Saw this when I was 10 years old on its release in 1968. Absolutely mind blowing, I couldn't get enough of it. Coupled with the Apollo missions at the same time and it was just an amazing period in my life. Even now in my sixties this movie still holds a special place. Possibly the greatest pure sci fi film ever made, an astounding vision.
The quintessential science fiction/fact experience. Deep, ambiguous, stunning, compelling. 2001: A Space Odyssey is one of the all time cornerstones of the cinematic universe. The wonders that await the human race...eventually.
I had the amazing luck to talk to Gary Lockwood at a convention. He said that he talked to Kubrick and Dullea about the time he met Neil Armstrong at a party, and they based their portrayals of the Discovery crew off his impressions. This is kind of ironic because there seems to be a consensus that Armstrong was a bit of an odd duck in the astronaut corps. People have said things like "I worked with Armstong every day for ten years and I didn't know he lost a daughter until I read his biography." But it does explain why the crew of the Discovery are on the very short list of fictional spacemen who would plausibly be put in charge of a multi-billion dollar spaceship.
My mom took me to see 2001 when I was 7 years old. I did not understand it but I still liked it. Over the years I read the books and re watched 2001 over and over. I truly think it is a masterpiece.
As always, thank you for a high quality review. I read the Clarke novelisation in 1981, before I saw the film, so I could understand what was going on when I did see the film. If I hadn't, then I might have dismissed the film as deliberately obscure and slow moving to a degree approaching being unwatchable even if it is unquestionably brilliant in technical terms. I'm very much a well-structured screenplay viewer, not an art-house viewer. I don't know if Kubrick got bored with the idea of a conventional story telling style and wanted to go to a direct 'experience' style instead, but his dismissal of the SF movies that Clarke liked is (in my opinion) very significant. Alex North (as major a talent as he was) was not the right choice. I believe only Jerry Goldsmith could have composed an original score for '2001' It was Keir Dullea's idea to have those perspective shifts between the different Bowmans in the hotel suite environment. The only flaw in the special effects that time has shown up is that photographs of models (the Moon shuttle for example) are often used, instead of filming the actual models themselves. Carl Sagan persuaded Kubrick not to directly show the aliens who are observing/evolving Bowman. I completely agree that Kubrick achieved an objective reality of space as vast, empty, dangerous and not remotely designed with human survival as a consideration, so that benevolent aliens have to intervene to ensure the potential of humanity is achieved.
First saw it as a 12 year old in 1978 when MGM re-released it thinking "hey, space is big now, put out our space movie out again". Saw the 50th release together with Dullea and Lockwood who did a world tour. Greatest film I have ever seen.
I saw this movie in 1968 at the Century theatres in San Jose next to the Winchester Mystery House. Come to think of it, this was the best theatre as it had the big wrap around panaramic screen, stereophonic sound (also had the snazzafrantic seats and poppaphonic popcorn). I remember thinking it all made sense. Yep, when I will be an old guy I can get a ticket on a PanAm spaceplane. Afterall my grandfather was a youngster when airplanes were flimsy and crashes were frequent. Later as an old guy him and his wife cruised to Europe on a 707 at 600 mph above the weather. I never thought much about classical music (back then I consider it what only old people listen to). I distinctly remember all sci-fi movies looked so cheesy after watching 2001. Later in 1970s when it was released again in theatres, friends and I go watch it. Then later debate what was it all about. But then I read the book, it all was then clear what the plot and storyline. Kind of took away the imagination. I also remembered all the young people like myself at the time thought the music was perfect, which I read articles many adults thought the music confusing. What does a classic Viennese waltz tune have to do with space travel? (I thought it was interesting Johann Strauss' Blue Danube was first performed in the US in 1868, 100 years before 2001 release). Besides the special effects, it was showing that commercial companies will have their place in space. The actors portrayed the kind of people in those occupations. Many engineers, scientists, and managers are not expressive, showoff actors that show wide range of emotions as needed for entertainment. And then on the 50th anniversary of the release in 2018 the Castro theatre in San Francisco showed a 70mm ANALOG of the film. It was watching it ***exactly*** like I saw it as a 10 year old. There was a certain quality to this which digital does not have. And the sound had certain characteristics, I can hear things I usually don't hear in movies. Later talking with someone about the music, he said young people at the time never heard these songs before so they equate the music with space travel. Adults had preconceived bias. Oh, I can dance Viennese waltz but what they play at ballroom dance studios is more of a consistent tempo unlike the composition used for the movie is more of an interpretive version to match profiles of the various spacecraft and at what phase in the flight. But it's now 23% into the 21st century, Pan Am is long gone and we might get back to the moon before I am dead of old age.
I saw in one documentary that Stanley Kubrick actually gone to Sam Goody in New York to buy all kinds of classical albums while making this movie. Always have high regards for this movie and influence in future science fiction to come. Enjoyed the sequel as well. Enjoy your UA-cam videos always well thought off and very detailed as always
2001 is my favorite film of all time. My favorite genre is sci fi, and I think 2001 is without a doubt the greatest sci fi film ever made. It is the biggest influence for all the sci fi films that came after it. It's also my favorite film in terms of cinematography. The glorious shots and special effects are a sight to behold even 50+ years later. My biggest dream as a film fan is to be able to watch the film in imax one day. I could go on about how much I love this movie, but basically what I wanted to say was thank you for making such a great video about 2001. Watching it really made my day. Love your channel!
