That scene always got me, you’re exactly right. Incredibly eerie but also heartbreaking. It’s a strange moment of experiencing “someone’s” death in real time, from the inside sort of. When I was little, I was always struck by Dave saying he’d like to hear that song. A good distraction for him, but also a final connection with the last childlike memory of HAL.
@@angelrogo I seem to recall reading somewhere that Tom Hanks wanted to film 2061. If it's going to be done, they'd better hurry. Halley's Comet (a key plot point in the story) won't wait.
this is one of those movies that you should watch multiple times to completely understand some of it and you should also watch the sequel, 2010: The Year we made Contact. it will explain a lot of what happened in this movie and why.
This movie is very trippy. But then again, so were the 1960's. And so was Stanley Kubrick... Kubrick loved leaving his audience wondering. He would intentionally give you multiple options for what you see on the screen and then leave you hanging at the end so the whole thing is open to interpretation. "I think I get it. But I don't completely get it." Yes. Exactly. Aside from that, you should definitely watch a making of documentary because the visuals were ground-breaking for its time.
This was released in 1968, and as a science fiction movie it still looks better visually than anything made in the last 20 years. No CGI was used. All the effects were practical. So everything you see in the movie was shot for real. That's why except for some of the costumes, it doesn't look that dated. For me, it's one of the greatest movies of all time and the best science fiction movie of all time. Most kids today would have to take Ritalin to watch this, including mine, Gen Y. The visuals make it worth watching alone, without the storytelling, which takes time to figure out, but once you get there, it's an incredible ride. Stanley Kubrick was one of the greatest directors of all time. His final movie, Eyes Wide Shut, isn't just a softcore porn movie. It's storytelling. Personally, I think undersold what Hollywood is like in that movie.
I think one of the biggest middle fingers to Stanley Kubrick from the Oscars was the fact that he never received an Oscar for Directing, Producing or Writing and only ever won one for Best Visual Effects for this film. This film wasn't nominated for Best Picture, but it was for Best Original Screenplay which it lost to Mel Brooks for The Producers, Also there is a sort of sequel to this film I recommend called 2010: The Year We Made Contact which is more cohesive with a plot.
The Academy has a pretty bad track record of best picture awards. The winner for the 1968 film year was Oliver!, a movie that hardly anyone today considers great. For that they passed over 2001 and The Lion in Winter.
2010 was NOT directed by Kubrick and is more traditional scify movie. Literal, not allegorical. It explains a lot, and doesn't leave you much to think about. The opposite of 2001
@@Jeff_Lichtman So true. They have a terrible tendency to go the "play it safe"-route, and with that leaving out so many creative and influential artists (not only directors, but throughout all categories, acting, music...). Even Hitchcock - another one of the greatest of all times like Kubrick - never won an Oscar. It took them ages to give one to Scorsese, and even that felt more like a consolation prize, since Departed is not a bad movie, but surely far away from his best works.
I was 13 when I saw 2001 in the theater in 1968 and it really made an impression on me. Also saw 2010 when it came out and it didn't make much of an impression at all. I really don't remember much about it except that Roy Schneider starred in it.
This movie TERRIFIED me as a child when I saw it in a Texas drive-in. I was so frightened of that baby...the Star Child as it's called in the novel...that it took me until my first year of college to get the nerve to watch it again. I now consider it one of the greatest films of all time... The more you see it the more you reap from it. Kubrick's masterpiece, for sure...and THANK YOU for acknowledging it as ART. There was a sequel in the 80s, very entertaining but also pretty standard stuff compared to the original...like prose vs. poetry. Great reaction Sam!
You and I are kindred spirits, it would seem. I was all of four years old when my aunt took me to see *2001* when it was rereleased in 1974. (I suppose she wanted to expand my already capable mind a bit more.) But this is really not a movie for children to watch casually. The ominous overture, the awesome silences of the infinite void underscored at times by heavy breathing, the eerie Monolith theme like a conclave of disturbed ghosts, and most especially that luminous child regarding us with decidedly unhuman eyes...all this made for a VERY unsettled four-year-old me. (And that's not factoring in the colossal boredom the rest of the time from lack of excitement and sheer noncomprehensibility.) And so you see, I too had to spend quite a number of years before I found a synopsis which enticed me into another try. Still, I'm glad to say Mr. Kubrick's opus did not scar me for life; it did make me think about a future for Earth in space, and prepared my mental ground for *Star Wars* three years later (an altogether more exalting and invigorating experience), so I too am content now to accord it a well-deserved place among the - pardon the expression - monolithic specimens of cinematic art. 👽
@@goldenager59 I was 6 in 1968 when my parents took me to see it. I don't remember being frightened initially, but my mind couldn't handle subsequent viewings on movie posters, record albums or magazine ads. It seemed to be looking for me and at me! It haunted my nightmares for years and still makes me jump if I run across it unawares. That image was personally looking at me! Years later, I was also slightly freaked out by the aliens at the end of Close Encounters of the Third Kind for the same reason... though it was a much warmer movie!
@@davidfox5383 There's a daguerreotype of the composer Chopin in the last year of his life that haunted my juvenile consciousness in much the same manner. And a certain photograph of an elephant's skull that can still give me a jump. So I read you, man, LOUD AND CLEAR. 🤯 😱
@@davidfox5383 Ditto that on age and date of first viewing. Was very frightened by the imagery at the end. Took me many years to walk through a dark room unafraid, but at least that ended at adolescence. Read the book at age 12 and got what it was about totally. Never my philosophical cup of tea, but will always sing its praises as cinema and science fiction.
