View Full Version : 2001, A Space Odyssey, explained in 10 minutes
pookie_old
10-22-2005, 11:01 PM
http://www.kubrick2001.com/
David G. Smith
10-23-2005, 01:42 AM
Too cool. Where do you find this stuff Pookie?
I am a big fan of 2001 and this is one of the better attempts at interpretation.
Steve Strickland
10-23-2005, 05:50 AM
Wow, that was cool. Thanks for the link, Pookie. I loved this take on 2001. Everytime I read or, in this case, see someone's interpretation on this film, it makes me want to go watch it again for myself. For a movie that was made almost thirty years ago, it is awesome that people are still dissecting it and contemplating the films meaning. More proof, like any more was needed, that Kubrick was a true master of his craft. If only he could have gone out with A.I. instead of Eyes Wide Shut.
edit: I meant 40 years, I just can't count very well... :embarasse
spidey
10-23-2005, 07:07 AM
the movie nearly 40 years old!
Kirk Gillock
10-23-2005, 07:18 AM
Very cool. Thanks Pookie.
David Jimerson
10-23-2005, 08:22 AM
Coincidentally, "40 years" is how long it takes for that thing to load.
spidey
10-23-2005, 10:41 AM
lol i know i did get to watch it/
Not many 40-year-old films look as good today. Hell, not many 4-year-old films look as good today!
spidey
10-23-2005, 11:40 AM
thats true
isnt werid how films look like say in 1990 ? everythin looked pastel
Isaac_Brody
10-23-2005, 12:07 PM
Good find. Makes me want to watch it right now. Too bad I don't have a projector. 2001 doesn't have the same effect when viewed on a small screen. It's amazing in the theatre.
MovieSwede
10-23-2005, 12:20 PM
Not many 40-year-old films look as good today. Hell, not many 4-year-old films look as good today!
There is even movies showin in the theaters today that look like ****
David G. Smith
10-23-2005, 01:31 PM
There is even movies showin in the theaters today that look like ****
I love a quote I read in the book about the making of "2001" where some critic says, "This film should be shown continuiously on a wall at the Musem of Modern Art."
I second that.
J.R. Hudson
10-23-2005, 03:06 PM
That was very cool; and saves me another 3 hours watching it and trying to figure it out.
How do people like this movie? How do people dig Kubrick so much? Yes yes yes...... I appreciate some of the work he has done but find his myth and mystique and his open shuning of Hollywood is what people tend to gravitate towards.
I find Kubrick to really just not care about the audience. 2001 has no narrative structure but is like a montage of a visual poem and we're supposed to 'figure it out' or 'make what we will' out of it.
If it wasn't for films like Spartacus, The Shining and Full Metal Jacket I'd have ZERO respect for this filmmaker; cause the rest is prententious crap.
There was nothing pretentious or crap in Clockwork Orange...Period!
David G. Smith
10-23-2005, 03:56 PM
That was very cool; and saves me another 3 hours watching it and trying to figure it out.
How do people like this movie? How do people dig Kubrick so much? Yes yes yes...... I appreciate some of the work he has done but find his myth and mystique and his open shuning of Hollywood is what people tend to gravitate towards.
I find Kubrick to really just not care about the audience. 2001 has no narrative structure but is like a montage of a visual poem and we're supposed to 'figure it out' or 'make what we will' out of it.
If it wasn't for films like Spartacus, The Shining and Full Metal Jacket I'd have ZERO respect for this filmmaker; cause the rest is prententious crap.
What about Lolita, Dr. Strangelove, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb and The Killing? Throw in 2001, a Space Oddessy, A Clockwork Orange, The Shining, Full Metal Jacket and yes, Barry Lyndon and you have one hell of a body of work. Now I agree, there is alot of hype about Kubrick that was fostered upon him by the press and I think that his only fault was by keeping quite about it and not adderessing it.
One thing I admire about Kubrick is that he was the original American independent. He did what Robert Rodriguez, Kevin Smith, Joe Carnahan and Sam Rami did. He went out and made a movie with what ever resources he could scrape together. Of course, he did it in 1953!!. Of course the film, Fear and Desire is not that good, IMO, but he did it. Kubrick predates John Cassavetes's Shadows for pete'sake.