It's still an impressive visual display. it holds up well today. The 'Dawn of Man' sequence has that mosaic background that shows up in HD but it hardly matters. I saw a 35 'scope print in 1988 at an art house theater and it was pretty amazing.
I've been enjoying several of your videos, and this one is no exception. I'm surprised you completely reject the monolith-as-cinema-screen idea though. In the shot where the monolith appears at the foot of Dave's bed, the dimensions perfectly match up with the size of the screen itself. On my 4K bluray the aspect ratio of the monolith and the letterboxed screen are exactly 1:2.32, and they scale together whether shown at 1:2.20 like in the original release or 1:2.35 in the re-release. Surely not a coincidence? I know the monolith was originally a pyramid, then transparent, and was a sort-of teaching TV at one point, but like many things in his films, I think Kubrick came up with the idea through iteration.
To add further weight to this idea, the monolith is clearly NOT 1 by 4 by 9 in the film, despite how people repeat that over and over because they read it in the novel. When the monolith turns on edge as part of the strange constellation with all the other moons/planets, it can easily be measured and shown to be more like 1 by 17 rather than 1 by 9. Much thinner.
I saw 2001 for the first time in its entirety not all that long ago. Truly a one of a kind experience and mesmerizing visuals even for today’s standards. I still can’t comprehend that this was before the Apollo 11 moon landing! I’ve been curious to watch 2010: The Year We Made Contact as I’ve played the video game before but worry it might taint the original. Awesome review as always! 👍🏻
2010 is fine. It’s more of a conventional movie, but it doesn’t take anything away from the original. Besides, it’s got Roy Sheider, Helen Mirin, and Jon Lithgow in it, so there’s that. I’ll probably review it one of these days, since I’ve finally gotten through this one!
Looking forward to that one! I like the cast but yeah judging by the trailer it does look very conventional. I feel like it’ll be one of those movies fine on its own, had it not been a follow up of a Kubrick classic.
I think what 2001 showed that no other such sci-fi movies would show is most likely how scientists would react when examining data of extra-terrestrial life. Most movies always have the characters go "OMG this is totally astonishing" and lots of drama in their body language. Here we have Floyd and others on the moon bus looking at the magnetic field plots of Tycho crater. "Any idea what the hell it is?" "No, but we do know it was deliberately buried there four million years ago." "hey, how about some coffee?" "watch it, it's hot." I think the sequel movie "2010" completely failed in this regard as scientists and astronauts were portrayed as very expressive like sales and marketing people. While expressive people more entertaining than analytical people, but expressive characters are not a good cast. Unless it is an entertainment like "Armageddon."
I had the great good fortune to meet Gary Lockwood at an SF convention, where I bought his book. One of the things he mentions was meeting Neil Armstrong at a party and suggesting Bowman reflect the impression he received, making this one of the very few films where you actually believe Commander Bowman was put in charge of a billion-dollar spaceship. This part would have taken place before Apollo 11 but after Armstrong's first flight in Gemini 8.
The video might have said more about Kubrick's use of music. The Blue Danube sequence has my vote for the best classical musical video of all time. The fanfare from Also Sprach Zarasthustra became, as a result of its use in the film, a lasting part of popular culture, still being used today, including TV commercials. For that matter, the "program"of what Strauss was attempting with his tone poem is a pretty good description of the themes and meaning of the movie. An amusing sidelight of the movie is its use of iconic 1968 businesses, like Pan American Airways as the provider of commercial passenger service to the space station. Pan Am, poor dear, went out of business in 1991.
Nice work on this review. Im curious about the Pink Floyd connection. I was obsessed with this film since seeing it as a child. I always thought I had read as much as possible on the making of the film. I had certainly heard about the rumor involving Kubrick approaching Pink Floyd, but I've never heard anything factual about it. May I ask where you found the info? I highly agree with you on Lost Worlds and Benson's book. Also, Pink Floyd's Echoes is a really interesting mashup during the Star Gate sequence. I'm fortunate to live near a wonderful art house theater that has a 70mm print of 2001. I usually see it once or twice a year.
I appreciate your videos. I realize a lot of hard work goes into these things... This film ranks in my top ten Sci Fi films... I've been slowly devouring your videos and appreciate your work... Thanks!
2001 is THE movie, the most perfect fusion between video and audio that humanity ever produced and that's my personal truth. Seeing it for the first time opened my mind and made me convinced that cinema is the ultimate experience, for now, in satisfying the hunger for sensorial stimuli that we all have. I cherish every time I see it again and it's really a joy. It's also THE standard to which every sci-fi movies should aspire: elevate humanity to its extreme limits, good or evil that they could be, to evolve beyond and see what could happen. Thanks to this review for reminding me again of this!
I love Sci fi but never really got invested in 2001. I always see Leonard Rossiter an quickly want to put on some classic British comedy.....I didn't get where I am today by watching highly acclaimed Sci fi movies! 🤣 One for the Reggie Perrin fans.
Cool video and in fact it prompted me to actually find out why creators can't talk 'bout the pandemic on UA-cam. So an eye-opening video as well, even if not in the reason intended.
