TMA-1 scene.
It's such a minimalist, "deliberate" effect that I actually didn't notice it for years, most likely because I never heard the audio on a decent sound system until recent years.
Can't wait for part 4!
+Matthew Florez I hadn't heard about that before! I just checked it out and I can hear what you're talking about. Fascinating!
All the sound in this movie is extremely meticulous just like the visuals. The sound is what I liked the most when I saw it the first time
Utterly fascinating
Very nice effects. As there appear to be no comments on Part 2, I will add that the rotating wheel space station was proposed by Werner von Braun in an article for Colliers magazine. Gravity is provided by rotation and sunlight, according to a later NASA concept is brought in by mirrors. If memory serves me, Hughes Aircraft Company studied the concept at one time and found it possible to construct, but the required budget would have been gigantic, likely swallowing up the entire NASA and Defense Dept budget...interestingly, NASA was asked whether it wanted to build such a station, and NASA's answer was "no." NASA's space stations are for studying the effects of weightlessness and other conditions in space, so introducing gravity would be beside the point. Of course, by varying the velocity of rotation, you could create variations in gravity and run experiments in a range of gravity strengths.
Since my childhood I always wondered why the reporter behaved so agile and fast-moving in the conference scene, just like a ballet dancer. It looked somehow unrealistic. As nothing escaped from the scrutining eye of Stanley Kubrik, very plausibly it was an attempt of Mr. Kubrik to represent the effects from 1/6 th of 1 G on the lunar surface. Effectively, no-one had ever seen anyone walking on the Moon in those years, although any phisicist would certainly would have had a good idea of that. Physicists would have certainly clarified that the real thing would have been totally different: the best way to represent 1/6 G in terms of movement, would have been slow camera. However after seeing all the many movies about men on the Moon, it stands very clear that all of their directors found no realistic way to depict 1/6 of Earth's gravity inside enclosed and pressurized settings, except the mere license of giving the task to the viewer's imagination. The only cases of successful mock 1/6 gravity enclosed scenes is perhaps when the actor representing Edwin Aldrin Jr. pours wine into a golden cup while performing a communion ceremony on the Moon, just after Apollo 11's Eagle moon lander touched down, on 90's HBO TV series "From The Earth To The Moon" (real fact that happened in 1969).
Hi, Just want to compliment you on your excellent series on 2001. It is outstanding!
It is one movie that I have never seen in one sitting. I always fall asleep !
It's for adults. I wouldn't expect my kid to sit through it.
Try it in reverse motion
Of all the cinema enthusiasts I've watched on RUclips (and I have seen many) yours are the most lucid, intelligent and brilliantly edited of all. Are you related to Stanley? 😁
@11:15 The cases are Zero Halliburton aluminum cases. The case on the right has the handle on the top of the lid. The company that built those cases also manufactured the cases that brought back the moon rock samples on Apollo.
Excellent videos . Congrats . The "Moon bus " sequence contains the only serious science " error " in the film IMO . As they are not weightless in the cabin , the bus is not moving in a very low skimming orbit , but hovering on support jets . This raises two problems . Firstly the jets would probably kick up some dust and secondly the jets can't work like a hovercraft by forcing ambient air down with large fans but must be ejecting some gas stocked on the "Bus " . Even with low moon gravity this would involve pretty large quantities of some pressurised gas and there doesn't seem to be enough room on the Bus to stock that amount of material . I know this sounds a bit nerdy but I say it because Arthur C Clarke said that they wanted to make the first " scientifically acurate " Si Fi movie and apart from this one thing they pretty much succeeded
2:07 Love the Aries spacecraft model but a couple of observations. First, it takes about 3 days to traverse the distance to the moon, so people will need beds to sleep, place to change clothes, etc. Those chairs wont cut it for a bed. Second, for that many passengers you will need more than one zero-G toilet.
There's one thing I've always wanted to know. The red shine on one side of space station 5 .I think It's due to underexposure certainly when you look at the overall look of the station and compare it to the earlier images of the ship which are very bright. Sure Kubrick saw it, but I suppose he liked this coincidental effect. A bit like the reflection in the eyes of the leopard caused by use of the frontprojection. Am I right ? I'm a big fan of your documentaries on 2001. It's just great to see how Kubrick created that world of tomorrow with the tools of the sixties. It still works.
Looking forward to part 4.
I totally see what you mean about the space station and I love that you brought up the leopard's eyes! I had never made the connection between the leopard eyes/projector and Blade Runner, but that's exactly how they achieved the effect of the Replicants' eyes. They filmed through a two-way mirror and shined a light into the actors' eyes at the same angle the camera was filming at. Thanks!
Wow, this is amazing work. Can’t get enough. Thank you.