It’s funny that you asked “Is this what a drug trip feels like?” because one of the taglines of the movie in its advertising was “The Ultimate Trip.” Also in some theaters in 1968 (the hippie era), some young folks would drop acid (LSD) and lie down underneath the movie screen during what’s called the Stargate sequence, tripping out in a very wild way. Much has been written about this film. It was absolutely groundbreaking in many respects at that time, especially where visual effects are concerned. Many of the people who worked on this film in special effects later worked on films like CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND (1977), STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE (1978), STAR WARS (1977), SUPERMAN (1978), and many other films. I believe there is a “making of” documentary about this and I think there was a book about the film’s production back in the day as well. It’s really quite fascinating to see how many of the effects were accomplished. Miniatures were definitely involved. If you ever get a chance to see this on the big screen in a theater, don’t miss it. The story was written by famous British science fiction author Arthur C. Clarke (whose own accomplishments are pretty impressive as well), and he wrote this as a novel that was released at the same time the film was. He also wrote several sequels to it.
The shuttle flight with Heywood Floyd was empty because his mission to the Moon was considered so critical and classified that the government booked a special extra flight just for him, as the only passenger.
this is not just a movie. this is art. the answer comes in the sequel 2010: The Year We Make Contact (1984). the computer HAL is named from the letters for International Business Machine abbreviated and transposed one place to the left. so IBM becomes HAL.
@@les4767 one does not negate the other. saw this when it came out... the book. Author C. Clark the author and the person who proposed communication satellites, revealed this tidbit in an interview.
Yes it's meant to be an audio/visual experience that leaves the viewer thinking about our place in the universe. Seeing it on a small screen like this reactor did, does a big disservice as Kubrick made visuals for a huge screen and the awe of never before seen sights shown on screen is lost. Talking through it also breaks the atmosphere the movie. New viewers of the movie should realize that this was really the first modern sci-fi movie whose effects were way ahead of it's time. It wasn't until Star Wars almost a decade later that someone was able to reach that level again.
@@victore6242 Sorry, no. Both Arthur C Clarke AND Stanley Kubrick debunked that theory on multiple occasions. IBM was instrumental in helping them during the production of the film with the computer screens and technical specs. The last thing they wanted to do was mock the company. They are on record saying had they realized the coincidence, they would've renamed HAL.
To me, "the slow bits" are what makes this movie still so special! I wish modern Hollywood would slow down once in a while... (Denis Villeneuve seems to get this)
The "Zarathustra" music alone is supposed to bring to mind Nietzsche's whole ape/man/superman thing. And now you can fully appreciate the new "Barbie" teaser.
2001: A Space Odyssey changed filmmaking forever. It was absolutely groundbreaking, and also led to unending speculation and debate. The novel and film were created at the same time and diverge significantly. '2010: The Year We Make Contact' (1984) is a good movie with a talented cast, and offers some explanations.
It is great that OGB is checking this one out, but it highlights the fact that OGB is watching on a small computer screen. I really wish she had a big giant TV to watch on...a lot of these movies are much much better on a big screen. ✌
Agreed. I wish I was able to watch Interstellar on the big screen too. If it ever comes back in the movies as like, a rewatch sort of thing, I'll watch it.
@@OGBReacts I watch movies on my laptop, but I have an HDMI cable running into my home entertainment system, so I can use my 70 inch TV as my computer monitor. I rarely feel the need to see a movie in a theater now...only the most blockbuster, effects driven films need a bigger screen than I have now. If you can do that, I highly recommend it. Other option is to get a decent but cheap projector, then you can just use a white wall as your screen. 😁 BTW...if you want to understand more about this movie without watching "making of" videos, or watching the sequel 2010 with Roy Scheider and Helen Mirren, you should read the book by Arthur C Clarke...I cannot recommend it more highly.
It's trippy, and it was hard to show the intentions of the author: The monolith is a device with several functions: - a gate to travel to other places quickly - a way to initiate intelligence on primitive lifeforms - informing the "owners" that life forms have evolved to a state of spae traveling The trippy part was showing the interaction with those interstellar beings - which are super intelligent. And the human mind can barely understand it. David is in a timeless space and evolves. Old, young. Everything at once. If you want to add God into this whole sequence or as the origin of the monoliths... That is also a possibility.
Nominated for 4 Oscars including Best Director Best Original Screenplay Best Production Design Best Visual Effects. It won the latter. It was a box office and critical success making $150-160 million dollars against a $10 million dollar budget. When the film premiered in 1968, actor Rock Hudson walked out of the theater 10 minutes before the movie was over and shouted "Could someone tell me what the F--K that was all about!?" He was confused by the films ending. It was confirmed that Dave Bowman became a god like entity, thanks in part to the black monolith, where the structure showed him planets, galaxies and other star systems throughout the universe, giving us the origin of the alien race and the monolith they created.The reason why he was a fetus is because he was born again, showing the next stage in human evolution.
Quick question. How can it be an original screenplay if it's based on a novel? I always see movies based on something else getting nominated for that category and I'm not really clear on how that could be.
@@martina180394 , the novel was written as the film was being made: [from Wikipedia] -- In the end, Clarke and Kubrick wrote parts of the novel and screenplay simultaneously, with the film version being released before the book version was published. Clarke opted for clearer explanations of the mysterious monolith and Star Gate in the novel; Kubrick made the film more cryptic by minimizing dialogue and explanation. Kubrick said the film is "basically a visual, nonverbal experience" that "hits the viewer at an inner level of consciousness, just as music does, or painting".