My personal take on HAL's "malfunction" contradicts Word of God, but I am stubbornly proud of it. HAL exhibits three primary opinions: 1) This mission is very important. 2) I (HAL) am incapable of error. 3) Whenever somthing goes wrong, human error is involved. Given those three assumptions, the logical thing to do is to have the humans replace the stuff likely to fail first (The AE-35 is played by a Sperry gyroscope assembly. Since they have moving parts, these are often the shortest-lived parts on a spacecraft in real life), and then do away with them before they make the mission fail. What also strikes me about the film is its profoundly Lovecraftian vibes. God, I love this film.
1968, Ah to be living in New York twenty years old, and an Art major at Queens. I was no stranger to the Cinerama Theater, I had seen the 3 projector version of, "How the West Was Won" there. Now I was at the opening of 2001. I felt a shift in my being, It was awesome. This was a postcard from thirty years in the future. I could not watch Star Trek for a month. The next day at the Library I took out the record. Thus Spoke Zarathustra. only to find the monumental opening was the only good part of the work. (Sorry Richard. I liked some of your other works better.) lol. Artists adored the film before the critics. My parents hated it. blamed pot for my liking it. worse yet my best friend thinks its a snooze fest. Alas. I stand proud in my appreciation of the singular Artistic excellence in every frame. In concept and presentation. This is The number One. and not just Sci Fi.
Great review! But what is “That Thing That Happened That We Don’t Talk About On UA-cam?” I’m not exactly new to UA-cam, but I’m unaware of a topic or subject that has been deemed so taboo that even mentioning it by name is prohibited.
The pandemic. There was a period for a few months when the algorithm got a little overzealous in cracking down on misinformation, flagging any and all mentions of the specific virus as "inappropriate."
Yeah the final Act is a serious acid trip… 2010, although nowhere near as deep or good does a good job of filling in the holes about why HAL went insane…And it tells a compelling continuation of the story in its own right.
I was in grade school when this movie came out. I must have been 7. This movie scared the crap out of me. But this movie set the standard for science fiction up to that point. Science Fiction up to that point was pretty cheesy. I did find out the the reason it was 2001, and not 2000, because the 20th Century started in 2001. Remember the first century started in year 1, not year 0. I really need to see this movie again!
Lot to unpack there and I will be watching this again, but for the moment, let me say that the editing on the end titles was really first rate. That was perfectly cut with 'Chasing the Funk'
I went to see this film when i was a bout 8 years old with my Grandmother being a Sci Fi fan mostly (Stat Trek) expecting action and aliens etc imagine our reaction Haha. We did however watch it to the end, years late i still watch it and love it and get more from it etch time i see it. Do i fully understand its meaning well no will i ever who knows but i keep watching.
I keep waiting for 2001 to happen and it is 2022...did they get something wrong? With that said, it is a prediction of a future that never happened. When I was a young child, I believed that this would be our future...then the Great Society came along with all its diverting and wasting of resources and this future became an afterthought. Here's to dreams that do come true!
The title of the film can be a year, like 2015 or 1988. But the year chosen was not so much of a specific year, but what 2001 as a year represents. 2001 (not 2000, if you know your math) is the first year of the new millennia. It was chosen by Kubrick and Clarke to show what the next epoch of time will have instore for humanity. It did not try to portray what will be happening in the year 2001, but what will be in the next century or so.
Hi E.Magill. Incredible work on this essay! Thank you for sharing. An ongoing debate about 2001 is whether you must see it in a Cinema (on the "Big Screen") to believe it. What's your opinion on that?
I loved and appreciated the film long before I saw it in a theater. That said, it is a much more impressive experience on the big screen, and I dare say it is far superior to see it that way.
I agree 100%. I was lucky enough to be taken to a movie theater by my dad, himself a huge SF geek even before the term existed. It was one of the many re-screenings this movie has had and I was 8 at the time. I remember being mesmerized by the visuals and the story. To this day, this movie always makes me remember my dad (now dead since 7 years), and how he made of me another SF geek all those 49 years ago.
The reason many find this movie boring is because Kubrick didn't merely want to show life in the future. He wanted to show living in the future, and that's going to bring along many of the banalities that that entails. A challenging but necessary artistic choice. As a film fan, this is not my favorite sf movie. As a film historian, it's weight is immeasurable. And anyone who wanted to bring more Pink Floyd music into the world is clearly a genius who's got my vote...
It's hard to say something is the best movie in any category: sci-fi, war, sports, comedy, documentary, etc. I would say this belongs in the top 10 for sci fi movies. Definitely the best sci fi movie of the 1960s.
my personal interpretation of 2001 is that it's about the evolution of mankind, the journey towards the unknown, unraveling a higher state of being, to me the film ponders.. what comes after death? do we simply fade or are we reborn as something else and I think the ending is a clear answer to that question. I'm religious but to me, this film is theologically ambiguous, there could be a god in this film, there could not, which adds another layer of mystery to it.
The F/X on "2001" are well ahead of it's time, but the pacing was very slow for me. I actually preferred the sequel, "2010". Oddly, my personal favorite film of all-time was Kubrick's "Spartacus".
While Kubrick was an outstanding director, and if 2001 is only considered from an 'art' perspective, then arguably it is one of the greatest films ever made. If on the other hand, one looks at the film from a story and entertainment perspective, then the book is far better than the films narrative, which one could argue is designed to be cold and distancing. Of course, YMMV and clearly does in this case.
it seems clear to me, that the monolith is linked to the creator. HAL is our creation, and we make mistakes and lie. HAL is made with mathematics, and science does nt lie. we evolved from the animal to modern science with tools. the monolith is like the 10 commandments s stone. this what I see. good show!
