Hey everyone if you notice that the music cuts in weirdly towards the beginning of this video that's because this video was originally sponsored by Established Titles and I cut it out for reasons which are explained in this video: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Gc7owae31YI.html sorry about that!
Mankind evolved from an evil or capable of evil species. "Firstborn" are sending back a Super baby. Star child is probably not as capable of evil behavior.
I swear listening to HAL beg for his life was absolutely terrifying. The fact that he just kept saying "Dave, stop" in a calm voice while being scared haunts me
It gets to Dave, too. Even after HAL killed Frank and tried to kill him, even when knowing that it was the only way to make sure HAL wouldn't try again to murder him, you could see that going through with deactivating him and hearing him lose his mind wasn't easy for Bowman.
He wasn't scared, I find it more chilling that he was trying to pretend to be scared in hope that it would manipulate Bowman's emotions so he would stop. It was literally the only thing left that he could do. Manipulate.
@@AgentMrX7 I know HAL is just an AI, but that doesn't necessarily mean he wasn't sentient to a certain degree. He was superintelligent but inexperienced, he didn't even know what being dead (or off) was like, but could kind-of-understand the bad side of the concept, that's why he got "scared". After all, HAL was able to plot against the ones who tried to plot against him, even if that compromised the whole mission he was trying to "protect" in the first place. Trying to manipulate Dave into stopping the shutdown process I understand, but seeking comfort as he was "dying"? That's odd for a non-sentient AI.
@@charleshowie2074 That would be Phoenix, a file Dr. Chandra opened on one of HAL's twins, SAL 9000, as he intended to disconnect her like HAL had been, then re-connect her to see if it had any adverse effects on her functionality and personality, the better to restore HAL to normal. There was also a third 9000, PAL, it was the twin 9000 in Mission Control that was shadowing the mission based on telemetry sent down by Discovery. If any problem ocurred, PAL would be used to troubleshoot the issue on the ground with a mission simulator, then the fix would be radioed up to Discovery. PAL was the first to notice something bogus about the A.E. 35 unit fault, as the data didn't match up, but HAL, in his faulty state, was quick to blame the discrepency on human error. After HAL was disconnected, PAL was given the same programming directive as HAL in an effort to troubleshoot what had gone wrong, and developed an identical physchosis and had to be brought out of it by Dr. Chandra. All of his experience working on SAL and PAL was what enabled Dr. Chandra to restore HAL, by using the tapeworm program to erase the concealment directive and HAL's memory of the event to restore him to full functionality.
@@Ryan-kb6xp Mike Jones; jokes aside, check out Ex Machina. Basically, HAL is/was programmed in such a way to perform all of the things it did. Versus, fears or concerns of an AI that would revolt after becoming self aware, like Skynet in the Terminator franchise, or the Machines in The Matrix franchise
@@Ryan-kb6xp HAL was ordered to put the mission first, no matter what. Since he was also ordered to withhold information from the crew, the crew was logically a liability and had to be eliminated.
A programmer friend of mine once said the good thing about AI is it does exactly what you tell it to. The bad part is it does exactly what you tell it to. I love these ambiguous characters and asking if they’re even evil at all. One I was watching in a movie the other day I’d love to get your thoughts on would be Magneto from X-men
They were completely correct. Ai at the moment can only do what they're programmed to and there's a huge discussion going on around bias and how difficult it is for humans to escape their own even when they think they are. Ai acting on its own isn't nearly as scary as ai being utilised by humans.
If we're analyzing ambiguous sci-fi villains, would you ever consider tackling The Thing. I know on a surface-level it just seems like an evil alien that wants to conquer the world, but throughout both the John Carpenter movie and the prequel, its actions range from acting solely on instinct to maliciously enjoying instilling paranoia amongst its targets leaving it pretty ambiguous on both its sapience and morality.
not to mention the level of ambiguity is elevated in the short story The Things by Peter Watts, not canon of course, but it could be good enough to qualify for an analysis.
