• We are currently performing site maintenance, parts of civfanatics are currently offline, but will come back online in the coming days. For more updates please see here.

2001 A Space Oddessy

cgannon64

BOB DYLAN'S ROCKIN OUT!
Joined
Jun 19, 2002
Messages
19,213
Location
Hipster-Authorland, Brooklyn (Hell)
Just say this movie like 20 minutes ago. Great movie (and great book). The ending of the book and movie made me wonder - is the ending religious? If you think about it, parallels to theology are pretty easy - what if Dave (or Frank, whichever was the one that lived) died during the descent into the Obelisk, and then the white house they entered was an afterlife, of sorts? You can see he ages throughout the house, being young when he enters the Obelisk, growing older as he reaches the room, older still when he is eating, and oldest when he dies in the bed. And finally he becomes the Star Child.

Does anyone else see alot of religion in that? Dying, and becoming some new, sentient creature that is apparently beyond space and time? :)

its not obelisk...whatever it is
 
that movie could mean just about anything, though I do see some very convincing information to support your arguement.

If you can do it cgannon, so can I
 
Originally posted by Immortal
that movie could mean just about anything, though I do see some very convincing information to support your arguement.

If you can do it cgannon, so can I

Yeah. One thing I definetely noticed throughout the book/movie is the theme of the evils and goods of civilization and techonology. Without the Obelisk (technology) man would have never advanced beyond apes, but without the Obelisk (technology), man would have never killed man. Same thing with HAL - he is good, but his logic of keeping a tight ship and a perfect mission goes so far that he decides to take human life over risking the mission.

boo this is my trademark...*hiss*
 
I've seen 2001: A Space Odyssey many times, but I've yet to really understand what the ending is all about. (I've never been very good with trying to interpret symbolism. I need someone to come out and say what they mean.)

But cgannon64, you're interpretation is as good as any.

And BTW, it's not Obelisk, it's Monolith.
 
The ending is about cycles...life, the universe, everthing goes through a cycle. Notice he ages in the end on his deathbed then an embryo is shown hovering above the Earth.
 
Originally posted by Cantankerous
I've seen 2001: A Space Odyssey many times, but I've yet to really understand what the ending is all about. (I've never been very good with trying to interpret symbolism. I need someone to come out and say what they mean.)

I felt the same way. It is a VERY weird ending. The religion idea has one hole though - the MONTOLITH (:D) was planted by aliens. So why is it in his dream/afterlife? Are the aliens God? Or is God an alien? Or was the Monolith not planted by aliens? When they say that "It is a sign of intelligent life in this universe besides us" are they referring to God? It confused me, because Clarke is an athiest, but the book/movie seems so religious.

hmm
 
I HATE THIS MOVIE. Every time I see it I can't help but think: a huge fetus in space? A HUGE FREAKEN' FETUS IN SPACE!?!?!?!?!
 
Those are not God, just more highly evolved life forms. If you need to understand Clarke's philosophy, read Childhood's End. He spells it out in detail. In a nutshell, he is not traditionally religious, and this is what fills that portion of his world view. Its not cyclical in the sense Hinduism is, but more inthe sense Darwin is. The world you see around you is a cradle. Eventually we will outgrow it.

J
 
Nice interpretation of the movie, CGannon. Isn't Kubrick the master! A little off-topic, I know, but the other day I was thinking about how if Kubrick could have been a part of "The Minority Report," I not only would have given it 5 stars (which I did), but it would have become an instant classic.
 
Some of that symbolism is lost on me as well. I liked the movie just because it was strange myself. I also like the idea of a computer that thinks. Guess it stems from my technical background.

By the way, did you know where the name HAL came from? Each letter is one letter prior to the acronym IBM.
 
Originally posted by JonathanValjean
...if Kubrick could have been a part of "The Minority Report," I not only would have given it 5 stars (which I did), but it would have become an instant classic.
Loved 2001. Love Kubric. Loved "Full Metal Jacket" and "Clockwork Orange."

...Loved "Minority Report." Love Spielberg. Did not love "AI" (the reasons are legion).

...Don't think "Minority Report" would've been any better with an infusion of Kubric style.

One is like a fine cognac. The other is like a smooth brandy. They should not, however, be mixed.
 
Childhood's End is a brilliant book.... the 200x series are definitely better in movie form however. :)
 
Originally posted by CrackedCrystal
By the way, did you know where the name HAL came from? Each letter is one letter prior to the acronym IBM.

Clarke has denied that this is the origination of the name and has been trying to dispel this myth for years. I don't remember exactly what the letters stood for but it was three words, and the middle one might be Algorithm, but I'm not sure.
 
Yeah, it was something like HeuristicALgorithms.

By the way, loved the movie.
 
Napoleon I completely agree with you. this movie sucks. It was boring as hell. It could be shortened into a 30 minute or possibly 1 hour tv show. Nothing realy happened at all. It was boring and Kubrick must have been stoned or drunk when he decided to make this into a movie. I haven't read the book, but the movie gets a :vomit:
 
This is the ultimate purpose of 2001: Man's final destiny. One day, the movie declares, Man will evolve to the point where he will be free at last; he will be unencumbered by any crude tools or physical forms. He will at last take his place in Eternity.

And where shall we go from there? There will only be one last mystery:

"And if there was anything beyond THAT, then its name could only be God."

Source: http://www.modemac.com/2001/2001-e.html
You make an interesting point on the religious aspect, it could be quite true - good observation.

I love this film and I think Kubrick was a genious.

Critics of the film usually say things like these: (This list borrowed from the aforementioned site)
- The ending is confusing.
- The spaceships move too slow, and it's boring.
- The whole movie could easily be condensed into a 60-minute episode of The Outer Limits.
- What does the story of the malfunctioning computer have to do with the Monolith, anyways?
- Why were those monkeys in the movie?
- What was the "cosmic light show" all about?
- How come the characters don't talk very much?
- Did Stanley Kubrick use drugs?

Basically you need to remember that this film was created over 30 years ago when people were entranced by the thought of space and the future. This explains the cinematography and detail taken in the spaceships and the vast amount of time spent on those scenes. Also, people who criticize are normally the ones that are truly frustrated because they don't understand the story and they come to the conclusion that it sucks because of that. Don't let it get to you guys, try and figure it out! I'm still working it out piece by piece myself.
 
There is a realism to the space scenes that is quite disturbing - and the docking sequence is sheer genius.
 
I also always thought, that it showed the evolvement of human life. A good movie (though it is not, it is an anime series) to watch additionaly to 2001 is "Serial Experiment Lain". It deals with layers of concsiousness and evolment of the species.

But the thing I like best about 2001, and Kubrik movies in general, is the music. (Very good music also in "Barry Lyndon".) In Austria it is a tradition to hear the Donauwalzer at midnight of sylvester. Whenever I hear it I think of the movie (scene of space shuttle dancing with the space station and scene of space ship landing on the moon.) This has to be the best song ever composed and Kubrick put it to the best use.

Personally I wouldn't mind if the movie was twice as long.


In "A.I." and "Minority Report" you see why Kubrick is a genious and Spielberg just a good director. Both films could have become timeless if directed by Kubrick.
 
Back
Top Bottom