• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Need some help understanding 2001: A Space Odyssey

zerocool84

zerocool84

Lifer
Ok so I finally saw 2001: A Space Odyssey but have many questions as the film obviously doesn't explain anything. So the monoliths helped advance primitive man. Find one on the moon. Space voyage people don't know where they are going and HAL goes insane and kills everyone except one guy. The guy finds out what their mission is. The monolith on the moon is transmitting to Jupiter so they are sent to investigate. Arrive at Jupiter, guy goes into a time warp seeing as where ever he arrives, he's older. He gets older and older and gets "reborn" as a baby. Is he supposed to be like a new being or something? So monoliths are supposed to help advance man? If so then why did the moon one not advance anything or was it just a gateway to the Jupiter one which it seems that's all it was? Obviously they meant for you to just figure out everything yourself.
 
I don't think the movie version did a good job explaining the ending, it's made a little more clear in the book. If you're curious and don't want to read the book, read the plot summary here.

I think they only made movies out of the first and second books, third and final odysseys, you have to read the books. A lot more happens at jupiter afterwards
see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010:_Odyssey_Two
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2061:_Odyssey_Three
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3001:_The_Final_Odyssey
 
The whole movie was designed to set up the light show. When it came out it was considered spectacular.
 
Read the book. It's perfectly clear what's going on.

Cliffs: Thousands of years ago, an alien race installs a monolith (a large clear one in the book) on earth to spark intelligence in the crude animals living on the human-less planet. The aliens secretly install another monolith on the moon, but this isn't divulged until later in the book and movie. Through generations of evolution, the human race is create. The human race proceeds to develop new technologies, finally inventing space travel and eventually finding the monolith 'alarm system' planted on the moon by the alien race. The humans figure out that the monolith on the moon transmits a signal to Saturn (in the book and Jupiter in the movie). A space mission is created to send a crew to Saturn to investigate. The ships AI freaks out and kills everyone except for one astronaut. This one astronaut, piloting a small vessel, finds where the moon's alarm system signal went...a third monolith floating in space. As he approaches this monolith, a worm hole opens and transports him past alien civilizations to a alien world. However, much like the aliens in Contact, they think the human astronaut would freak out if he saw them and their world, so they create a human 'place' for him to live. The astronaut grows old, dies and then, much like the apes evolved into humans, the astronaut evolves into the next generation of being...pure energy. However, in the movie, this transformation is symbolized by seeing a baby floating in space.

The second and third books are good, but stray from the first one slightly. In the last book we learn that the monolith on the moon was a sort of test for the humans. However, the humans uncovered it too late in their progress of development. The alien race was disappointed by the humans not evolving and developing technology fast enough, so they planned on wiping out the planet. Mankind learns of this, bands together and kills the aliens with a computer virus (I think...it's been a while) with the help from the astronaut/pure energy being from 2001.

I think that's as short and thorough as you can get. 🙂
 
I hate kubrik so much. 2001 was so god damn pretentious. Should just stick to making movies that are actually fun to watch like FMJ or Spartacus
 
Originally posted by: Mo0o
I hate kubrik so much. 2001 was so god damn pretentious. Should just stick to making movies that are actually fun to watch like FMJ or Spartacus
Click to expand...

2001 isn't pretentious. The only way to have told the story better or more thoroughly would have been to have a narrator or, like most dumbed down films today, include an extra character that represents the audience. A character that's 'new to the team' and is always asking questions.

"What are we doing on the darkside of the moon again?"
"We're investigating a mysterious object of suspected alien origin a team recently uncovered, Timmy"

"Why are we going to the Jupiter?"
"We're tracking down a mysterious radio signal of suspected alien origin, Timmy"

"What's that floating object?"
"We believe that's were the moon's object was beaconing to. Now it looks like it's opening a mysterious wormhole to a suspected alien civilization. You first, Timmy"

Who the fuck likes movies that continually tell the audience that they're stupid?


As for FMJ, only the first act was good. The rest is a snorefest much like the his other films.
 
Originally posted by: biggestmuff
Originally posted by: Mo0o
I hate kubrik so much. 2001 was so god damn pretentious. Should just stick to making movies that are actually fun to watch like FMJ or Spartacus
Click to expand...