I was never a huge fan of 2001. I understand and respect it for the "milestone" that it is in film. But honestly there are other "milestones" that are more to my personal tastes. That said, I caught a special screening at the Cinerama in Seattle, and when seen in a large format (it was either 65 mm or 70 mm) on the deep curve screen, it really is an experience.
Great review, with lots of background information - thanks. Just two suggestions... have a look at the PBS-Nova documentary "Dawn of Humanity" - short version here: ua-cam.com/video/M7KH5n9QyBU/v-deo.html This documentary turns Kubrick's "Dawn of Man" upside-down, or more accurately - right side up. Second point, have a look at "Voyage to the End of the Universe" (Original Czech title: "Ikarie XB 1") from 1963. Arthur C. Clarke's novels were not the only things that inspired Kubrick.
There's a lot that's impressive about it and there's a lot that is boring. It's not my favorite Kubrick movie but when its breath taking its breath taking. Did you get a chance to see the Nolan mix of the film?
What many do not know is that after the film flopped and was relegated to smaller local art- house cinemas it's genius and visionary content was enjoyed by the hippy generation who saw the film while on psychedelic drugs. Many of these patrons spread the word that understanding and profound revelations were to be experienced watching the film while whacked out on hallucinagens.
I would argue Forbidden Planet was just as big of a leap foward in Special Effects. My top 3 sci fi films of all time - 3. 2001: A Space Odyssey 2. Forbidden Planet 1. Star Wars A New Hope. The Empire Strikes Back could also be second place. I put a New Hope above it though, because of the Death Star. 2001 is a true masterpiece of film making. It's a phenomenal depiction of what the space program could evolve into. However, it probably would of been more realistic to have used the date of 2100, instead of 2001. I appreciated the video.
Every single frame of this movie has a meaning, closed to any discussion or individual interpretation, till arriving to its final destination and concluding the whole portrait. You yourself noticed the birthday themes and foods and yet You say everyone can understand and conclude what they want, every painting hung on the walls has something to say. A meticulous person like mr Kubrick can not agree with other`s opinions. Take the very beginning of the movie, apes and pigs, why? because he is presenting dawn of humanity with apes but he is very aware that pigs are genetically more close to humans.
What do I think? I think 2001 is proof a group of amazing film-makers can make an engaging and breath-taking movie despite having, really, no fucking idea what it was about.
Because you can get copyright flags for less than two seconds of music--whereas the bots are far more forgiving of visual data--so even when I use old classical music, I have to rely on public domain recordings or royalty-free versions of those songs. I could certainly put in the real thing and then fight with various companies over a period of months over the definition of "fair use," but it's just not worth my time and effort or the risk to my channel's entire existence should I lose such an argument. Hence, crappy music.
It's a BORING movie. The movie has scenes that are way too long ; you can cut at least 30 minutes from it. The actors are soulless ; the best actor of the movie is the computer HALL. I don't understand why people love Stanley Kubrik movies. He was a very pretentious director, making meaningless movies.
I saw this film in a theater. It contained an intermission. It was breath taking on the huge screen and the sound was incredible.
Saw this when I was 10 years old on its release in 1968. Absolutely mind blowing, I couldn't get enough of it. Coupled with the Apollo missions at the same time and it was just an amazing period in my life. Even now in my sixties this movie still holds a special place. Possibly the greatest pure sci fi film ever made, an astounding vision.
I think the music in the beginning is the greatest music pieces in the history of cinema.
So ahead of its time that Richard Strauss composed it before Kubrick was even born.
@valmarsiglia I digress here, if I'm correct the background music for this video, is from the movie Alien. I love that movie, especially its sequel!
@@tufflucal4037 Well, I was referring to Also Sparch Zarathustra, but that's good too.
The quintessential science fiction/fact experience. Deep, ambiguous, stunning, compelling. 2001: A Space Odyssey is one of the all time cornerstones of the cinematic universe. The wonders that await the human race...eventually.
Gary Lockwood said, "There is thought behind every shot of the movie."
I had the amazing luck to talk to Gary Lockwood at a convention.
He said that he talked to Kubrick and Dullea about the time he met Neil Armstrong at a party, and they based their portrayals of the Discovery crew off his impressions. This is kind of ironic because there seems to be a consensus that Armstrong was a bit of an odd duck in the astronaut corps. People have said things like "I worked with Armstong every day for ten years and I didn't know he lost a daughter until I read his biography." But it does explain why the crew of the Discovery are on the very short list of fictional spacemen who would plausibly be put in charge of a multi-billion dollar spaceship.
My mom took me to see 2001 when I was 7 years old. I did not understand it but I still liked it. Over the years I read the books and re watched 2001 over and over. I truly think it is a masterpiece.