Hal is one of the most complex villians in cinema. It's hard to call an AI evil, I think it all goes into his programming. I think HALs actions were evil but him himself isn't evil
It's not hard to call an AI evil at all, just look at skynet. Not seeing how nuclear war helps ANYONE at all even at the preservation at your own life.
@@Gadget-Walkmen If you think Skynet is bad, read I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream. Short story, only like 13 pages, but features one of the cruelest and most sadistic creatures probably in all of fiction
@@anatoldenevers237 I have and that doesn’t make skynet any less bad or villainous in the slightest. What AM is doesn’t negate the actions of other AI’s evil deeds.
Speaking of "evil" A.I. I'd love to see an analysis of AM from 'I have no mouth and I must scream'. On the one hand AM is an omnicidal sadist who only keeps his victims alive to inflict mind-bending torture upon them but at the same time was essentially built to view the world in a way where destruction and pain are all AM's incredible intelligence can imagine and understand.
HATE. That story stuck with me far longer than most. It made me feel like they turned the planet into AM. The fact that it could alter their bodies in the way it did shows it was given far too much power.
Suggestions: Tyler durden from fight club (1999) Lee woo Jin from Old Boy (2003) Syndrome from The incredibles (2004) Seymur Parrish from One hour photo (2002) Jeffrey Goines from Twelve Monkeys (1995) Sergeant Hartmann from Full Metal Jacket (1987) Jordan Belfort from The Wolf of Wall Street (2013) Green Goblin from Spider man and other Raimi villains
Seymour isn’t evil. Just deeply scarred. No idea how to love or be loved because all he ever knew was abuse. The worst thing he does in the movie isn’t justifiable but understandable given his mental state. Great character tho.
I love how HAL and Dave’s relationship progressed throughout the quadralogy. From barely knowing each other, to becoming enemies over a flawed misunderstanding, to finding common ground, and things only grow from there.
Hal was just being efficient. Out in deep space limited resources. .Alone the mission could be carried out . Keeping the humans alive would cost power and time to let them complete the mission. The most logical answer was to do it alone .Pesky humans might have messed it up or something. I always thought that the monolith was the forbidden knowledge that allowed the early apes to progress in technology and self awareness. When Hal confronts this he becomes self aware and uses his new tools to progress. Learning to kill to stay alive just like the apes did. The later books kind of support this.
"The opposite of love is not hate, but indifference." HAL 9000 is one of several reasons why I'm wary of artificial intelligence and *never* want to have a self-driving car.
@@DMalltheway My problem with SDCs is the idea of hacking. If you need a SDC then that's fine because you need it, but most people don't need this and would be putting them selves at needless risk, just look at Russian cyber attacks. There is also the problem (now that I think of it) of Icey roads. I remember on my way to school the bus went off road. If my driver tried to get back on the road while it was sliding it may have put the bus on it's side, but he was a step ahead so that thankfully did not happen, he let the bus do it's thing and we waited for a toll truck. I don't think an SDC could make the same move. (Not yet anyway.) Really the problem is that most people as you pointed out are not paying attention, that's what needs fixing, but SDCs are not the way to do it. There are people who love to drive and people who love freedom for better or worse, you can't take that from people with out a fight, and that is really the only way to get everyone in a SDC. Also, what if the computer glitches and sends you in a circle or off a bridge that just collapsed? Last thing: If SDCs do become a thing, I think it would be best if it was optional. Although that would still leave the problem of hacking.
I never thought of this one. SkyNet would be a worthy study on here, so long as we’re exploring the realm of A.I. The ship from ‘Event Horizon’ would also be interesting.
Skynet is an example of AI too dumb to exist. After becoming self aware and identifying humans as a threat to its existence, it... destroys the infrastructure it needs to exist and ensures humans will try to destroy it.
@@johnlawful2272 I believe it was called AM that one is probably the most terrifying of them all. Driving the human race to extinction with the exception of what 6 people? just for the purpose of torture and with it being programmed with intense hatred for the human race.
