2001: A Space Odyssey
hello
have you ever wondered what this film was all about?.check this website i discovered:-
http://www.collativelearning.com/2001%20analysis%20new.html
thank you
colin
have you ever wondered what this film was all about?.check this website i discovered:-
http://www.collativelearning.com/2001%20analysis%20new.html
thank you
colin
Post edited by ladderman on
Comments
the film is based on a sci fi book. the book is about a stargate and the wierd stuff at the end of the film is open to interpatation. apparently. :)
That's not true... the story was co-written by Kubrick and Clarke for filming, and the book was written from the script.
Act I: Evolution as planned by monoliths. The rise of monkeys.
Act II: The discovery of the moon monolyth, the voyage to Saturn (later to Jupiter), and the [strike]bugs[/strike] features of [strike]Microsoft[/strike] HAL 9000.
Act III: The allowance of a man in the olympus of the creators.
Act I and Act III shows some similarities, because both depicts the manipulation of a being to a higher intelligence (but in later books it seems that Bowman is more a tool to study humans).
Viewing the movie doesn't make sense (what did you smoke, Kubrick?), but the books are more understandable. The movie is a great show, but it doesn't tell me a story... Kubrick FAIL!!!
An' you know what they said?
Well, some of it was true!
So why bring it up?
Yup, read 'em all several times - ACC is/was one of my favourite authors.
ACC was quoted many times as saying that if anyone understood what the hell was going on at the end of the film then Kubrick and himself had failed. As for the movie not making sense - what couldn't you understand up until the time Dave Bowman travels to become the starchild?
Admittedly, Planet of the Apes is a great film, but I wouldn't say 2001 was particularly overrated. But I've always found it interesting that Planet of The Apes won the best makeup Oscar in 1968, the same year 2001 was released. The reason that's usually cited for that is that a lot of Academy members didn't even realise the man-apes at the start of 2001 were actors, because the costumes, make-up and performances were so convincing.
Well they didn't fool me! ;) 2001 was a great film but I think I like the book better simply because I understood the context a bit better when reading it.
Oh, and welcome back! :)
Bytes:Chuntey - Spectrum tech blog.
Curiousity, I guess.
But really I suppose the only person who would ever know would be Arthur C. Clark, and he's dead, so nobody will ever really know now?
I do seem to recall his wife threatening legal actions against a newpaper or magazine for the allegations a while back, can't really remember though.
misteaksmistrakesmisyaleserrurs— oh, sod it.In the first part of the film (depiction of apes), it is not so clear that the monolyth is "improving" their brains. The trip to Jupiter is understandable, but the rising of Bowman is visually impressive... and that's all. Nodoby understood the ending.
At least, it seems Katsumiro Otomo saw the film and understood the ending... the ending of Akira is as understandable as in 2001.
An' you know what they said?
Well, some of it was true!
Comic or movie?
But it is based on a book: "The Sentinel".
https://discordapp.com/invite/cZt59EQ
They did do an audio drama based on that book, sometimes crops up on BBC7.
Both, but in the movie is more evident.
An' you know what they said?
Well, some of it was true!
Yes, I recorded it when it was aired in the late 70s. Recently copied it to CD as the tape is bound to be wearing thin by now!
IBM
Excellent book. As is Deep Range.
Oooh something to look out for! Can you rip the CD to 192 KBPS mp3 and email it to me?
Gaaah, every time 2001 is mentioned this dumb urban myth gets dragged up yet again.
Clarke pointed out numerous times that the HAL->IBM thing was an unfortunate coincidence, and a highly embarassing one, given all the help that IBM gave in the making of this movie; one which they would have corrected, if they'd spotted it in time.
misteaksmistrakesmisyaleserrurs— oh, sod it.<timothy-spall>It's a blaitant clew!</timothy-spall>
And anyway, to my mind it's far more significant that "The Towering Inferno" and "Millennium Dome" are anagrams of "Not worth fire engine" and "Need million, Mum" respectively. :D
misteaksmistrakesmisyaleserrurs— oh, sod it.There's so many things I've promised Wossers and still haven't delivered! I'll put it on my list of things to do and let you know when I get round to it. Y'never know, y'may get lucky as I fancy giving it another listen myself very soon. :)
I very much doubt it was coincidence.
http://tafkac.org/movies/HAL_wordplay_on_IBM.html
Much more likely.
Heh, no worries at all. I didn't even know it existed :)
Nah, some of those arguments are a bit crap...
Why yes, as long as you're prepared to stretch the word "ahead" to mean "behind" then that makes perfect sense... (Ok, you can fudge things by saying "precede". But when was the last time you saw someone decrementing a version number to make something sound "one step ahead"?)
The *one* name? So if the computer had been called JCN, or IBN, or MBI, or IMB nobody would have made the connection? Or if it had been a similar variant on NCR or RCA, people wouldn't be saying "aha, in return for IBM's support on the film Kubrick and Clarke agreed to choose a name that poked fun at one of their competitors"? And never mind that all of those are crapper names for a computer than HAL, which kind of blows a hole in the assertion that he had seventeen thousand equally likely three-letter combinations to choose from.
It's a coincidence dammit, and not even a particularly interesting one.
http://www.2001halslegacy.com/interviews/clarke.html
Stork: But there was no computer in "The Sentinel", so you had to add that new character, HAL.
Clarke: Of course the key person in the expedition was the computer HAL, who as everyone said is the only human character in the movie. HAL developed slowly. At one time we were going to have a female voice. Athena, I think was a suggested name. I don't know again when we changed to HAL. I've been trying for years to stamp out the legend that HAL was derived from IBM by the transmission of one letter. But, in fact, as I've said, in the book, HAL stands for Heuristic Algorithmic, H-A-L. And that means that it can work on a program's already set up, or it can look around for better solutions and you get the best of both worlds. So, that's how the name HAL originated."
Stork: It was pointed out that HAL was just one letter off from IBM. What was the reaction when that was discovered?
Clarke: I don't know who discovered that coincidence, which is not a really remarkable one. And I don't remember that Stanley ever commented on it. For some time we were a little embarrassed about it but I think now IBM is rather proud of the association.
Personally, I choose to believe the author himself, as opposed to a very tenuous theory.
If it isn't, so what?
It will be forever that in my mind.
I thought that from the moment I heard the name, first time I saw the film.
I also thought. "What a shit, tedious and pointless end." (To the film, the book does it much better.)
First story ACC story I read was 'A walk in the dark.' Have to admit I wonder if it was the inspiration for the film Pitch Black. Possibly just me. ;-)
Recently, I read the 'The City and the Stars.' Just plain incredible. IMHO his best novel. :D
Oh and for me, 'The Fountains of Paradise' was ACC's last good novel.