As for 2001, it is not for eveybody and in this post Star Wars, MTV, A.D.D world we live in, it is a hard movie for some people to grasp. However, I totally disagree with the common complaint that, "It has no narrative". Kubrick is quoted as saying, that with 2001, he was, "Trying to destroy the 3-act narrative". What most people do not understand is that is complete bullshit. 2001 is one of the most tightly structured 3 act narratives ever put on film. Look at it, Act-1-Aliens meet Apes, Act-2 Aliens meet Humans, Act 3-Humans find Aliens. Along the way, we are treated to some of the most
magnificent visuals ever captured on film. Not to mention the fact that the use of music in the film forever changed movie music. I have had the good fortune to have seen the film, in 70mm, a couple of times. What an experience. I love it. I quess we will have to just disagree on this one. I think it is a great film.
As for no respect for him as a filmmaker. Gee whiz, some people will slap together a 35mm adaptor and shot flowers in their back yard and we all damn near pee on ourselves giving them praise on this forum (and deservedly so). Give it up for Kubrick. He chopped up a Mitchell BNC and mounted NASA lenses on them so he could shoot in candle light! Also, look at how he forever changed special effects in 2001. You may not like his movies, but I think that talking smack about the dude as a filmmaker is wrong.
:thumbsup:
TimurCivan
10-23-2005, 04:41 PM
i dunno, when i was at NYU, there ws major gripe between the Art majors (me and Company) and the Tisch Film folk.
They often had problems with our film work and Video art because it lacked narritave structure.
Now i personally have mucho respet for Filmmmakers because i got 2 shorts under my belt and it is just as much, if not more work to put to gether a coherent narritive story as it is to come up with an art video or Art film. ( like that saying goes walk a mile in a mans shoes before you judge him) But i personally find that alot of work out there is pretentious crap. but the the thing you have to understand is some times its really not. The genius of the Kubrick was that he ws trying to convey a philosophic concept ( more on this later). THAT IS UNBELIEVABLY dıfficult to do with a narritive story. because philosophy unless you can follow it very closely is SOOO boring. 2001 a space odyssey, was much more similar to art in my mind because, he lays out the symbols, and lets the viewer put it together. The genius was that he was able to do so in such a way that without telling you what to think, the juxtoposition of the elements of the film leads the viewr to the philosophic conclusion on their own. For example: "Waking Life"..... that whole movie was philosophic rhetoric... but it was shallow because if you could follow its dialogue, it just kinda is like mental masturbation, cause it makes you feel smarter just that you were able to follow the logic of the writer..... its answers were prepackaged. you basically evesdropped on a few awesome conversations. this is why i think he had to do the weird animation thing just to distract you from the fact that he was leading you around. Same deal with "Pi" the Aronofsky film. it seemed like it was gonna answer some bıg question. then it just kinda fızzles out and becomes an action movie at the end to distract you from thefact that the writer couldnt answer the questions he posed....
Kubrick, on th other hand had no delusions that he knew any answers. he just gave you his evidence ( or Sir Arthur C Clarke`s) and lets you make what you will of it.
That is why this film Really is a piece of art. you have to work to understand it. it actually make you smarter after you watch it.
lol i actually remeber when i joined this board i posted upsome Video Art stuff i did when i got my DVX.. and John said it was crap too.... well at least hes consistent. lol
( no offense should be taken John, i highly respect you)
J.R. Hudson
10-23-2005, 05:00 PM
What about Lolita, Dr. Strangelove, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb and The Killing? Throw in 2001, a Space Oddessy, A Clockwork Orange, The Shining, Full Metal Jacket and yes, Barry Lyndon and you have one hell of a body of work. Now I agree, there is alot of hype about Kubrick that was fostered upon him by the press and I think that his only fault was by keeping quite about it and not adderessing it.
I cannot dispute his body of work is wide open and I too wish he addressed the hype. I strongly feel that the majority of it is that; hype and mystique (ooooh and awwww)
One thing I admire about Kubrick is that he was the original American independent. He did what Robert Rodriguez, Kevin Smith, Joe Carnahan and Sam Rami did. He went out and made a movie with what ever resources he could scrape together. Of course, he did it in 1953!!. Of course the film, Fear and Desire is not that good, IMO, but he did it. Kubrick predates John Cassavetes's Shadows for pete'sake.