Don't have all the answers. But those monoliths were all different. The first stimulated evolution, the moon one was to detect Earth's technology progress and to direct us onto the final giant one near Jupiter.
Keir Dullea (Bowman) is still alive and working at 86. His most recent role was an Admiral in Paramount+'s Halo series (which I recommend despite its mixed reception). After this film, he was quickly nicknamed "Gone Tomorrow," due to his name sounding like "Here today."
“What the fuck was that ending?” is the most appropriate comment for a first time reaction. I’ve heard that the idea is supposed to be that he spends his life in an alien zoo (for lack of a better term) where he isn’t really experiencing time.
Imagine watching this before the internet. 2001 intrigued me enough to buy the book, which explained a lot. You can see the influence the movie's had on other filmmakers.
After watching this movie's reactors on YT, I bought the Arthur Clarke books. One each for both movies and then two more to finish the entire story arc. It was a very good arc with a satisfactory ending. Recommended. Clarke provides a lot more detail of what actually happens to the astronaut after he enters the monolith on Jupiter that the movie glosses over.
As seen Childhood's End, Clarke thought that humans would eventually transcend physicality and become like naked spirits in space. Later in his life he accepted the Church Turing thesis interpretation that nothing is more powerful than a Turing Machine. So Bowen went from transcendental space child to a very complicated Turing Machine. A counter argument to Church Turing borders on religion that there are things like a human soul which is complex beyond the capabilities of a TM. The Church Turing asks whether AI on digital computer can ever completely mimic a human. And whether the universe can be simulated on a digital computer (and thus whether this universe can be simulation). Something like the Mandelbrot set cannot be exactly represented with a digital computer, but only approximated. But I don't know if the Mandelbrot set corresponds to any physicality in our universe.
Fun facts: all the breathing you hear from the space suits were done by Stanley Kubrick himself. The voice of HAL 9000 was added post production by Douglas Rain, but during filming Kubrick got his assistant director Derek Cracknell to act the voice for the actors benefit, he spoke in a London cockney accent. Kubrick also had a bespoke soundtrack recorded for the movie, at the last minute he discarded the soundtrack and replaced it with classical music instead. Entire movie was filmed in London including the 'desert' scenes, the shot of the ape man throwing the bone was filmed in the studio car park.
lol- "I can cut out the slow parts" - gonna be a short video. This film is a classic because it IS the experience. Seeing this film in a theatre was jaw-dropping when it came out, 100% practical effects. In 1968 we hadn't even landed on the moon yet. The film foreshadows flat screens, I Pads, AI, space travel, video-phones and other things.
Even though I was a kid when I first saw this movie, it never seemed slow to me. I didn't fully understand it, but this was the first time that I got the idea that visuals could primarily tell a story. This movie inspired me to learn more about the craft of movie making, everything from directing to production design to editing and of course, cinematography, starting with a paperback on The Making of 2001 as a guide.
This film is actually only half of the intended experience. Kubrick worked with the science fiction writer Arthur C. Clark (best known for Clark's Law: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic") to create a movie and book that together served as a full story. I'm one of the few who actually read the book first.
I did that too. I think that is the best way to go if you really want to understand what is going on. It might make the experience of watching the movie a little less mind blowing but it also gives you less of an aneurism when you try to figure out just what in the hell you finished watching.
About Hal singing is based off a actual computer called the ibm 7094 in 1961 was the first computer to sing, and the song was called Daisy Bell which Hal sings as he’s “dying”.
As a college student, we saw this shortly after it was released. We were stunned. People sat in the theater with the same look you had on your face. We then returned to BSU, smoked a bit 😉, and proceeded to stay up all night arguing about what the monolith was. ✌️
We all had the same confusion and questions you did when we first saw this film. The follow up didn't come until the sequel book, "2010" came out around 1983, and the movie that followed is worth watching to clear up some of the questions from this one.
I saw this in London when first released & using the correct multi projector & sound systems. We were sat up high in the balcony & there was the usual hubbub of chatter, sweets being unwrapped etc. ... Then the organ pedal note sounded, vibrating in my chest, & the curtains opened ... All the chatter stopped. There was a collective intake of breath. As the opening bars of Also Sprach Zarathustra sounded we were suspended in space, looking down the line of the earth, moon & sun. I have never experienced anything like it.
"OF COURSE the computer was evil!" Keep in mind that when this first came out, the idea of an AI created by people becoming hostile was a revolutionary concept to many folks.
The interesting thing about HAL is, he's as much a victim as the others on that ship. He was made to conceal the true purpose of the mission from the flight crew until the science team was awakened, and the science team being loaded into the ship in cryo meant nobody but HAL knew where they would be going until they got there. Thing is, 9000-series computers aren't supposed to lie, but the higher-ups made HAL lie, "for reasons of security", and that logic loop caused him to have a nervous breakdown. All that weird stuff, the cryptic conversations, the false error, it was his attempts at alerting Dave and Frank that something was up that he couldn't talk about, but since he couldn't tell them, they couldn't follow his breadcrumbs. So, in his paranoid state, HAL concludes the only way to fulfill all his mission parameters is to kill the crew and carry out the mission alone. The sequel, _2010_ , devotes a good chunk of time to explaining why HAL did what he did. "He was ordered to lie, by people who find it very easy to do so."