As always, thank you for a high quality review. I read the Clarke novelisation in 1981, before I saw the film, so I could understand what was going on when I did see the film. If I hadn't, then I might have dismissed the film as deliberately obscure and slow moving to a degree approaching being unwatchable even if it is unquestionably brilliant in technical terms. I'm very much a well-structured screenplay viewer, not an art-house viewer. I don't know if Kubrick got bored with the idea of a conventional story telling style and wanted to go to a direct 'experience' style instead, but his dismissal of the SF movies that Clarke liked is (in my opinion) very significant. Alex North (as major a talent as he was) was not the right choice. I believe only Jerry Goldsmith could have composed an original score for '2001' It was Keir Dullea's idea to have those perspective shifts between the different Bowmans in the hotel suite environment. The only flaw in the special effects that time has shown up is that photographs of models (the Moon shuttle for example) are often used, instead of filming the actual models themselves. Carl Sagan persuaded Kubrick not to directly show the aliens who are observing/evolving Bowman. I completely agree that Kubrick achieved an objective reality of space as vast, empty, dangerous and not remotely designed with human survival as a consideration, so that benevolent aliens have to intervene to ensure the potential of humanity is achieved.
First saw it as a 12 year old in 1978 when MGM re-released it thinking "hey, space is big now, put out our space movie out again". Saw the 50th release together with Dullea and Lockwood who did a world tour. Greatest film I have ever seen.
I went to see it at the cinema a few years back with my dad. We sat in the front row for the second part
I saw this at school when I was 7 back In 1972. It was the first science fiction I had ever seen and It made me fall in love with scifi.
I saw this movie in 1968 at the Century theatres in San Jose next to the Winchester Mystery House. Come to think of it, this was the best theatre as it had the big wrap around panaramic screen, stereophonic sound (also had the snazzafrantic seats and poppaphonic popcorn). I remember thinking it all made sense. Yep, when I will be an old guy I can get a ticket on a PanAm spaceplane. Afterall my grandfather was a youngster when airplanes were flimsy and crashes were frequent. Later as an old guy him and his wife cruised to Europe on a 707 at 600 mph above the weather. I never thought much about classical music (back then I consider it what only old people listen to). I distinctly remember all sci-fi movies looked so cheesy after watching 2001. Later in 1970s when it was released again in theatres, friends and I go watch it. Then later debate what was it all about. But then I read the book, it all was then clear what the plot and storyline. Kind of took away the imagination.
I also remembered all the young people like myself at the time thought the music was perfect, which I read articles many adults thought the music confusing. What does a classic Viennese waltz tune have to do with space travel? (I thought it was interesting Johann Strauss' Blue Danube was first performed in the US in 1868, 100 years before 2001 release).
Besides the special effects, it was showing that commercial companies will have their place in space. The actors portrayed the kind of people in those occupations. Many engineers, scientists, and managers are not expressive, showoff actors that show wide range of emotions as needed for entertainment.
And then on the 50th anniversary of the release in 2018 the Castro theatre in San Francisco showed a 70mm ANALOG of the film. It was watching it ***exactly*** like I saw it as a 10 year old. There was a certain quality to this which digital does not have. And the sound had certain characteristics, I can hear things I usually don't hear in movies. Later talking with someone about the music, he said young people at the time never heard these songs before so they equate the music with space travel. Adults had preconceived bias. Oh, I can dance Viennese waltz but what they play at ballroom dance studios is more of a consistent tempo unlike the composition used for the movie is more of an interpretive version to match profiles of the various spacecraft and at what phase in the flight. But it's now 23% into the 21st century, Pan Am is long gone and we might get back to the moon before I am dead of old age.
I saw in one documentary that Stanley Kubrick actually gone to Sam Goody in New York to buy all kinds of classical albums while making this movie. Always have high regards for this movie and influence in future science fiction to come. Enjoyed the sequel as well. Enjoy your UA-cam videos always well thought off and very detailed as always
Your reviews are among the very best on YTube! Keep up the fantastic work.
Wow, thanks!
2001 is my favorite film of all time. My favorite genre is sci fi, and I think 2001 is without a doubt the greatest sci fi film ever made. It is the biggest influence for all the sci fi films that came after it. It's also my favorite film in terms of cinematography. The glorious shots and special effects are a sight to behold even 50+ years later. My biggest dream as a film fan is to be able to watch the film in imax one day. I could go on about how much I love this movie, but basically what I wanted to say was thank you for making such a great video about 2001. Watching it really made my day. Love your channel!
It is comic book stuff compared to the TRUE GREATEST flick ever ,,,,,,,,,?
HOMBRE !!!
This video has so much quality that hurts. You should have 1 million subs.
Thank you!!! 😋
Broken down to it's most simplistic analogy:
Sperm - The Discovery
Egg - Jupiter
DNA - Bowman
Brought together to form new life - Star Child
It's still an impressive visual display. it holds up well today. The 'Dawn of Man' sequence has that mosaic background that shows up in HD but it hardly matters. I saw a 35 'scope print in 1988 at an art house theater and it was pretty amazing.
I've been enjoying several of your videos, and this one is no exception. I'm surprised you completely reject the monolith-as-cinema-screen idea though. In the shot where the monolith appears at the foot of Dave's bed, the dimensions perfectly match up with the size of the screen itself. On my 4K bluray the aspect ratio of the monolith and the letterboxed screen are exactly 1:2.32, and they scale together whether shown at 1:2.20 like in the original release or 1:2.35 in the re-release. Surely not a coincidence? I know the monolith was originally a pyramid, then transparent, and was a sort-of teaching TV at one point, but like many things in his films, I think Kubrick came up with the idea through iteration.
To add further weight to this idea, the monolith is clearly NOT 1 by 4 by 9 in the film, despite how people repeat that over and over because they read it in the novel. When the monolith turns on edge as part of the strange constellation with all the other moons/planets, it can easily be measured and shown to be more like 1 by 17 rather than 1 by 9. Much thinner.