Again, part of that sensationalism of Kubrick. I admit; anyone doing this route is cool for school in my book. I have no desire to ever 'Make it' in Hollywood and would kill (only bad people) to be in the RR vien of indieville
As for 2001, it is not for eveybody and in this post Star Wars, MTV, A.D.D world we live in, it is a hard movie for some people to grasp. However, I totally disagree with the common complaint that, "It has no narrative". Kubrick is quoted as saying, that with 2001, he was, "Trying to destroy the 3-act narrative". What most people do not understand is that is complete bullshit. 2001 is one of the most tightly structured 3 act narratives ever put on film. Look at it, Act-1-Aliens meet Apes, Act-2 Aliens meet Humans, Act 3-Humans find Aliens. Along the way, we are treated to some of the most
I can't chalk it up to the MTV thing; not for me anyway. A good film is a good film is a good film. Hell, M Knights films are very deliberate intheir pacing and are the farthest thing from a Star Wars, MTV A.D.D. idea. I too saw 2001 on the bigscreen (as a child) and I also wouldnt chalk it up to someone not being able to grasp it. Once we take that approach it starts becoming a kind of elitist pompous arty vibe. Someone people like it, some people don't. I don;t personally get how someone can stand to sit there for almost 3 hours and watch it. Like "Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz..." and Space ships flying floating through space to pre-recorded classial music is cool; for a few moments.
magnificent visuals ever captured on film. Not to mention the fact that the use of music in the film forever changed movie music. I have had the good fortune to have seen the film, in 70mm, a couple of times. What an experience. I love it. I quess we will have to just disagree on this one. I think it is a great film.
I'm down. If we all liked the same things where would we be? Jesus; some people actually like John Woo; know what I mean?
As for no respect for him as a filmmaker. Gee whiz, some people will slap together a 35mm adaptor and shot flowers in their back yard and we all damn near pee on ourselves giving them praise on this forum (and deservedly so). Give it up for Kubrick. He chopped up a Mitchell BNC and mounted NASA lenses on them so he could shoot in candle light! Also, look at how he forever changed special effects in 2001. You may not like his movies, but I think that talking smack about the dude as a filmmaker is wrong.
I'm digging it. Hell; I have more stokage on him for these reasons thatn the actual films. My last word is just 'Overhyped' IMO. Good; really good even? Yes. The great magnificent OZ? No.
spidey
10-23-2005, 05:10 PM
well hes better than the guy who made doom. LOL
David G. Smith
10-23-2005, 05:27 PM
I'm digging it. Hell; I have more stokage on him for these reasons thatn the actual films. My last word is just 'Overhyped' IMO. Good; really good even? Yes. The great magnificent OZ? No.
Yeah, I agree. I dig the shit out of the guy. Greatest filmmaker ever? No way. (I know I am gonna get shit for this, but I would give that title to John Ford.)
You know what I love as for explaining Kubrick? Vivian Kubrick's documentary on the making of the Shining. It was cool to see Kubrick blocking shots, working with the camera, dealing with Shelly Duval. It really made him out to be just what I think he was, just a very smart guy who made movies for a living. You are right, the great and magnificent OZ? No way.
Also, I forgot about Paths of Glory. Holy shit, that is a great film.
spidey
10-23-2005, 05:38 PM
never seen a john ford film dont plan on it.
CallaghanFilms
10-23-2005, 05:59 PM
I gotta side with John on this one (as far as Kubrick is concerned.) He was a filmmaker who made some great films IMO, not a great filmmaker. Shining and Dr. Stranglove stand out to me as examples of outstanding works to his credit. Full Metal Jacket is a quotable movie (especially for guys), to be sure...but so is Animal House or Top Gun for that matter. 2001 and A Clockwork Orange, to me, are among my least favorite films (blasphemy to some ears I'm sure).
John Ford, on the other hand, was a great filmmaker in every conceivable way.
David G. Smith
10-23-2005, 06:37 PM
never seen a john ford film dont plan on it.
I find that very sad.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000406/
TimurCivan
10-24-2005, 03:55 AM
Duuuudeeee.... go rent at least "the Searchers".....
John ford IS really great. Minimal "style" all story telling.
J.R. Hudson
10-24-2005, 02:46 PM
Yeah Spidey; I admit "GO see some Ford films. You'll dig em'
c.g._eads
10-25-2005, 03:41 AM
kubrick's films are icy and alienating. i hate everything about the way he directs (from the stories I've heard). Doing 72 takes so you can suck out every single ounce of emotion from the actors (in order, I believe, to adequately bore the audience). Everytime I try to watch one of this guy's films I get so frustrated I start kicking my TV. You say he holds on a shot for 3 minutes because he's "trying to make a point". I say it's him saying "fuck you" to the system. And we, the audience, suffer the more for it.