I like your approach to reacting to this film vs. viewing this film. There are certain films that I consider "Must See" examples of certain genres, tropes or film-styles. One of my B.A. degrees is in Communications with a specialty in Broadcast & Film Production. During that process we were exposed to an eclectic variety of films and how certain sound design, lighting, film-stock, camera angles, shot variety and shooting techniques can be used artistically to create different moods and evoke different emotional responses. Films like 2001 and A Clockwork Orange were among those films. I am glad that you choose to share these experiences (in their edited form) even if the reaction might be a little bored, confused or "W.T.F.-ish". All we're looking for is your honest reaction. To be honest, when I first saw this movie I was "under the influence" of some "recreational" herbs which really enhanced the long visual sequences without getting too bored or hung up on "seeking the meaning" of the abstract and surreal visual imagery. I do think that the film captures the retro-futurism of the day as it might have appeared in "Popular Science" magazines. The way the film addresses weightlessness vs. artificial gravity is fairly unique in a genre that later assumed spacecraft would develop some mystery technology to recreate "Earth-like gravity" in the naturally free-floating environment of the spacecraft's interior.
"What the fuck was that, " is a very common first response. I've had the advantage of watching this several times over the past 55 years, reading the novel and sequel, so let me offer the following. A highly advanced intelligence visited Earth when hominids were beginning to reign. They planted a black monolith among a tribe of early hominids which was their first experience of something not of nature. It was smooth and had sharp edges. It got one of them thinking while playing with some bones and he figured out how to use a bone as a tool - the first tool. His tribe used it to hunt animals for meat - at the beginning they were living along side the tapirs, after the nine scene, they were eating tapir meat. They used the bones as weapons to gain dominance over another tribe at the water hole. The first war using tools! In victory, one of them throws a bone in the air - glass forward to an orbiting nuclear bomb. The aliens left two other monoliths to guide human development once mankind was ready. One was buried in the moon. It sent a signal toward Jupiter as if telling them that's where the next clue was guided. At Jupiter, the third monolith opened a portal to the aliens home world. Note that all three monoliths were activated by alignment of planetary bodies. At the alien home world, Dave was put in a type of zoo so they could observe him and know more about man. They picked surroundings they thought he'd be comfortable in. He agreed and after he died he was transformed until the Star Child who was sent back to Earth to guide mankind's next v phase of evolution into a part of the universe.
There were three monoliths. The one on Earth triggered the survival instinct in the apes, the one on the Moon sent a signal to Jupiter when humans were advanced enough to dig it up, and the third one around Jupiter was there to meet them when they arrived, acting as a wormhole/gateway to somewhere else. That somewhere else was basically a zoo/laboratory, where the human (in this case Dave) was examined and in some way improved, and then sent back to continue the development of the species (the strange vocalizations you hear on the soundtrack are the voices of the aliens observing and commenting on Dave), the idea being that the Starchild is the next step in human's managed evolution. By the way, your WTF reaction was the exact reaction of 90% of the audience when this was released. Kubrick was so artful most people didn't know what the hell he was saying, but it was brilliant and beautiful and cause for a lot of passionate discussion. :) P.S. HAL wasn't evil - he was confused and scared and threatened. (Remember how helpless he was once Dave understood the danger and had his full airsuit on.) His state of mind is explained in the sequel _2010,_ which I highly recommend. It was released in the 80's, and the style is very different from this movie, but it's written by Arthur C. Clarke, who wrote this one, and it tells you a lot about what happened here. :)
Arthur C. Clarke had the best solution for people who had trouble understanding the film: Watch the movie, read the book, repeat as needed. Reading the book definitely helps. I saw this movie at a drive-in at age 12 and did not understand a lot of it. Some years later, I read the novel, and everything made perfect sense.
"all art is open to interpretation" "the music carried the movie" For someone having seen and trying to process this movie for the first time you did a fantastic job of grasping two of the many fundamentals of what the director Stanley Kubrick bases all his movies on. And the messages his movies convey are similar to how you noticed there seemed to be three parts to the film. His narrations are like a epic story written on a onion. You can read the entire story on the first layer and subsequent layers. But each layer adds more depth and detail to the story. So the deeper you go, the more you discover. It is wonderful to see that this film still instills the curiosity to explore its meaning in those like yourself, who are intelligent and open minded. As someone who is now senior in age: I, like many others, wonder what sort of people are following in our footsteps. Your solid reasoning in trying to understand this complex story has reassured me that humanity is still in good hands. "O' brave new world, that has such people in 't!”--Miranda, The Tempest. Shakespeare
“Is this what a drug trip feels like?” That’s funny to hear because on its first run a lot of people went to see the film high just for the Stargate (wormhole) sequence.
So glad you reacted to this! Very funny. I’m surprised a number of people said it wasn’t a “reaction” film, as I’ve very much enjoyed every reaction video I’ve seen to this one. Maybe difficult to edit? One of the best movies of all time (that I’ve seen). I remember someone saying it was more of a ballet than a film. I think as a tiny kid I had a crush on HAL because of his soothing voice. Of course, later that calmness is read as TERRIFYING lol. So many interesting and expansive themes about humans, tools, exploration, overreach, technology, aggression, etc. Like when you said “kill or be killed” regarding HAL, it reminded me of the “early humans” at the beginning.