2001 isn't pretentious. The only way to have told the story better or more thoroughly would have been to have a narrator or, like most dumbed down films today, include an extra character that represents the audience. A character that's 'new to the team' and is always asking questions.

"What are we doing on the darkside of the moon again?"
"We're investigating a mysterious object of suspected alien origin a team recently uncovered, Timmy"

"Why are we going to the Jupiter?"
"We're tracking down a mysterious radio signal of suspected alien origin, Timmy"

"What's that floating object?"
"We believe that's were the moon's object was beaconing to. Now it looks like it's opening a mysterious wormhole to a suspected alien civilization. You first, Timmy"

Who the fuck likes movies that continually tell the audience that they're stupid?


As for FMJ, only the first act was good. The rest is a snorefest much like the his other films.
Click to expand...

I dont need him to dumb it down or explain anything, but I'd rather not watch the monkey bash another monkey w/ the bone for 15 minutes. Yes we get it , it got smarter. The last act also dragged on forever. The plot is not hard to figure out, it's just longwinded and pretentious
 
In 1968, the word from those seeing the movie in a theater was trippy. 😀

For some reason, it was rated as 14yo and above in Quebec City (nowadays I guess this would equate to PG) and I was only 11yo, so I could not go see it. 🙁 Strangely enough, I could and did go see The Good, The Bad & The Ugly around the same time as it was rated general audience, even with all its violence. Ditto for For A Few Dollars More a few months earlier, which also included marijuana smoking and a rape scene. Go figure.😕
 
Such an incredible book by Arthur C. Clarke. Required reading in my high school sci-fi class. I finished the rest of them up on my own, and have reread them all a dozen times. Now that I think about it I'm probably due to read the series again.

Don't bother with the movie - it glosses over the really good stuff.
 
Originally posted by: makken
I don't think the movie version did a good job explaining the ending, it's made a little more clear in the book. If you're curious and don't want to read the book, read the plot summary here.

I think they only made movies out of the first and second books, third and final odysseys, you have to read the books. A lot more happens at jupiter afterwards
see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010:_Odyssey_Two
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2061:_Odyssey_Three
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3001:_The_Final_Odyssey
Click to expand...

Yeah, I never understood what was going on in the movie until I read the book. If you get the chance to read it, I strongly suggest doing so.
 
Originally posted by: dennilfloss
In 1968, the word from those seeing the movie in a theater was trippy. 😀

For some reason, it was rated as 14yo and above in Quebec City (nowadays I guess this would equate to PG) and I was only 11yo, so I could not go see it. 🙁 Strangely enough, I could and did go see The Good, The Bad & The Ugly around the same time as it was rated general audience, even with all its violence. Ditto for For A Few Dollars More a few months earlier, which also included marijuana smoking and a rape scene. Go figure.😕
Click to expand...

you won, id watch those movies over and over again. i watched 2001 and ill never watch it again.

edit: i just read the 2001 synopsis on wikipedia. now i remember how little sense the end of the movie made. meh.
 
Yea I feel the way many of you guys feel too. I would not watch it again. The movie obviously doesn't hold you and yes the visuals were cool and I'm sure that's what made it awesome back in the day but with practically no dialogue/acting, it has no real staying power.
 
Originally posted by: Mo0o
I hate kubrik so much. 2001 was so god damn pretentious. Should just stick to making movies that are actually fun to watch like FMJ or Spartacus
Click to expand...

perhaps you should try and read or watch something of merit for the first time in your life.
 
btw, Clark worked closely with Kubrick on the screenplay and throughout production of the film, so it's as close to the book as one should reasonably get for a film.

Remember, kids: book /= film
 
I read a lot and I watch a lot of movies and I still think 2001 was silly & pretentious.
Having said that, everyone should watch it at least once. If you dont like it, thats OK.
 
