Analyzing the story 2001: A Space Odyssey Options

[Cleo_Serapis]

OK, so I could never understand the point of this movie. Perhaps the weakest part is the ending?


From primordial ooze, comes apes… Introduce Monolith #1

After interaction with it by touch, a signal is sent somewhere (I think to the one on the moon) – the apes have learned how to use tools and evolve.

Then we cut to modern day, and uncover another monolith on the moon, which also doesn’t do anything at all until we touch it. At which point it also sends a signal somewhere (to Jupiter ?). Then we find the HUGE one out by Jupiter, and obviously the logical progression is supposed to be now we’ve evolved enough to get to the moon, so now we evolved further enough to find the one near Jupiter and interact with it. This is where I always lose the plot. What is the bit about the MC, Bowman, devolving and being transformed and be born again ????

I find it funny that the author, Arthur C. Clarke, does not understand what Stanley Kubrick was thinking at the end of the movie.

Which then sets up the next book: 2010. The Year We Make Contact.

Any takers?

[Guest_shaggy breeks_*]

hahaha oooh yer its a very deep film 2001. Hmmm lemme think about this.

The way i interpreted it was this.

The first act, the apes. Shows the first stage of human evolution. The idea being that darwins natural selection theory etc. was rubbish and that the reason we evolved was because of either a divine or other worldy influence who placed the monolith on earth to initiate our first steps into higher intelligence. The shot of the sun in particular as it rises over the top of the monolith suggests a power beyond out own understanding. Obviously it then match cuts into the present day. One of the most beautiful edits i have ever seen.

The fact that we are exploring space in the next act suggests that we have now grown to big for our world. The next shot of the monolith on the moon is again shrouded in mysticism and power, implied by the low angle shots and the awful sound effects that set the teeth of the audience on edge. It is, as we learn later pointing towards jupiter. This then leads us on to the third act. the mission to jupiter.

The mission to jupiter isnt so much about the greater narrative of the film, i believe it is instead about the nature of exsistence. What is life?
Hal is quite eveidentaly a murderer but the film leads you to question why? is it because he was jealous? was he doing it because he thought he was doing good. was it maybe self preservation. these are all attributes linked with humans. Not computers. This is made all the more poigniant because as Hal is killed the audience, who are alligned with the human character, no longer have a moral high ground. Finally as Hal is killed we enter the last and most confusing act of the film.

First of all you are taken through a trance/blackhole/void of colour and imagery that sets the mind on edge. And then you are presented with a montage of sequences which can be interpreted in a number of ways. Maybe to show that as he passes through this void, his life flashes before his eyes in a weird sorta way. Or maybe suggesting that time doesnt seem to exsist in this void he is in, as if he is stuck. And then eventually he comes out on the other side reborn as a higher being. Ascended you might say . . . It does seem however to be be an internal endevour rather than a physical one. As if what we see is playing in his mind.

Whatever the messages however, i feel it is a beautiful, artistic, challenging, and above all engaging film that will live, like the humans it represents, for generations. A masterpiece in every sense of the word.

shaggy breeks

[Cleo_Serapis]

Hiya Graeme,

I agree with you on Act I with one minor diversion: The zooming in on the sun was also zooming on the moon - which is the hint of Act II - the signal being sent to the moon's monolith.

In Act II, we've evolved beyond our means as we stupidly touch that which we do not understand, triggering once again that signal, this time to Jupiter's monolith.

In Act III, I believe HAL is the anti-hero as he struggles to survive. We don;t find out why he did these things until the next book/film: 2010. I'd need to see that film to recall it, LOL.

In Act IV, I see this as the next stage of evolution - rebirth. you could call it assension I suppose and I do think it is mindplay done very very well in the film. We are watching bits of it now this evening. Yes, a great movie, even some 25 years after I first saw it, I'm still intrigued by the notions it presents and the question of life and higher learning.

Cheers
Lori

[Cleo_Serapis]

Of course,

there's always conspiracy theories, i.e. what one letter up from HAL? IBM - was he really writing about IBM?

LOL!

[Guest_shaggy breeks_*]

HAHAHAHA thats a very cool conspiracy theory :p made me chuckle . . . but then again you never can tell. :o IBM ay who would have thought they had such technology hidden up their sleeves.

oooh i have never seen 2010, i got put off of it by some pretty dire reviews from friends. is it worth watching?

graeme

[Cleo_Serapis]

Of course - but you'll have to watch 2001 first - so make a day of it - when it rains, !

[Guest_shaggy breeks_*]

hahaha well heres something else to puzzle. I have just finished watching another science fiction epic . . solaris. It, like 2001, seems to making a comment on the origins or the direction of humanity. It also deals with the idea of their being an almighty creator. It is very inriguing and definately worth a watch. have you seen it?

shaggy breeks

[Cleo_Serapis]

I vaguely recall seeing bits and pieces of Solaris (George Clooney, right?) and wasn't too keen on the concept or the plot they were trying to convey. I don't believe I made it through the entire movie as i found it boring if memory serves correctly. If it comes up on the Directv guide, I'll set the TIVO to record it for a re-watch.

Cheers,
Cleo

[Guest_ohsteve_*]

Lori and Graeme, the best way to view 2001 space odessey is to read the book, I think Kubric got a lot of it right but his interpretation was a little over the top, but then again in reading Arthur he can sometimes slip the realm in understanding. He has the ability to really make you think about what he writes. As for Solaris, it bored me to tears, I could not finish watching it either.
Steve