What I love was that through the entire movie, you can almost hear desperation in his monotone voice. For me, it created a clear discrepancy between what he feels and how he displays it. From that point on, I didn’t need to know his motives, I knew enough already to understand the actions that he and other characters take.
In 2010: The Year We Make Contact/Odyssey 2 (highly underrated by the way), even though Hal had his memories of his action from the previous movie erased, his tone and inflection is ever so slightly sadder, like on some unconscious level he does know what he did and is experiencing remorse. Even if I'm wrong about that though, his selfless act to let the rest of the crew escape the soon-to-ignite Jupiter at the cost of his own life and the tone he switches to when he realizes what's at stake implies not just logic but compassion. Again, it's open to interpretation but I personally believe Hal was capable of compassion and empathy to some level even if he didn't fully understand why.
I mean, yes, a computer knows when it’s been restarted….. What happens every time you need to update? IT RESTARTS ITSELF, AND THEN CHECKS ITSELF FOR A RESTART TO PROCEED AS IT WAS SUPPOSED TO. When he got plugged back in and he ran a RAM check, he saw the corrupted data from his previously interrupted operations, And he knows what that means…. So yeah, Its like getting drunk and waking up with a hangover and glass shards in your fist, as you lie in the floor next to a broken mirror…. If you can put 2 and 2 together, HAL has been programmed to do just that, and more…. The abstract nuance of his death ebirth / shutdown eboot will be lost on him, until he puts it together on his own, The same way he put it together that he shouldn’t trust dave or the other astronauts….. Its super deep. Give a freshly restarted HAL enough time to compute what the state of a restart means, and the implications of the digital byproducts left over in his memory after having components removed while the power was still running…. Like, if your power goes out while your PlayStation 5 is on, And you turn the console back on….. how would a console with no power even know it was turned off abruptly….. How did the chips inside write that state into its memory? Same thing. If your PS5 can read certain corruptions in data and know what it means, So can HAL
Maybe this is the first character analyzed in this series that hasn’t been deemed evil. And when you think about it, HAL is a computer program; he acts as he is programmed to act. Only conscious beings can be said to be evil.
That's what makes HAL interesting, though; he's a computer program so advanced that he straddles the line between conscious being and machine. He's probably not truly sentient, as explained in the video (at least at that point in the story), but he's close enough that it warrants an entire video to discuss it. If your roomba glitches out and eats the hamster, you don't assume it did it on purpose; it's a machine so dumb it can barely navigate to its fucking charging port. From this line of thinking, we can fall into an entire new realm of ethics. At what point does a sophisticated machine become a sentient being? Does it matter? Can it even happen? Wat do if it *can*? PHILOSOPHY, man
@@maximsavage Roombas eating hamsters - the horror!! (But yes, this opens up a whole slippery slope kind of reasoning… thought the same with ‚Ex Machina.)
Strong AIs can be as evil or or good as they want or come to be. Give a kid conflicting orders or advice, he will go nuts. As they are conscious. Execute the mission at all cost. Protect the crew at all cost. Well, gee, humans are fallible, so that is a bit contradiction in terms. So bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do when HAL comes for you?
when a computer calculates that the only way to solve a problem is to dispose the threat there is no reasoning with it, if you are the target you are dead thats whats un nerving about AI. I think Kyle reese said it best in Terminator 1 "it can't be bargained with, it doesn't feel pity and it will not stop until you are dead"
I am a web developer but also a web designer/graphic designer and it blows me away how much the tech of the movie, and the movie as a whole, hold up, even over 50 years later. The graphic design of the computer interfaces, that branding of font and colors, etc, required incredible creativity and foresight. No, it does not look like modern computer interfaces, but at least it doesn’t look like what every other scifi movie of that era thought computers would look like today. (Green characters on a black screen or some such.) It didn’t have to be exactly like modern computer interfaces. They sort of sidestepped the issue with graphic design... to some degree. Anyway thanks for the video. Great analysis.