The look on your face at the end was priceless! I've seen this a dozen times and sought other's opinions and I feel I'm coming up short on understanding. You seem to to be very insightful and that makes this reaction enjoyable. Thanks!
Film, at its very best, can entertain and transform. Very rare films can actually transcend the medium, and this is on a very short list of transcendent works of cinema art.
The overall idea of the movie is that the monoliths are sentinels of a galactic civilization that watch over the evolution of humans and report on our progress. The monolith at Jupiter is a stargate, that allows David Bowman to travel to that civilization. In other books in the series we learn and Bowman was absorbed into that civilization. Here is a bit of explanation from one of the fan blogs: "After David Bowman discovers the Jovian Monolith, he travels through a Star Gate of unknown space and time. The Star Gate brings Bowman to a replica of a Hotel Room. In this space, time seems to excel or jump toward the final days of Bowman’s life. Like a dream, he sees himself at older life stages of himself until he assumingly expires. Bowman is then reincarnated into a Star Child, who then transforms into a type of energy being."
The odd thing about the music is that it was originally a 'temporary' soundtrack using existing music. An original score was commissioned from Alex North, but Kubrick finally decided that he preferred the music he was using after all. North was not told, and was shocked and disappointed when he attended the premiere and didn't here his music.
Don't stop here. Watch "2010" (1984). Not only does it answer most of the questions this movie leaves hanging, but it does it with far better pacing and a thrilling climax. Not to mention the incredible talents of Roy Scheider, Helen Mirren, John Lithgow and Bob Balaban.
best film that will ever be made. imagine audiences in 1968, without a CLUE. now, these ideas are rampant, so we arent surprised by any of it. now, we are all sort of expecting either complete catastrophe, or some transcendent event that takes us to the next evolutionary level. this was the first mass audience exposure to the idea. now we all live with the technological singularity in our minds. AI, nanotech, aliens coming down, etc. PS i saw this in the theatre when it came out, with my dad, who was a rocket scientist. so this is all my feels now.
I like to interpret the ending as the monolith revealing it is an ancient alien lifeform (or machine) with infinite powers, and can grant lower beings the gift of evolution. So it chose Dave as the next level of human evolution, but before it could, it decided to allow Dave to live a full life in comfort, with plenty of food, and sped up the process until the time of his natural death until he can be reborn into the next stage.
Kind of my interpretation as well, Dave passes beyond human limitations of time and space, As the chapter says "and the infinite" The monoliths are the heralds and cause of each leap & evolution.. 🤔
Five years after this film, HAL was spoofed in the Woody Allen film Sleeper, where he went the extra mile and actually got Douglas Rain back to talk about cloning a new leader out of the old one's nose using that same velvet monotone.
The sequel "2010: The year we make contact" made in 1984 is a more traditional film and does a decent job helping make 2001 make sense. Highly recommend watching it.
Such an epic, classic, Sci-Fi movie. A lot of people don't realize this came out before humans even made it to the moon, it was the height of the space race, no space station. This was purely conceptual, nothing existing to go off of, and he nailed so many aspect of space travel, right down to a spinning centrifuge to simulate gravity. The Monolith: I like to think the Monolith vastly improves the understanding of technology for any beings that encounter it * The Dawn of Man: You see primates learn to use tools to defeat their enemies, securing resources, advancing their group over the defeated, less intelligent, ones. * Modern Man: In "our time", man has colonized the moon, long been the dominant species on their planet, and they encounter the monolith again. Allowing them to create "perfect" AIs, and now they can go as far as Jupiter, which is actually a big deal. We can barely get to Mars now. Moon is only a 1/4 million miles away, Mars about 60 million, Jupiter is 474 million miles away..... * Jupiter & Beyond the Infinite: Dave encounters the monolith one more time and his understanding of "technology" goes....beyond our understanding, something we can't comprehend. The whole ending is just artistic expression to the 1000th degree, it's a trip.
and then there's HAL: The grandaddy of evil AIs, before Skynet, Tron, the Matrix, GLaDOS, there was HAL-9000. Think about it from his perspective, if he just recently gained sentience, and became self aware and independent, and these humans were trying to "shut him down" when he makes his first mistake. He was kinda defending himself.
RE: The Monolith(s) in the books “… because in all the galaxy they had found nothing more precious than MIND they encouraged its dawning everywhere. They became farmers in the fields of stars. They sowed and sometimes they reaped. And sometimes- dispassionately- they had to weed.”
Yours was a perfect reaction. The movie was created to provoke questions - by deliberately being vague, ambiguous, open ended and expansive - while taking us on a journey through time and space. The genius of this film is that the main "character" is not a human protagonist but instead is presented in the form of three ancient, mysterious monoliths. This is one of those rare films that actually makes you think, and then to ultimately ask, as you did, "What the hell was that?"
A very quick thumbs-up on this one. I'll be signing on because this is a masterpiece. This edit version is nice. I actually saw this in a theater. Love it. Note: Recognized your jacket, cool. Once again your reactions were hilarious.
Kubrick on the ending: "The idea was supposed to be that he is taken in by godlike entities, creatures of pure energy and intelligence with no shape or form. They put him in what I suppose you could describe as a human zoo to study him, and his whole life passes from that point on in that room. And he has no sense of time. ... When they get finished with him, as happens in so many myths of all cultures in the world, he is transformed into some kind of super being and sent back to Earth, transformed and made some kind of superman. We have to only guess what happens when he goes back. It is the pattern of a great deal of mythology, and that is what we were trying to suggest."
