XIXAX Film Forum

The Director's Chair => Stanley Kubrick => Topic started by: MacGuffin on October 27, 2008, 10:37:37 AM

Title: Discuss: Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey'
Post by: MacGuffin on October 27, 2008, 10:37:37 AM
Discuss: Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey'
by Scott Weinberg; Cinematical

We studied it in high school, which made it amazingly boring. I tried again a few years later, but just couldn't get into it. Saw it on the big screen about ten years ago and finally got what everyone was raving about ... but still the film didn't really "connect" with me in any powerful way. But then a few nights ago, I sat down with my awesome 2-disc special edition of Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey, and was blown away as if I'd never even heard of it before. Thousands of writers much cleverer than I have devoted a billion words to this very fine film, but after watching it earlier this week, I was struck by how simple the story actually was. I mean, a film is a work of art, and as such each viewer will have their own interpretation of the experience, but if we're talking about the oh-so-confusing and deliciously ambiguous nature of the plot, um, here's what I saw:

A. Early man is little more than an animal before a mysterious object appears on their planet and signifies the next step forward: The creation of tools, which immediately leads to the creation of weapons, and then we (awesomely) jump-cut to millions of years later. Our first weapon has evolved into our ultimate weapon: A nuclear arsenal poised ominously in outer space.

B. Then we (slowly but very coolly) discover that another mysterious object has been discovered beneath the surface of the moon. When modern man places his hand on the second "monolith," a signal between the moon and Jupiter is opened. Looks like man is officially "ready" for his next step.

C. The most memorable part of the film is the Jupiter journey. That's where two human astronauts are forced to match wits with the ultimate tool: a virtually infallible computer that also happens to have a pretty snotty attitude. What began as a bone has become a super-computer, and it's right about now that mankind has allowed its tools to become just a little too powerful. The computer decides that humans are a variable too volatile too ignore, so in an effort to maintain the Jupiter mission, HAL kills everyone except for one clever astronaut who destroys his ultimate tool just as the journey is ending.

D. Just over Jupiter our one remaining human finds the mysterious object yet again, somehow enters into it, travels through numerous dimensions, and ultimately transforms into the next grade on the evolutionary scale: It's the star-child, baby, and just as the movie ends the being is about to land on Earth.

That's pretty much it, right?

Title: Re: Discuss: Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey'
Post by: Alexandro on October 29, 2008, 11:24:26 AM
mmm pretty much, yeah.....

I don't understand. Is this the "2001 for dummies" guide or something?
Title: Re: Discuss: Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey'
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 29, 2008, 04:34:42 PM
What a stupid article. Even as a former admirer of Stanley Kubrick, I am offended that is all Cinematical can offer is that to why 2001: A Space Odyssey is good. The way the articles focuses on the content of the film is the first mistake. Nothing about the evolution of man in 2001: A Space Odyssey is serious or thoughtful. It only rings of cleverness if you think making a theory that sounds as crackpot as Scientology is a good idea.

The reason the film is heralded to this day has everything to do with filmmaking and storytelling. It is the only major film I know of that has little basis in a human story. 2001 has leading characters and presents a few emotional situations, but it presents them within the larger scheme of a structure and style meant at highlighting the space world around the characters. The way the film creates a space opera and presents such a believable depiction of space life is the clincher.

Then the journey beyond Jupiter is an exhibition of film scenery not seen before or since and that makes the film even more unique. It shows the evolution of the main character, but it does so in a way that requires no standard storytelling. It ends on an extension of the rest of the filmmaking that was steeped in style over substance. Good or bad, 2001 is the only experimental film of its kind that had such a filmmaking scheme through out and was pretty memorable for it.
Title: Re: Discuss: Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey'
Post by: MacGuffin on February 10, 2009, 11:17:24 AM
I'm sorry, Dave, but you can now download HAL 9000 onto your iPhone

The year 2001 came and went, and nothing: No monolith, no orbiting Howard Johnson's, no Pan Am flights to the moon. But you can have one thing: your own personal HAL 9000 computer.

Not exactly built at the HAL plant in Urbana, Illinois, on the 12th of January 1992, the new HAL 9000 app for your iPhone was actually created by Jonathan Mulcahy and is available at the iTunes App Store for 99 cents.

HAL, of course, was the nefarious computer from Stanley Kubrick's classic 1968 film 2001: A Space Odyssey, the one that nearly scuttled the mission of the Discovery to Jupiter.

The HAL 9000 app consists of that creepy glowing-red-eye panel. When you touch it, HAL utters several of his deathless phrases. And he still has the greatest enthusiasm for the mission.
Title: Re: Discuss: Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey'
Post by: modage on February 10, 2009, 11:36:24 AM
Title: Re: Discuss: Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey'
Post by: modage on October 22, 2009, 11:57:13 AM
At fourteen, [James] Cameron saw the movie that made him want to make his own: Stanley Kubrick’s “2001: A Space Odyssey,” the first cinematically exquisite treatment of what had traditionally been B-movie material. “I saw all these cool spacecraft and I wanted to know how the visual effects were done,” he said. “I started building my own models of spaceships, from the ‘2001’ model kit and the ‘making-of’ book, which was quite thick and well researched.” After he finished making “True Lies,” Cameron called Kubrick, by then a recluse, and invited himself over. They spent a day, in the basement of Kubrick’s house in the English countryside, watching “True Lies” at Kubrick’s flatbed editing station. Cameron went over the shots—Schwarzenegger in a Harrier jet firing a missile, with the villain attached to it, through an office building and into a helicopter: boom!—so that Kubrick could learn how the effects were done.

Title: Re: Discuss: Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey'
Post by: Gamblour. on October 25, 2009, 09:50:04 AM
I'm sure Kubrick really liked it.
Title: Re: Discuss: Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey'
Post by: Fernando on September 12, 2017, 10:00:27 PM
Finally saw it on the big screen.

For decades I refused to watch it on a TV, so it is the first time I see it in its entirety, obviously I've seen many sequences but there were some that were new to me, it was a wonderful experience and worth the wait.

Pretty sure the print was digital, maybe even a bluray? Don't know, I asked someone if they knew how it was projected but he didn't have a clue.
Title: Re: Discuss: Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey'
Post by: Alexandro on September 13, 2017, 11:07:06 AM
It's a DCP.
And a terrific one.
I saw it once in Mexico city and once last weekend in Monterrey.
Pretty much the best film there is to watch on the big screen.