I saw 2001 for the first time in its entirety not all that long ago. Truly a one of a kind experience and mesmerizing visuals even for today’s standards. I still can’t comprehend that this was before the Apollo 11 moon landing! I’ve been curious to watch 2010: The Year We Made Contact as I’ve played the video game before but worry it might taint the original. Awesome review as always! 👍🏻
2010 is fine. It’s more of a conventional movie, but it doesn’t take anything away from the original. Besides, it’s got Roy Sheider, Helen Mirin, and Jon Lithgow in it, so there’s that. I’ll probably review it one of these days, since I’ve finally gotten through this one!
Looking forward to that one! I like the cast but yeah judging by the trailer it does look very conventional. I feel like it’ll be one of those movies fine on its own, had it not been a follow up of a Kubrick classic.
I think what 2001 showed that no other such sci-fi movies would show is most likely how scientists would react when examining data of extra-terrestrial life. Most movies always have the characters go "OMG this is totally astonishing" and lots of drama in their body language. Here we have Floyd and others on the moon bus looking at the magnetic field plots of Tycho crater. "Any idea what the hell it is?" "No, but we do know it was deliberately buried there four million years ago." "hey, how about some coffee?" "watch it, it's hot." I think the sequel movie "2010" completely failed in this regard as scientists and astronauts were portrayed as very expressive like sales and marketing people. While expressive people more entertaining than analytical people, but expressive characters are not a good cast. Unless it is an entertainment like "Armageddon."
I had the great good fortune to meet Gary Lockwood at an SF convention, where I bought his book. One of the things he mentions was meeting Neil Armstrong at a party and suggesting Bowman reflect the impression he received, making this one of the very few films where you actually believe Commander Bowman was put in charge of a billion-dollar spaceship. This part would have taken place before Apollo 11 but after Armstrong's first flight in Gemini 8.
Awesome work on 2K subs! Seems like you had this one planned for some time 😁
You have no idea!! I think I started working on it right after my first video. 😂
@@TheUnapologeticGeek We may have our own long term project in mind 😉.
The video might have said more about Kubrick's use of music. The Blue Danube sequence has my vote for the best classical musical video of all time. The fanfare from Also Sprach Zarasthustra became, as a result of its use in the film, a lasting part of popular culture, still being used today, including TV commercials. For that matter, the "program"of what Strauss was attempting with his tone poem is a pretty good description of the themes and meaning of the movie. An amusing sidelight of the movie is its use of iconic 1968 businesses, like Pan American Airways as the provider of commercial passenger service to the space station. Pan Am, poor dear, went out of business in 1991.
+1 citing/plugging sources in-video.
Wow, great review. And so much new insight into a film I already loved so much. BRB while I Google all about that chess game
Nice work on this review. Im curious about the Pink Floyd connection. I was obsessed with this film since seeing it as a child. I always thought I had read as much as possible on the making of the film. I had certainly heard about the rumor involving Kubrick approaching Pink Floyd, but I've never heard anything factual about it. May I ask where you found the info?
I highly agree with you on Lost Worlds and Benson's book. Also, Pink Floyd's Echoes is a really interesting mashup during the Star Gate sequence.
I'm fortunate to live near a wonderful art house theater that has a 70mm print of 2001. I usually see it once or twice a year.
I appreciate your videos. I realize a lot of hard work goes into these things... This film ranks in my top ten Sci Fi films...
I've been slowly devouring your videos and appreciate your work...
Thanks!
Thank you!
2001 is THE movie, the most perfect fusion between video and audio that humanity ever produced and that's my personal truth.
Seeing it for the first time opened my mind and made me convinced that cinema is the ultimate experience, for now, in satisfying the hunger for sensorial stimuli that we all have.
I cherish every time I see it again and it's really a joy.
It's also THE standard to which every sci-fi movies should aspire: elevate humanity to its extreme limits, good or evil that they could be, to evolve beyond and see what could happen.
Thanks to this review for reminding me again of this!
Well said.
I love Sci fi but never really got invested in 2001. I always see Leonard Rossiter an quickly want to put on some classic British comedy.....I didn't get where I am today by watching highly acclaimed Sci fi movies! 🤣 One for the Reggie Perrin fans.
Cool video and in fact it prompted me to actually find out why creators can't talk 'bout the pandemic on UA-cam. So an eye-opening video as well, even if not in the reason intended.
As a UA-cam creator, I am obligated to ask, “What pandemic?” 😁
My personal take on HAL's "malfunction" contradicts Word of God, but I am stubbornly proud of it. HAL exhibits three primary opinions:
1) This mission is very important.
2) I (HAL) am incapable of error.
3) Whenever somthing goes wrong, human error is involved.
Given those three assumptions, the logical thing to do is to have the humans replace the stuff likely to fail first (The AE-35 is played by a Sperry gyroscope assembly. Since they have moving parts, these are often the shortest-lived parts on a spacecraft in real life), and then do away with them before they make the mission fail.
What also strikes me about the film is its profoundly Lovecraftian vibes.
God, I love this film.
Excellent video. Thank you.
Keep up the good work.