When you as early as during The Dawn OF Man part very humbly declared doubts over your ability to interpret the movie, I just thought "Well, just wait until the end. This will all seem clear as glass in comparison." :D Your reaction between the transit beyond and the space baby was quite normal. No surprise that people using "mind expanding products" back in the day found this movie a perfect companion to them. So many high people in the theatres.
Exactly the reaction one hoped for and is the same one I've had since i saw it at the Winterpalace here in Stockholm in the 1970 for the first time " and with a break or intermission " before the Jupiter mission . I don't think i will ever experience anything like this masterpiece of art made by my favorite director Stanley Kubrik. So welcome .
I think we can clear up one thing: The apes didn't go to the moon. Most people agree that the story is that the Monolith _caused_ the Dawn of Man. Note that after the apes encountered it they started eating meat, and in the waterhole scene they were walking upright. 4 million years later (bone up, spaceship down), Man's technology had reached the point where they could travel in space, and so could find the Monolith buried on the moon. Whether it was the same monolith or a different one is a mystery. The Monolith could be alien technology, or it could be the aliens themselves -- if the plural can even apply in this case. Perhaps the Monolith is in all places and times at once. In any case, it sent the radio signal pointed at Jupiter, indicating the next step in the evolutionary treasure hunt. Then they took Bowman to Elsewhere, where they kept him comfortable in a "humanitarium" while he completed his life cycle, with some confusing overlap. Perhaps the aliens don't understand our conception of time any better than we understand theirs. In my opinion, the very last shot in the film isn't meant to be taken literally -- Bowman did not turn into a planet-sized fetus, he was reborn as a "Child of the Stars," having been upgraded by the Monolith to the next level. It's also my opinion that HAL didn't malfunction -- he was working better than his creators ever dreamed. A main theme of the whole movie is technology as an extension of Man. With HAL, what had Man done to computers but exactly what the Monolith did to the apes -- give them consciousness.
The bone thrown into the air is actually match cut with a satellite that is a laser - one weapon leading to another. Oh, and that was Kubrick's daughter in the phone call!
There is an incredible book about the making of the film which is worth checking out. Remember this film was made before the first landing on the moon, the visuals still look amazing 55 years later!
The monolith represents evolutionary leaps to a higher intelligence. In the beginning we see the apes learn to use tools after touching the slab. The bone tool to spaceship tool is one of the greatest sequences in cinema history. The computer HAL is a higher intelligence but fallible, maybe a false dawn. At the end, after the second encounter with the monolith Dave is reborn as the space child and a new evolution of humanity occurs.
Happy New Year Sam! 2001 is one of my favorite movies and your reaction was priceless. You should watch 2010: The Year We Make Contact….the sequel will answer some of your questions.
I hope this helps. My view as to what happened in the film: The Monolith was a tool for unseen aliens. Its job is to seek out intelligent life in the universe and to help it along. It arrives on Earth where the ancestors of Mankind are struggling. They are gatherers, eating only the plants they can scrounge and are on the brink of starvation. The Monolith teaches the man-apes technology in the form of tools that allow hunting, ending their starvation. The side effect of that technology is the second water hole scene. We see the first war, now made deadly with the advent of weapons. Technology is a double-edged sword that brings life and kills. Bone gets thrown into the air, jump-cuts to the satellite. In act 2, we go to the Moon, where another Monolith was found, deliberately buried. When that Monolith is exposed to sunlight for the first time in 4 million years, it sends a radio beam to Jupiter. It’s a way the aliens know mankind is advanced enough for the next step. The people who find the Monolith on the Moon lie to keep its existence a secret, because reasons. Act 3 sees the astronauts going to Jupiter. The tech crew (Bowman and Poole) are awake for the trip there but don't know about the real mission (they think it's just the first manned mission to Jupiter). The science crew (Hunter, Kaminsky, and Kimball) were briefed on the alien thing found on the Moon and then frozen, to keep the secret. HAL was also told the truth but instructed to lie to Bowman and Poole. HAL goes crazy, since lying went against his original programming. When HAL starts to crack up, he begins making mistakes...blaming those mistakes on the crew. He kills off the fallible humans so they don't ruin the secret mission. Bowman shuts down the higher functions of HAL's brain, in the process activating prerecorded briefing materials informing him about what was found on the Moon and what the real mission is. Act 4 Bowman investigates the giant Monolith orbiting Jupiter, but when he gets close, it turns into a sort of stargate and drags him to a pre-planned location set up by the aliens (the aliens themselves are long dead). After the trip (and incidentally seeing many mysteries of the Universe), he is put into a cage of sorts, made to look like an Earth hotel suite so he feels more comfortable. The weird thing where he keeps seeing himself I think is representing time being affected...so he sees 'time jumps' of himself on multiple occasions. Bowman is drained of all his memories and humanity, which is transferred to his new existence, the Star Child. The Monolith, the thing that gave humanity a gentle 'push' down the evolutionary path of tool making and technology, now gives him a new 'push' to the next phase of evolution, from existence as matter to existence as pure energy. Bowman/Star Child then returns to Earth, and the next step of Mankind's journey begins. That's how I see it anyway.