People forget that one of the reasons this movie was initially so popular was because it was the first film in history to make space look REAL. Nobody had ever done that before. And so people went to see it to have that experience. They were treated to 3 hours of boredome as a result, and then forced to quickly pretend that they liked it in order to look smart.
Kubrick. BLAH.
c.g.
MovieSwede
10-25-2005, 04:57 AM
watch 2001 as a painting with moving pictures and a great sound.
Its not a movie its an experience.
(but I say that about Black hawk Down to)
TimurCivan
10-25-2005, 06:11 AM
Wow. thats sad that so many people are bored with his work.
but i guess some people just think old black and white movies look stupid too....... i swear i heard a COLLEGE student say in a film as literature class and i quote " ....i hate black and white movies, why didn,t they just make them in color."
we were watching "The Magnificent Ambersons"...... i almost cried.
Steve Strickland
10-25-2005, 07:25 AM
I saw this quote today about Kubrick by a director that many here hold in high regard.
"In the whole history of movies, there has been nothing like Kubrick's vision," said Steven Spielberg, who was a friend of the director. "It was a vision of hope and wonder, of grace and of mystery, of humor and contradictions.
"I am pleased to hear that his archives are going to University of the Arts London, which will ensure his legacy and vision are kept alive."
Apparently Mr. Spielberg wasn't bored for those three hours? :thumbsup:
As usual...It all comes down to "To each, his own"
David G. Smith
10-25-2005, 09:43 AM
kubrick's films are icy and alienating. i hate everything about the way he directs (from the stories I've heard). Doing 72 takes so you can suck out every single ounce of emotion from the actors (in order, I believe, to adequately bore the audience). Everytime I try to watch one of this guy's films I get so frustrated I start kicking my TV. You say he holds on a shot for 3 minutes because he's "trying to make a point". I say it's him saying "fuck you" to the system. And we, the audience, suffer the more for it.
People forget that one of the reasons this movie was initially so popular was because it was the first film in history to make space look REAL. Nobody had ever done that before. And so people went to see it to have that experience. They were treated to 3 hours of boredome as a result, and then forced to quickly pretend that they liked it in order to look smart.
Kubrick. BLAH.
c.g.
Just as a point of reference, what directors to you really admire?
TimurCivan
10-25-2005, 09:56 AM
OK, what did you guys think of Eyes Wıde Shut.
now i,m curious.
David G. Smith
10-25-2005, 10:08 AM
I liked Eyes Wide Shut. Any flick with Nicole Kidman's ass and Leelee Sobieski in her underwear, is OK in my book! :thumbsup:
TimurCivan
10-25-2005, 10:20 AM
Yea i liked it too. i liked that you have no idea whats going on. it really created atmosphere.
then there was Nicole...... :)
but unfortunatly leelee sobiesky----- i just think she looks like a small charachature of helen hunt. and helen hunt not attractive to me......
David G. Smith
10-25-2005, 01:43 PM
then there was Nicole...... :)
"Baby done a bad, bad thing"!
Luis Caffesse
10-25-2005, 02:25 PM
As for no respect for him as a filmmaker. Gee whiz, some people will slap together a 35mm adaptor and shot flowers in their back yard and we all damn near pee on ourselves giving them praise on this forum
Hahahaha that's the funniest things I've read all day!
:)
(and damn true as well)
As for Kubrick, well.... to each his own I suppose.
Art is subjective.
TimurCivan
10-25-2005, 04:23 PM
hey david, i lost the thread now but there was one of particular interest. the one about copyright ınfringement and some poor guy with a cell phone ring in his shot. that Doc was shot like 3 blocks from my house...... Good ole` Bensonhurst!!!!!! nice to see someone from brooklyn is makin some cool stuff.
oh yea... kubrick!
David G. Smith
10-25-2005, 04:35 PM
hey david, i lost the thread now but there was one of particular interest. the one about copyright ?nfringement and some poor guy with a cell phone ring in his shot. that Doc was shot like 3 blocks from my house...... Good ole` Bensonhurst!!!!!! nice to see someone from brooklyn is makin some cool stuff.
oh yea... kubrick!
http://www.dvxuser.com/V3/showthread.php?t=36497