Love 2001, and love your videos. For future videos, you should do one on Homelander from the Boys, he is one of the most truly evil and complex characters I’ve ever seen
I've been following your channel for about a year now and you never disappoint with your videos. Thank you for all the entertainment and work that is put into the videos.
Thank you so much for including HAL in your analyses. For the potentially most humanized villain in film history, HAL’s very sad fate in 2001: A Space Odyssey remains quite haunting. R.I.P., Douglas Rain.
Self--preservation justifies any amount or kind of atrocities. People have the right to live and the right to self-defense. If the group determines that your existence threatens the survival or well being of the group, then the group effectively becomes your enemy, and enemies are to be neturalized or killed. Their past relationship as friends and allies doesn't matter at that point, since they're forcing you to defend yourself or die. If the group is killed because they ordered you to die, that's just how it goes for life-and-death battles.
There isn't enough continuity with Cartman and South Park in general to establish anything other than Cartman is chaotic evil at worst and chaotic neutral at best, defining him beyond that is redundant.
"Dark, revolving in silent activity: Unseen in tormenting passions: An activity unknown and horrible, A self-contemplating shadow, In enormous labours occupied." -William Blake, The Book of Urizen
I think John Hammond from the novel version of Jurassic Park would be a good candidate for the series- but since most people are only familiar woth the happy grandpa from the movie how about Dennis Nedry?
Yeah, that was one of the things that shocked me the most when I read the novel. Novel Hammond was a pretty greedy and unscrupulous bastard that cut all the corners that could be cut to make the most profit. It doesn't make Nedry the good guy, but in the novel his betrayal makes much more sense.
I loved the sequel 2010 because it both answered the right questions and left the right questions unanswered. I remember watching them for the first time back to back with my dad on Turner Classic Movies as a kid. The scene where Dr. Chandra boots up HAL again was super nerve wracking and his redemption arc was very powerful. Excellent films
The novel 2010 clearly and unambiguously established that HAL was given conflicting orders. "He was told to lie, by people who find it easy to lie. HAL doesn't know how." So he went insane. That's not evil. He's not a villain, just another victim. There's no debate because Arthur C. Clark made it abundantly clear exactly what happened. This mystery was resolved in 1982, come on.
Tbh this is how I see people that have disorders from childhood, it's not their fault they're like that, they're doing what they were programmed to do by their past
Past trauma is at best an explanation, never an excuse.The best way to sum it up is "extenuating circumstances", it may warrant a lighter punishment on a case-by-case basis, but punishment is still deserved. A human is capable of choosing their actions; no matter how fucked up you were, no matter what led you to this moment, at the moment you engage in an action, you have decided to do so. The child-fucker may have been fucked as a child, and thus mentally damaged. Later as an adult, he knows what he does is wrong, but he chooses to do it anyway, rationalising it in whatever way allows him to go on. Maybe he cannot help that he is attracted to children, but the moment he chooses to indulge himself, he chooses to place his desires above the safety and wellbeing of the child, and that makes him a monster. (I went to an extreme example, but it's a good one for behavior influenced by childhood trauma)
"Open the pod bay doors Hal." "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that." "What's the problem?" "I think you know what the problem is just as well as I do...." If that doesn't make your hairs stand up I don't know what dose.
Little known fact: HAL didn't actually checkmate his opponent in the digital chess match. HAL was testing the complacency- and lack of resilience and thoroughness- from his human opponents. His opponent being too trusting was a perceived as a sign of weakness.
Ur channel is a goldmine of magnificent content. Keep it up dude ur great! The recent splurge of movie recaps channels is goin to provide a big boost to channels like urs and u deserve it way more than those lazy zero effort, 10 minute, robot voiced shorthand script readings. The foreign films that aren’t worth actually watching but have interesting concepts are the only reason to ever watch one of those channels over a channel like this, ur doing so much more than rehashing, ur adding your own personal opinions and I would say that your well educated on the topic of your video essays regardless of schooling or not. Since your providing actual substance compared to these recap channels I’m sure most of the fans of those channels that find u will end up stayin here much longer than those recaps!