My take is that the Monolith appears to help mankind to its next plane of existence during its evolutionary journey. (I probably read that somewhere... LOL... but it makes sense). I first saw 2001 in the mid-1970s... it was re-released (along with A CLOCKWORK ORANGE) around the time Kubrick's BARRY LYNDON was first in theaters. I was 15 and couldn't make head or tails of it... but I was so fascinated, that I went back to see it the very next day! I thought your reaction was terrific (I confess I started watching your full-length reaction on Patreon, but this is a movie that, for the purposes of reaction, works better in edited form). If you get a chance to see it in the theater please do... on as large a screen as possible!
But I wonder. The last couple of times I watched this movie, I had these thoughts: The first thing early man learns after being influenced by the monolith is violence, culminating in the killing of his own kind over the water hole. When our main character tosses the killing weapon, it transforms into the space ship. The technology that evolved from bone to space ship, culminates, for us, to HAL, a computer capable of killing its creator. During Dave's time on Jupiter, I don't get the sense of any enlightenment going on. He is alone, inexpressive, and concentrated on self. I would also venture that the environments we see people living in are fairly sterile, and that their inter-actions are controlled and fairly cool for the most part. Almost the most expressive character in the later part of the story is HAL. Was the influence of monolith benevolent? It seems to have helped early man survive and develop, but at what cost? Of course we do see that life on primitive earth is stacked against early man. Still. I wonder.
The bone is not a weapon of violence, it’s a tool. The spark of realization that a being can use another object to obtain a goal is what led us down the path. The primitive man uses the tool to get more nourishing food in a stark environment, by killing and eating the tapirs, fulfilling a survival necessity. This also eliminated something that had been previously depleting some of its food supply. The meat in turn allowed us to grow stronger with larger brain development and so on and so on… all the way to us going to space. trippy!!
Thanks for doing this classic (masterpiece). Can we give a thumbs up for the special and practical effects, the set and the music. Visually stunning, it's not for everyone. You definitely need to see the sequel 2010: The Year We Make Contact with Roy Scheider (Jaws).
Wow, great reaction, Sam, I love this film. I especially enjoyed your intelligent attention to it. So many other reactors talk over stuff and miss what’s going on, but you followed it very well, and that’s an accomplishment for such a strange, complex film. My parents took me to see in 1968, when I was 7, and it was jaw-dropping to me. I loved the cinematography, although I had no idea what that was. 😄 Do you see how Star Wars was influenced visually by this? George Lucas said if there was no 2001, there wouldn’t have been Star Wars. There are many videos on RU-vid about making this film. All of it was practical effects, which still hold up. Looking forward to your reaction to the next classic film! Happy New Year! 🍾
It was actually HAL's fault. You will notice that HAL said that no 9000 series computer had ever had a fault or withheld information... Well they forced HAL to keep the real purpose of the mission a secret and it basically caused him to act erratically. If you watch 2010 you will get a detailed explanation of what was happening in this movie...
This movie is now 55 years old and it still widely regarded as the greatest film about Space ever made. This is a movie at it's greatest experience should be on the biggest screen possible . I believe that Stanley Kubrick wanted people to experience this movie. Some movies you watch and and you forget other you experience. This is a movie you experience.
In a nutshell: An alien race was using the monoliths to evolve humans on Earth. The first one inspired the apes to create tools/weapons. When humans eventually developed technology that would lead them to the moon, they found the second monolith the aliens left for them to find. Upon interaction, the second monolith immediately sends a signal to the third monolith that is floating near Jupiter. Like good humans, they keep following the signals and seeking out the monoliths and send the Discovery 1 (HAL and the human crew) to explore. After all the drama with HAL goes down (a different conversation), Dave as the only survivor of Discovery 1 is catapulted through a wormhole where he finds himself in what looks like a weird, fancy, old-school, French "hotel room". This is what the alien race has come up with to serve as a kind of zoo for Dave to live out his days while they observe him. When Dave is about to die, they introduce the final monolith which Dave readily reaches for and he is reborn as the Starchild, now evolved beyond earthly limitations.
It is clarified in the sequel book that HAL's behavior was the result of the fact that he was told the true purpose of the mission, but was also instructed to hide this information from the crew. This set up a inner conflict, reconciling his basic function of always telling the truth with the instruction to hide the truth. This led to a psychosis that caused him to invent the AE35 problem. Supposedly the AE35 unit was responsible for keeping the communication antenna aligned with Earth, so HAL wished the link would be broken. Before leaving the ship, Dave left it in a parking orbit around Jupiter. In the sequel, another mission is sent to investigate what happened to the first mission. Dave had reported all he knew back to Earth before leaving. In the sequel they bring HAL back to life and fix his psychosis and he actually has a redemption arc, if you can believe it! As for the monolith, it was placed on Earth by an alien civilization to speed up the evolution of man. You will notice that at first the apes were eating only plants and ignoring the rich potential food in the wild pigs. After the contact with the monolith, they learned to kill and eat meat, and they learned to kill each other. The monolith on the moon is a different one, placed by the same aliens, for the sole purpose of sending a notification whenever those apes ever evolved to conquer space. The monolith on the moon had a magnetic field that was deliberately placed so that when man became advanced enough to scan for magnetic fields, he would discover it and dig it up. When it was dug up, the sun shining on the monolith triggered the signal. Once the signal was sent, that monolith had no other purpose. The monolith around Jupiter was there to invite man to an even higher form of evolution, hence the star child. In the sequel, Dave (now as sort of a spirit) talks through the restored HAL to the second crew. It is trippy, I agree. I don't think it is possible to get all of it without reading the books.
