2001: A Space Odyssey (WTF!? , I need help understanding...)

[MrMcSick]

I love this movie and don't smoke. Another movie in this vein that I love is The Fountain.

 

[ittoa666]

Fuckin big black monoliths. How do they work?








But seriously, i thought this movie was boring too, but I don't discount it because of that. I see why people consider it a masterpiece, and I appreciate it. The main story is very interesting, but to some I can see how it can be a bit plodding.

 

[JohnIce]

It's a difficult movie, for sure. I mean, it goes for over 20 minutes before there's even any dialogue. But the concept is very interesting, like a slow, passionate mindfuck.

I haven't read the book but I have read Childhood's End by the same author (Arthur C. Clarke), and it touches on a lot of the same themes while being a LOT more concise and to-the-point. I definately recommend it.

 

[playstopause]

Most of Kubrick's films have a reasonably "surface level" story going on, along with the more cerebral stuff (FMJ and ACO). 2001 is almost all cerebral, and doesn't hold the interest of people who are looking for something else, like the others.

Well said.

Frenchy, there's two ways people interpret Kubrick : one really enjoy the shit out of them because of the technical aspect and whatnot, and others find it to be bullshit and pointless

I'll admit that Kubrick's film are not for everyone. Especially "2001", it's far from a movie made for a large "general" audience. But you know what? I don't think that people's opinion counts when it comes to Kubrick. If some think he's pointless, well they don't have a freaking clue. Those who find it boring have the right to (you really have to be in a slow paced mood to watch 2001... This ain't the fucking Transformers), but IMHO (and cinema history books all over the world), you can't touch Kubrick. You have to get passed that "bored" feeling and use your head a little, you know? Kubrick is one of the 10 best filmmaker ever and everyone studying cinema will have classes about Kubrick. He's essential but some get it, some don't.

 

[ElRay]

I thought this was the worst movie I've ever watched.

If you know the book, the movie is great. If you don't know the book, there are a lot of WTF moments. Similar to David Lynch's Dune.

Ray

 

[ry_z]

If you know the book, the movie is great. If you don't know the book, there are a lot of WTF moments.

I haven't read the book, and it's still possibly my favorite film of all time.

(I don't do drugs, either. )

 

[LUCKY7]

Millenium Hilton Hotel
55 Church Street
New York, NY 10007
212.693.2001

 

[LUCKY7]

"How obvious—how necessary—was that mathematical ratio of its sides, the quadratic sequence 1:4:9! And how naive to have imagined that the series ended at this point, in only three dimensions!" -Clarke A (1968). 2001: A Space Odyssey, Signet.

Clarke's monoliths are black, extremely flat, slightly reflective cuboids whose dimensions are in the precise ratio 1:4:9 (the squares of the first three integers). These dimensions are the main source of debate regarding the monoliths' simple external design. It is suggested that this number series does not stop at three dimensions, presumably also extending into the fourth and fifth dimensions. What is meant by this is not clear.

2001 vs. 2001

So, was your consciousness transformed the first time you had contact with the monolith on 9/11/2001?

 

[Randy]

What the fuck are you on and where can I get some?

 

[LUCKY7]

 

[playstopause]

What the fuck are you on and where can I get some?

 

[ShreddingDragon]

The movie was on TV just a few days ago again. Didn't watch it with full concentration this time since I was recording stuff, but I got to play along with Also Sprach Zarathustra, which just feels awesome.

And chiming in on what some have said - I've never used "mind altering substances" at all besides alcohol. And I have to say I'm sort of annoyed when the only conclusion some people come to, upon seeing the Jupiter and Beyond section of the movie, is that "haha what an acid trip! It's like he's on drugs!" This movie is about something a bit bigger than that...I'm not saying I even fully understand all the references and meanings behind the film and story, but it's not very hard to respect the depth put into it.

I'm not a film fanatic or any sort of purist in the usual sense, but I can tell this is a movie that one should look at like a highly impressionistic painting. If you only look at what happens on the screen and try to put it together in the everyday-Hollywood way...doesn't make any sense at all.

Oh well, imagine if this movie was directed by Michael Bay (no offense, I like the Transformers movies, but... )

 

[ry_z]

I'm not a film fanatic or any sort of purist in the usual sense, but I can tell this is a movie that one should look at like a highly impressionistic painting. If you only look at what happens on the screen and try to put it together in the everyday-Hollywood way...doesn't make any sense at all.

Roger Ebert said about the film: "Alone among science-fiction movies, “2001'' is not concerned with thrilling us, but with inspiring our awe."

 

[Edika]

The movie and the messages it tried to pass was very cool. I didn't get all of it in the beginning but after thinking about it a bit I started understanding more. But this happened after my initial frustration with how slow everything in the movie was going. I know Kubrick tried to show the enormity of space and how time as we perceive it doesn't matter but the fact that everything that had to do with outer space moved disgustingly slow pissed me off when I saw the movie. I was with a couple of friends and we were screaming at some points for things to move a bit faster. I mean more than two minutes for the space ship to traverse the TV screen? Come the fuck on!!

But aside from that a very good movie.

 

[LUCKY7]

The director Stanley Kubrick encoded his movie "2001: A Space Odyssey" with the number 666.

To summarize the occurrences of 666 in the movie:

1) The "monoliths" in the movie appear for 666 seconds. The time between the first appearance and final disappearance of each of the four "monoliths'," the four times added together, is 666 seconds.

2) The number of camera shots starting from "The Dawn of Man" (the first shot after the opening credits) to "The End" (the last shot of the closing credits) is 666.

3) The running time of the movie is 666 in different ways. The running time of the film in seconds, from the beginning of the "Overture" to the end of the "Exit Music" (total exhibition time), is equal to the number of moon orbits contained in 666 years (8903). The running time of the film in seconds, from the beginning of the MGM lion logo to the fade-out of the story, is equal to the number of moon phases contained in 666 years (8237). Everything before and after the movie proper, that is, the "Overture," end credits, and "Exit Music" times, adds up to 666 seconds.

?) For an "added bonus," the director Stanley Kubrick was reported to have died 666 days before the year 2001, on March 7, 1999.