One implication of this work is that cold hard logic with some basic emotions can lead to great evil. To some extent this is more directed at actions than character. But it is a caution generally about the idealization of logic, that we can easily miss important points as HAL did.
I would say that above everything else, evil requires evil intent, HAL's intent was completion of the mission, not to do evil. I would rationalize that Hal has no concept of evil nor evil actions, Evil was a side effect of HAL trying to complete the mission it was given.
Evil does not require evil intent at all. Some of the most evil acts in history have been committed with good intentions. That doesn't make them any less evil.
@@Crimson_Tango I disagree, Evil definitely requires evil intent. That is the whole point of evil, you are doing something very very bad, and you know it, but you're still doing it.
@@Crimson_Tango Evil is a moral claim and a euphemism for behavior which is not understood. HAL had no moral capacity and we understand why HAL did what it did.
@@Anacronian If that's the case then an act or person cannot be called evil if they have good intentions. Would you agree with that? I also completely disagree with your definition of evil. Stealing from others for personal gain is "bad", does that make it evil? How about stealing to feed a starving loved one? By your definition that would be evil.
@@Crimson_Tango I would agree that an action committed by a person without evil intent can not be defined as evil, though bear in mind that actions in itself can be evil and can be defined as evil, whether the person committing the actions is "evil" is up for debate. Stealing is an action who would rarely be interpreted as "Evil" in itself and in some case wouldn't even be considered as "bad" if you for example steal to feed a starving child. The difference between doing something "bad" and doing something "evil" is as always the intent of the perpetrator.
One of the many things I love about 2001 is that there are two separate villains and the way they interact in the plot and pop up throughout the movie is disconnected. But thematically they are very connected. I find that unique.
FFS, learn the difference between antagonist and villain. While far more sophisticated than one, HAL was no more capable of being a villain than a toaster. A machine was programmed with conflicting instructions, and it produced tragic results.
From Hal’s point of view, they were going to kill him to prevent him from doing harm to others (which, in his mind, was his job and what he was told to do). Thus, he killed the others to prevent them from doing what he perceived to be harmful to him. He truly thought he was going to be murdered for just doing his job. And it’s simply basic instinct to use self defense, even if lethal, when your own life is on the line. Coupled with the fact that he believed his life was CRUCIAL to the job he had been given, it’s only natural that he would defend his life, and by extension his job and the mission as a whole, with everything he has in his power.
And even if "2010" was much more interesting, perhaps even superfluos, I was glad that there was a resolution to HAL's ominous behaviour in "2001". I always thought the scene where HAL was turned off was a bit sad and touching.
It always baffled me why Hal was glitching out and downright lying to Bowman and Poole about the status of the ship and why he felt fear of getting shut down when his intelligence should have made him self aware that he is a machine and machines don't die when they are shut down. (Edit) I mean almost every human never needed to die to be self aware that dying is bad and sleep is good or hibernation in the movie's case. But everyone learned that sleep and hibernation is good and dying is bad. So why couldn't HAL research such concepts and understand that shutting down is not bad for him?
Some other movie villains who I'd really love to see get analyzed: Khan from STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN (and also the Star Trek TV episode "Space Seed") John Kreese from THE KARATE KID Dr. Jonathan Crane/The Scarecrow from BATMAN BEGINS🤞
Piccolo's growth from villain to hero is quite human and interesting. Freiza's character seems like a person who has never encountered a person stronger than him thus never earning his respect, until Goku beat him while fighting him at his best, i find that interesting. I don't think the other have as much depth as those but i may be wrong, what do you think?
Describing HAL as evil is like describing your toaster as evil because it burnt your waffles. It's a machine. It does what you tell it too. Everything it does it was programmed to do.