1968, Ah to be living in New York twenty years old, and an Art major at Queens. I was no stranger to the Cinerama Theater, I had seen the 3 projector version of, "How the West Was Won" there. Now I was at the opening of 2001. I felt a shift in my being, It was awesome. This was a postcard from thirty years in the future. I could not watch Star Trek for a month. The next day at the Library I took out the record. Thus Spoke Zarathustra. only to find the monumental opening was the only good part of the work. (Sorry Richard. I liked some of your other works better.) lol. Artists adored the film before the critics. My parents hated it. blamed pot for my liking it. worse yet my best friend thinks its a snooze fest. Alas. I stand proud in my appreciation of the singular Artistic excellence in every frame. In concept and presentation. This is The number One. and not just Sci Fi.
my fave sci fi movie ever read all the books also much better but thats normal desert island movie for sure...
Great review! But what is “That Thing That Happened That We Don’t Talk About On UA-cam?” I’m not exactly new to UA-cam, but I’m unaware of a topic or subject that has been deemed so taboo that even mentioning it by name is prohibited.
The pandemic. There was a period for a few months when the algorithm got a little overzealous in cracking down on misinformation, flagging any and all mentions of the specific virus as "inappropriate."
Yeah the final Act is a serious acid trip… 2010, although nowhere near as deep or good does a good job of filling in the holes about why HAL went insane…And it tells a compelling continuation of the story in its own right.
Congratulations on 2003 subscribers. I got hit with 3 commercial interruptions. That's progress.
Having not hit the magic 1000 number, we can't know how ad selection works exactly. Did get one 39 minute ad in there though!
Don’t worry. Nobody knows how the ad selection works exactly. 😂
I was in grade school when this movie came out. I must have been 7. This movie scared the crap out of me. But this movie set the standard for science fiction up to that point. Science Fiction up to that point was pretty cheesy. I did find out the the reason it was 2001, and not 2000, because the 20th Century started in 2001. Remember the first century started in year 1, not year 0.
I really need to see this movie again!
Everyone : "I don't understand the movie"
Me : Read. The. Book.
Lot to unpack there and I will be watching this again, but for the moment, let me say that the editing on the end titles was really first rate. That was perfectly cut with 'Chasing the Funk'
Ok fine I’ll watch it!
I went to see this film when i was a bout 8 years old with my Grandmother being a Sci Fi fan mostly (Stat Trek) expecting action and aliens etc imagine our reaction Haha. We did however watch it to the end, years late i still watch it and love it and get more from it etch time i see it.
Do i fully understand its meaning well no will i ever who knows but i keep watching.
I keep waiting for 2001 to happen and it is 2022...did they get something wrong? With that said, it is a prediction of a future that never happened. When I was a young child, I believed that this would be our future...then the Great Society came along with all its diverting and wasting of resources and this future became an afterthought. Here's to dreams that do come true!
The title of the film can be a year, like 2015 or 1988. But the year chosen was not so much of a specific year, but what 2001 as a year represents. 2001 (not 2000, if you know your math) is the first year of the new millennia. It was chosen by Kubrick and Clarke to show what the next epoch of time will have instore for humanity. It did not try to portray what will be happening in the year 2001, but what will be in the next century or so.
Ordered the books noted in your video. Finding an affordable copy of LOST WORLDS OF 2001 in any condition is a bitch and a half.
Good luck! My copy is falling apart, and when I thought about replacing it last year, I gave up after looking around online.
a masterpiece.
Hi E.Magill. Incredible work on this essay! Thank you for sharing. An ongoing debate about 2001 is whether you must see it in a Cinema (on the "Big Screen") to believe it. What's your opinion on that?
I loved and appreciated the film long before I saw it in a theater. That said, it is a much more impressive experience on the big screen, and I dare say it is far superior to see it that way.
I agree 100%. I was lucky enough to be taken to a movie theater by my dad, himself a huge SF geek even before the term existed. It was one of the many re-screenings this movie has had and I was 8 at the time. I remember being mesmerized by the visuals and the story. To this day, this movie always makes me remember my dad (now dead since 7 years), and how he made of me another SF geek all those 49 years ago.
Okay, I’ve gotta ask, what is “that thing we don’t talk about on UA-cam“ referred to in the “other comments” section? Don’t leave me in the dark bro!
COVID. When I made this video, UA-cam was flagging and demonetizing everything that even said the word.
I love this movie. It was my first 12 pack drunk in my dorm room.
The reason many find this movie boring is because Kubrick didn't merely want to show life in the future. He wanted to show living in the future, and that's going to bring along many of the banalities that that entails. A challenging but necessary artistic choice.
As a film fan, this is not my favorite sf movie.
As a film historian, it's weight is immeasurable.
And anyone who wanted to bring more Pink Floyd music into the world is clearly a genius who's got my vote...
It's hard to say something is the best movie in any category: sci-fi, war, sports, comedy, documentary, etc. I would say this belongs in the top 10 for sci fi movies. Definitely the best sci fi movie of the 1960s.
my personal interpretation of 2001 is that it's about the evolution of mankind, the journey towards the unknown, unraveling a higher state of being, to me the film ponders.. what comes after death? do we simply fade or are we reborn as something else and I think the ending is a clear answer to that question. I'm religious but to me, this film is theologically ambiguous, there could be a god in this film, there could not, which adds another layer of mystery to it.
The F/X on "2001" are well ahead of it's time, but the pacing was very slow for me. I actually preferred the sequel, "2010". Oddly, my personal favorite film of all-time was Kubrick's "Spartacus".