I LOVED seeing your face at the end. I was sitting on the bed and my wife thought I was crazy for laughing so hard at that face you made at the end! My gawd it was priceless 😂
Everybody looks at the giant space baby at the end but fails to recognize that Kubrick is also showing audiences a view of the Earth from outer space for the first time.
Sam, definitely do the sequel "2010: The Year We Make Contact" (1984) made a long 16 years later. A different style of movie that I've read even Kubrick like it! Both Kubrick and Arthur C. Clark have a cameo in it, 2 for Clark and 1 for Kubrick but keep a sharp eye out. Here's a few details and clarifications about what you saw here. 3:25 Recall the pre-human a moment earlier looking at the Monolith with a puzzled look just before hitting the bones and skull with that large bone-tool? And right after they were eating fresh meats, and were standing more upright when attacking the opposition at the water hole. In the book, the Monolith was beaming much more information into its head than just how to use that bone weapon. It was a much more frightening and dramatic experience for the creature in the book with all its friends watching and him and freaking out over their pal convulsing and such. It sent more than just images of using that bone as a weapon, but other things it didn't understand as yet like using fire, etc. The reason Dr. Floyd was in the two ships by himself was because he was a special VIP and needed to get to the moon asap, and that scene takes place in late 1999. 8:55 The moon Monolith sent that high-pitch signal when the first tiny sliver of sunlight touched it in 4 million years! It was the smaller Monolith informing the giant Monolith orbiting Jupiter that the humans dug it up and will be coming there soon. Bowman and the crew arrive at Jupiter in 2001. 25:10 The Monolith took him on that journey where the "aliens" showed him the creation of the universe, formation of matter and later worlds. They placed the rattled Dave in a surrounding he was familiar with to live out his life, a nice hotel he once stayed in. As far as the Star Child at the end, that's open for interpretation, but it's best to see the sequel. I interpret it as Dave, working for the "aliens" now, is watching over the Earth until the year 2010 arrives! 🖖👽 One more little 2001 tid-bit to amuse you with Sam. Take each letter in H-A-L and note what its following letter would be, and put them together. Smile! 😁
I know it's not as well regarded but I do truly enjoy the sequel 2010: The Year We Make Contact which brings some more context to Dave Bowman / Starchild, explains a bit more about the purpose of the "monolith" while posing even more questions. It answers some of the mysteries behind HAL and honestly I think the acting is much better more natural with a fantastic cast that was about the "cold war" tensions between the US and Russia at the time. I highly recommend it.
This is a film that demands multiple viewings to get your head around it and put things together. I've been watching this movie fairly regularly for over 40 years, and occasionally something occurs to me that I'd never realized before.
It helps if you're familiar with Soviet space films-- This one was inspired by a few, famously so, one of the effects staff was also part of a team that worked on a couple Soviet sci-fi masterpieces! :D
2001 I think has to do with humankind's evolution and whether we people evolve on our own or get an assist by cosmic forces. Those simian beings at the beginning are taught by the monolith how to use a tool, that bone, but it starts as an implement of violence as establishing territory then the bone is flung into the air and becomes a spaceship also a tool that is also symbolic of claiming territory beyond Earth then HAL appears who is also a tool that reverts and becomes an instrument of violence so the monolith reappears to cosmically informs our protagonist that it's time to evolve further in which he is transformed into a more bright-eyed advanced form.of life. This movie if anything makes you think about us wee little humans.
Additionally, it's actually a common misconception that the bone cuts to a spaceship; that's an orbital nuclear platform. 100,000 years of evolution compressed into a single match cut, and we're still only at this most brutal and primitive stage.
2001 is a very long strange movie that doesn't give you answers, but don't worry. The sequel called "2010 the year we made contact" is a normal paced movie in a more typical style. It gives you many answers and tries to finish the story. The sequel is much better imho. If you enjoyed 2001 you will probably love 2010 the year we made contact.
Of all the super sophisticated special effects the thing that is most unrealistic is the view of Earth from outer space. There is a reason for that. When this was being filmed, we had no idea what Earth looked like from deep in space. We only had images from low Earth orbit, a few hundred miles above our 18,000 mile wide globe! It's fun looking at the futuristic things that came true or are coming true. Picture phones (they had already been introduced at the 1964 NY World's Fair), commercial space travel, artificial intelligence, scary artificial inelegant. Ironically, Bell Telephone and Pan American Airways did not make it the year 2001.
It doesn't get mentioned often, but the aging make-up in the final sequence is extraordinarily good. Dave as an old man at the dinner table looks almost _exactly_ like actor Keir Dullea does today.
If you noticed, HAL didn't have any issues until he started getting closer to the monolith. In the beginning what man learned from the monolith was TOOLS. Just a thought.
Black monoliths are swiss knifes for the Alien ! that what the Author of the story said (Arthur C. Clarke the great SF writer). See the sequel for some anwers : ''2010, the year we made contact'', story from the same writer.
The monolith jumpstarts evolution. It basically contains all the knowledge of the universe. Dave entered the Monolith in space, and essentially entered the next stage of galactic existence. Time is now meaningless to him.
The ending of this film might actually be pretty accurate as to what it would be like to encounter aliens. They encountered a superior intelligence. You would see things happen, but not really understand what was happening let alone how or why it was happening. Think of it like humans and cats. Your cat can see you do things, go about your day to day business. But the cat only has a very limited understanding of it. So basically, in the film the Monoliths are a high level intelligence (maybe machine or something we have never even imagined) and by comparison, humans are cat/dog level intelligent.