Originally posted by: xSauronx
Originally posted by: dennilfloss
In 1968, the word from those seeing the movie in a theater was trippy. 😀

For some reason, it was rated as 14yo and above in Quebec City (nowadays I guess this would equate to PG) and I was only 11yo, so I could not go see it. 🙁 Strangely enough, I could and did go see The Good, The Bad & The Ugly around the same time as it was rated general audience, even with all its violence. Ditto for For A Few Dollars More a few months earlier, which also included marijuana smoking and a rape scene. Go figure.😕
Click to expand...

you won, id watch those movies over and over again. i watched 2001 and ill never watch it again.

edit: i just read the 2001 synopsis on wikipedia. now i remember how little sense the end of the movie made. meh.
Click to expand...

End of the movie: humans have been artificially pushed to the next stage of evolution.

The movie is to the book what the dance Swan Lake is to the fairy tale Swan Lake. You don't expect to get the full detailed story from the film; it's an artistic interpretation of a story. The book is pretty good. Clarke's books written without a co-author are significantly better.

[edit] Oh, and not everybody likes dance or other artistic, non-literal interpretation of plot. That's fine, there's no reason to get elitist about it.
 
Originally posted by: biggestmuff
Read the book. It's perfectly clear what's going on.

Cliffs: Thousands of years ago, an alien race installs a monolith (a large clear one in the book) on earth to spark intelligence in the crude animals living on the human-less planet. The aliens secretly install another monolith on the moon, but this isn't divulged until later in the book and movie. Through generations of evolution, the human race is create. The human race proceeds to develop new technologies, finally inventing space travel and eventually finding the monolith 'alarm system' planted on the moon by the alien race. The humans figure out that the monolith on the moon transmits a signal to Saturn (in the book and Jupiter in the movie). A space mission is created to send a crew to Saturn to investigate. The ships AI freaks out and kills everyone except for one astronaut. This one astronaut, piloting a small vessel, finds where the moon's alarm system signal went...a third monolith floating in space. As he approaches this monolith, a worm hole opens and transports him past alien civilizations to a alien world. However, much like the aliens in Contact, they think the human astronaut would freak out if he saw them and their world, so they create a human 'place' for him to live. The astronaut grows old, dies and then, much like the apes evolved into humans, the astronaut evolves into the next generation of being...pure energy. However, in the movie, this transformation is symbolized by seeing a baby floating in space.

The second and third books are good, but stray from the first one slightly. In the last book we learn that the monolith on the moon was a sort of test for the humans. However, the humans uncovered it too late in their progress of development. The alien race was disappointed by the humans not evolving and developing technology fast enough, so they planned on wiping out the planet. Mankind learns of this, bands together and kills the aliens with a computer virus (I think...it's been a while) with the help from the astronaut/pure energy being from 2001.

I think that's as short and thorough as you can get. 🙂
Click to expand...
Thank you. 🙂



Originally posted by: Pegun
Such a horridly bad movie....
Click to expand...
Agreed. It made Napoleon Dynamite look like the lobby shooting spree in The Matrix.
It was dull as hell, and didn't make a damn bit of sense to me.
Never read the book though, so that probably has a lot to do with it.


 
Originally posted by: dennilfloss
In 1968, the word from those seeing the movie in a theater was trippy. 😀
Click to expand...

This. In 1968 there had pretty much not been anything much like it. Also Sprach Zarathustra on theater speakers, with a very distinct odor right in the damn theater, those were the days, bitches.
 
Originally posted by: biggestmuff
2001 isn't pretentious. The only way to have told the story better or more thoroughly would have been to have a narrator or, like most dumbed down films today, include an extra character that represents the audience.
Click to expand...

Originally posted by: AreaCode707
Oh, and not everybody likes dance or other artistic, non-literal interpretation of plot. That's fine, there's no reason to get elitist about it.
Click to expand...

Two excellent and interrelated points. Sometime the whiny, juvenile, serve-it-to-me on a platter ignorance of OT gets under my skin.

I still think I saw it the right way, on the big screen of a theater with then state-of-the-art sound pounding out Strauss, marijuana smoke wafting all over that unsuspecting suburban theater as we freaks dominated the first showing, letting the freak flag fly.

The very next night, cops raided that same theater while the movie was in progress.

"Saw your wife at the dog show, whiteman." 😛

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top