While Kubrick was an outstanding director, and if 2001 is only considered from an 'art' perspective, then arguably it is one of the greatest films ever made. If on the other hand, one looks at the film from a story and entertainment perspective, then the book is far better than the films narrative, which one could argue is designed to be cold and distancing. Of course, YMMV and clearly does in this case.
13:53 sadly there are people who STILL think this way about 2001 and it just goes to show the public was always stupid and unrefined, even in the 60s
Way did you through shade on Rob Agar? Things like that come off as petty and unprofessional.
it seems clear to me, that the monolith is linked to the creator.
HAL is our creation, and we make mistakes and lie.
HAL is made with mathematics, and science does nt lie.
we evolved from the animal to modern science with tools.
the monolith is like the 10 commandments s stone.
this what I see.
good show!
I was never a huge fan of 2001. I understand and respect it for the "milestone" that it is in film. But honestly there are other "milestones" that are more to my personal tastes. That said, I caught a special screening at the Cinerama in Seattle, and when seen in a large format (it was either 65 mm or 70 mm) on the deep curve screen, it really is an experience.
I am among those fortunates whose first viewing of 2001 was on the big screen.
Easily the best sci-fi film & none will match it...bravo Stanley Kubrick!
Great review, with lots of background information - thanks. Just two suggestions... have a look at the PBS-Nova documentary "Dawn of Humanity" - short version here: ua-cam.com/video/M7KH5n9QyBU/v-deo.html This documentary turns Kubrick's "Dawn of Man" upside-down, or more accurately - right side up. Second point, have a look at "Voyage to the End of the Universe" (Original Czech title: "Ikarie XB 1") from 1963. Arthur C. Clarke's novels were not the only things that inspired Kubrick.
I swear I come away from watching it with a different meaning every time
I wish they would do 2045?
so it is your favorite science fiction movie?
Yep. It's not my favorite to watch, but it is the one I always say when somebody asks me what I think is the "best" sci-fi movie.
Visually it is amazing. Still.
There is scarcely anything in it that looks dated
Arthur c Clark was a strange man with boys. That’s why he moved out of England when he got hot.
There's a lot that's impressive about it and there's a lot that is boring. It's not my favorite Kubrick movie but when its breath taking its breath taking. Did you get a chance to see the Nolan mix of the film?
I did. It was stunning!
@@TheUnapologeticGeek I should also say my dad showed it to me whenI was four years old so it's one of the first movies I ever saw
Say what you want about them, but the hippies did save *_2OO1._*
That is true.
What many do not know is that after the film flopped and was relegated to smaller local art- house cinemas it's genius and visionary content was enjoyed by the hippy generation who saw the film while on psychedelic drugs. Many of these patrons spread the word that understanding and profound revelations were to be experienced watching the film while whacked out on hallucinagens.
The big thing they always say about screenwriting is the stakes are very important. What are the stakes in 2001?
Am I the only one who enjoys "2010" more than "2001"? :D
No. Even as big a fanboy as I am for 2001, I can freely admit that 2010 is more entertaining. 😎
Did you notice that Stanley Kubrik put on a tonne of weight after this film?
I think you left out part of it...
I would argue Forbidden Planet was just as big of a leap foward in Special Effects. My top 3 sci fi films of all time - 3. 2001: A Space Odyssey 2. Forbidden Planet 1. Star Wars A New Hope. The Empire Strikes Back could also be second place. I put a New Hope above it though, because of the Death Star. 2001 is a true masterpiece of film making. It's a phenomenal depiction of what the space program could evolve into. However, it probably would of been more realistic to have used the date of 2100, instead of 2001. I appreciated the video.
Every single frame of this movie has a meaning, closed to any discussion or individual interpretation, till arriving to its final destination and concluding the whole portrait. You yourself noticed the birthday themes and foods and yet You say everyone can understand and conclude what they want, every painting hung on the walls has something to say. A meticulous person like mr Kubrick can not agree with other`s opinions. Take the very beginning of the movie, apes and pigs, why? because he is presenting dawn of humanity with apes but he is very aware that pigs are genetically more close to humans.
What do I think? I think 2001 is proof a group of amazing film-makers can make an engaging and breath-taking movie despite having, really, no fucking idea what it was about.
The velcro footies are the worst aspect of the film. That probably says a lot.
Not and never have been impressed! Dr. Strangelove though, that is another animal !
A flood of overly-positive comments about an over-rated film. On-line, perhaps it is posssible to fool most of the people - all the time?
How is it overrated? It’s a one of a kind and hugely influential.
How do you show scenes from a great movie and add shit music?
Because you can get copyright flags for less than two seconds of music--whereas the bots are far more forgiving of visual data--so even when I use old classical music, I have to rely on public domain recordings or royalty-free versions of those songs. I could certainly put in the real thing and then fight with various companies over a period of months over the definition of "fair use," but it's just not worth my time and effort or the risk to my channel's entire existence should I lose such an argument. Hence, crappy music.
No music is an option.
An overrated & self indulgent movie, your review on the other hand was simply terrific.
More aptly named "201 minutes of Space Idiocy"
That’s not clever
It's a BORING movie. The movie has scenes that are way too long ; you can cut at least 30 minutes from it. The actors are soulless ; the best actor of the movie is the computer HALL. I don't understand why people love Stanley Kubrik movies. He was a very pretentious director, making meaningless movies.