Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Film, TV & Theatre >

2001: A Space Odyssey

21:20 / 02.10.01

Saw 2001 for the first time last night and since I haven't read the book I wondered if some fellow Barbelithers could help me.

Firstly, I enjoyed the film and thought it was pretty cool. It didn't seem as slow as a lot of people had made out. Very 60's with all the pyschedelic lights and HAL was scary as fuck. I liked the special effects and loved the way people walked upside down in the spaceships. How did they do that?

Anyway, lets see if I've grasped this right. As far as I could tell the monolith is an alien artifact that when discovered advances evolution (Maybe I've OD'ed on New X-Men but bare with me). When it first appeared it evolved mankind to pick up weapons and start killing to attack and defend themselves and the second time it appeared it caused a sentient computer to try and protect itself as much as it could and willing to kill if neccessary.

Now at the end when Dave was in the "Stately Mansion" and he kept seeing himself and then he was in the older other version I got the impression that he had actually been in that place for years and now and again he caught glimpses of his past and future selves. The film was portraying the moments that he saw them and jumping forward in time.

At the very end we see a giant baby in a bubble approach earth? Totally confused by that bit.

Is it true that the book was written after the film? Should I read it?

All in all an enjoyable film. I await your answers.

21:37 / 02.10.01

Living with a Kubrick freak i'm sure i can help you out here

The walking upside down part (which looks excellent) was just a spinning set - ever seen Dancing on the Ceiling - the music video was done along the same lines..

as for the monolith yeah alien, it was a tool placed in various locations to act as agents to carry out tasks i.e give the early man intelligence, the one on the moon was to inform the aliens that man had arrived (this is explained better in the further books)..

as for the part of the end in the mansion after the trippy jump, i think there are various ideas about this but i think the main belief is that the aliens made it look like this to make Dave more comfortable, he's seeing himself get older due to the fact that he is evolving and finally turns into the space kid, the next stage..in the book the baby can travel to anywhere in the universe...

as for the book written after they were actually written at the same time by Arthur and Stan the man.. although the disagreed on the screenplay...Kubrick gets the credit for the screen plance Clarke get the credit for the novel although they are both mentioned in each one...

Excellent movie though, think its best to make your own ideas up but the ones above are the ones stated by the sources...

Anyone in London i'd suggest going to see it very stoned at Curzon in Mayfair if its on again in the orginal 70mm - niiiice...

hope that makes sense its not from me its from my flatmate the love child of Stanley...if you need to know anything else just say his head is full of it

08:56 / 08.10.01

Cheers for the response. That answered pretty much everything. Just remembered another question I missed from the original post. At the start with all the primeval people I'm saw I could hear talking in the background. I turned the volume right up and there was definately some talking going on but I couldn't hear what. I wondered if it was supposed to be there or whether its just my video being weird? (I taped the film off the TV)

14:02 / 08.10.01

Stanley Kubrick himself on the film's climax:

"When the surviving astronaut, Bowman, ultimately reaches Jupiter, this artifact (the monolith) sweeps him into a force field or star gate that hurls him on a journey through inner and outer space and finally transports him to a kind of 'human zoo' approximating a hospitable terrestrial environment drawn out of his dreams and imagination. In a timeless state, his life passes from middle age to senescence to death. He is reborn, an enhanced being, an angel, a star child, a superman if you like, and returns to Earth prepared for the next leap forward in man's evolutionary destiny."

-excerpted from an interview with Stan in Kubrick: Inside A Film Artist's Maze by Thomas Allen Nelson.

The second appearance of the monolith did nothing to influence HAL's slide into murderous insanity. The monolith buried on the moon was acting as an alarm to notify the aliens that mankind had progressed to the level at which they could travel off-planet, and were ready for the next stage of evolution. When it is dug up it emits the piercing scream, signalling its discovery to the aliens.

[ 08-10-2001: Message edited by: CameronStewart ]

14:11 / 08.10.01

>>Is it true that the book was written after the film?<<

Kubrick developed the screenplay from Clarke's ten-page short story The Sentinel. Clarke then wrote an expanded novelisation of the screenplay concurrent to the production of the film. The film was released April 1968, the book was released several months later.

12:54 / 04.11.01

I have a reading of 2001, that relates to the first monolith and how it creates intellegence. This is that it introduces the concept of nothing into primitive mans mind. This doubt leads to destruction, the bone, but also to science through questioning.
The logical ego is both fearful of nothing but curious to disprove.
HAL is a product of the conscious mind, replicating itself. Thus HAL is scientific and murderous, for it has no subconscious or divinity. It is necessary for HAL to threaten Dave, and force him to face his fear of nothing.
Dave evolves, going through his life by breaking the 4th Dimensional barrier, to become a Star Child, a 5/6th dimensional entity.
Hey, its not necessarily true, just my reading.
PEACE

[ 04-11-2001: Message edited by: Wize Dragon ]

13:28 / 06.11.01

I think that yes, the book’s worth reading, and if you can read 2010, the follow-up, as well (ideally within quick succession), I think it’ll firm up on the answers that people have already given – as well as giving an explanation for HAL’s apparent madness. Or you could check out the film, which I’ve always felt was a bit underrated – not as eye-popping or visionary as 2001, granted, but certainly better than many SF films.

And my copies of the books feature interesting introductions etc by Arthur C C – I think he refers to lending thinks to SK, and not getting them back, saying “Stanley uses a black hole for filing” or something on those lines.

Although I have to say that I don’t think that 2061 and 3001, Clarke’s further two books in the series, add that much to things.

DBC

14:30 / 06.11.01

quote:Originally posted by Rothkoid:
Could be some kind of audio ghosting, maybe? I know that my TV still shows the ghosts of BBC2 when watching C4; maybe the same thing happens with audio? I don't recall hearing talking when I saw the flick at the movies...

I seem to remember some whispered muttering on the soundtrack album.... It sounds like a trick to throw you off a little, add anxiety.

The Return Of Rothkoid

14:33 / 06.11.01

That's a good point: lots of Penderecki's work features fucked-up vocalisations - could be one of them. Is there any other music happening when the muttering sounds appear?