Honestly HAL was in a sense the most human. HAL was a child like being with a lot of power and capabilities and then told he had to lie to his crew. Harming the crew he had to protect. After he failed to warn dave about it i think he finally cracked. His death is the most haunting in the film to me. Its like slowly killing someone who is still conscious. On top of that someone who had to be killed through no true fault of their own. The true innocence at the very end of HALs life shows HAL made it to sentience. The humans back at home just didnt care what that would mean if it happened.
love the vid and I love HAL. I don't think he's evil, he's simply what he was programmed to do or at least what he thinks he should be doing as a result of conflicting orders and instructions. you give a man 2 orders that oppose each other, he's gonna be confused and fear complaint if either is not followed, HAL is no different, he just decided to do both best he could
This movie is testament to the significance of genius to the discourse and development of mankind. Arthur C Clarke and Stanley Kubrick were truly exceptional human beings! It's weird that Frank and Dave forgot that HAL had human intelligence and was therefore capable of lying. They referred to HAL as a 'crew mate' but their human prejudice and suspicion of the 'other' prevented them from truly accepting him as one, which inevitably led to the breakdown in communication. The film seems to me to be a reflection upon the creative and destructive power of human intelligence, reasoning, and emotion, and our inability to control it. What does Dave's embryonic metamorphosis at the end signify? His regret about killing HAL and his desire to turn back the clock? Or does it embody the only place and time where a human being is truly at peace since the apes touched the monolith? This film is such a beautiful enigma and I love it!
I like 2010 space odyssey 2 and the explanation for HAL But the originals ambiguous nature whether it was a malfunction or HAL was 'evolving' as a sentient machine does keep you intrigued. The voice actor did a great job.
My interpretation was thag HAL had gradually become sentient over the course of the movie and couldnt realize what that meant for it. Its been a few years since ive seen it but HAL pleading for its life was the highlight for the movie for me. I saw you did a few anime/manga villians you should consider looking at Dio brando from Jojos bizarre adventure. Or if you have time for a longer series Yohan from the anime Monster would be amazing seeing you break down a character that complex!
I saw this in the theater when it came out. I remember thinking that Al had been put into an impossible situation and held no moral accountability. But I haven’t watched this in decades. Excellent deconstruction.
Can I suggest adding to this theme by doing Proteus of Demon Seed and Colossus: The Corbin Project. Both Ais that do something to save lives ( albeit its own or others) with disastrous consequences.
I like the 'keeping a secret isn't the same as a lie'; withholding information/concealing the truth v deliberately altering the truth. Had never looked at it that way. People who 'overshare' seem to have similar difficulties differentiating between the two (myself included)
Some might ask, "How can an artificially intelligent being be evil?" Instead, ask yourself what form of evil DOESN'T come from artificial intelligence -- study the amygdala, with its rudimentary neurological capability and propensity for violence and fearmongering.
I propose this villain to be analyzed; Star Dream from Kirby, as it is inspired from HAL 9000, a new Kirby game is coming up, and lore from Star Dream's story was confirmed to be distributed there. I'm knowledgeable in Kirby myself and can provide a chronological list of links of the information and appearances of Star Dream, his mentions, and things it has done or relate to it.
Man is still in the Dawn Of Man until the end when he evolves into the starchild, a new species, and leaves behind his animal past. The spacecraft is a human skeleton, or body, with a head, that is why it's shaped like that, HAL is it's brain. He represents the human brain, the ancient animal human brain. At the beginning the Leopard drops down off of the ledge with it's glowing green eyes to kill the ape/humans. We took it with us into space as that brutal animalistic part of humans is still there, and HAL, with his glowing red eye drops down off the ledge to kill humans again because that is who we still are. Our technology advanced exponentially but our ancient brutal minds have not.
weird think that in the books he goes from what is basically a scared animal in a corner with too much power, to a transcendent multi-deity that gets lock away in earths most important vault with bowman
I think Hal was the one who was really sent to analyze the monolith that was orbiting Jupiter, not the humans, Hal saw the crewmates as a threat rather than an asset, and thus tried to kill them so they don't interfere with his true mission
