Ultimate 2001: A Space Odyssey thread

Originally posted by waltdisney

Sperm space ship.

Anyone notice the super long intro to the movie where Stanley just plays creepy music on a black screen?

He does it again after the intermission.

This represents the monolith. Our monolith. It wasnt a black screen. The movie literally served as our evolutionary tool.

yes that is nice,,! I think he was trying to show that art, cinema,, film,,, communication in general ,, sharing and uncovering, and interpreting, and discussing information is humans means of progression and evolution,.,.,.
but wow your right,,, with your analysis,,, from moving humans into one way of life,, to a completely different way,, is a evolution in multiple senses,,it is a brand new path and adventure for the human race,,, and the sci fi from the 30's and until recent,, has been a good way of easing humans into excepting their endless imaginative potential,, for technology,, culture, and way of life.,,.

reply to post by ImaFungi


Stanley only wanted to make one movie. 2010 was never in the plans. It was a sequel to keep viewers entertained, if not also distracted from the real meaning of 2001.

I mean look at what Stanley was trying to show us. 4 million years ago, Dawn of Man. Just a bunch of stupid monkeys. Then a smooth stone crafted by lasers or something not of this world, is placed amongst them???

Obviously pointing to the fact that a highly sophisticated group of people (aliens?) were alive and running 4 million year ago. Controlling Earth. This would disprove all religions, history, science, everything.

And Stanley did this all in one scene....

I still get chills every time when I see this movie when a proto-human throws the first weapon into the air (an animal bone) and the film cuts seamlessly, 3 million years later, to an orbiting nuclear weapons platform.

I think it relates to the fact that bowmen went where no man has gone before,, physical and mentally,, and the only way to show or tell others is mentally or physically.,.,., the experience he recieves and transmits to others alwahys takes place in the human mind,,,, so great thinkers of history who have put things together intellectually have always gone places no other man has gone before.,,.,. and how do they express this,, but throw images,, language,, allegory,,, this is what the film is,,,, Stanley expressing his expression on the entire expression of human history, and the universe,, in his form of allegory,,

Originally posted by ImaFungi

yes that is nice,,! I think he was trying to show that art, cinema,, film,,, communication in general ,, sharing and uncovering, and interpreting, and discussing information is humans means of progression and evolution,.,.,.
but wow your right,,, with your analysis,,, from moving humans into one way of life,, to a completely different way,, is a evolution in multiple senses,,it is a brand new path and adventure for the human race,,, and the sci fi from the 30's and until recent,, has been a good way of easing humans into excepting their endless imaginative potential,, for technology,, culture, and way of life.,,.

YES! Exactly. Imagine throwing Abraham Lincoln in an Apple Store. He wouldn't know what to do. However, if you condition Abe's mind over 40-50 + years with movie and tv shows, he might actually shop around the store. Bring home an iPad even.

2001 was more than a movie. All clues point to a hidden agenda.

Originally posted by waltdisney
reply to post by ImaFungi

 

Stanley only wanted to make one movie. 2010 was never in the plans. It was a sequel to keep viewers entertained, if not also distracted from the real meaning of 2001.

I mean look at what Stanley was trying to show us. 4 million years ago, Dawn of Man. Just a bunch of stupid monkeys. Then a smooth stone crafted by lasers or something not of this world, is placed amongst them???

Obviously pointing to the fact that a highly sophisticated group of people (aliens?) were alive and running 4 million year ago. Controlling Earth. This would disprove all religions, history, science, everything.

And Stanley did this all in one scene....

totally,,, well if relgious people dis believe in evolution,,, the scene would crash with their beliefs anyway,, by showing an earth with only monkies and no man,,, and then showing that man came from monkies,,

i dont like the alien explanation,,, because where did they come from? if you allow for aliens to naturally arise in the universe,,, then why cant man? ,.,.

but say the aliens naturally arose in the universe,,, and then created man,,, via monolithic suggestion,,,, thats still cool and believable,,, but I kind of felt like the monolith had more godly universal purposes..,,.,. what does it mean when bowman says,..,.,,. my god its full of stars,..,.. the monolith is huge and vast,,.,. what could it actually be?

Originally posted by waltdisney

Originally posted by ImaFungi

yes that is nice,,! I think he was trying to show that art, cinema,, film,,, communication in general ,, sharing and uncovering, and interpreting, and discussing information is humans means of progression and evolution,.,.,.
but wow your right,,, with your analysis,,, from moving humans into one way of life,, to a completely different way,, is a evolution in multiple senses,,it is a brand new path and adventure for the human race,,, and the sci fi from the 30's and until recent,, has been a good way of easing humans into excepting their endless imaginative potential,, for technology,, culture, and way of life.,,.

YES! Exactly. Imagine throwing Abraham Lincoln in an Apple Store. He wouldn't know what to do. However, if you condition Abe's mind over 40-50 + years with movie and tv shows, he might actually shop around the store. Bring home an iPad even.

2001 was more than a movie. All clues point to a hidden agenda.

but perhaps this started much earlier.,,.,.., with religion in general.,,..,., mystical and magical myths from the thousands BC,,, the human imagination giving hope for the future,.,. instilling honor and respect, purpose and meaning,, hope.,,.,.

Originally posted by waltdisney


2001 was more than a movie. All clues point to a hidden agenda.

I dont think there was a hidden agenda,,, i think stanely kubrick and arthur clarke did exactly what they wanted to as artists.,,..,.,.

stanley kubrick hated the elite,,, look at dr. strangelove and how he portryed their foolishness.,,.., look at eyes wide shut where he tried to depict the seedy ways of the elite.,,.., there was no hidden agenda,,, humans if they can,, will progress technologically,.,.,.,. one year we will not have the telegraph next year we will,.,.., same with the car.,,.,. the spear,,,.,. sewege,,.,. hot water,..,., guns,..,, cell phones.,., internet.,., 3 d printers,.,., and personal warp speed space ships

you can live like a monkey for millenia if you want.,,.,,. but something within man wanted to rise above that,.,. and there is no limit to how high he can then rise.,.,,. what he can do.,,. why he will do it.,.,.,

reply to post by ImaFungi


I dont like the Alien idea either lol. But someone is controlling everything from a view point. Like God. But it isnt the God we know. This could also be part of the conditioning. The whole film is anti-christ in a way.

However, i cant get over the fact that Bowman kills Hal 9000, then appears in a room with no technology. This has to symbolize humans evolving. Imagine our world without technology...it doesnt even seem plausible.
Yet it may be our next step. Either that or a world completely dominated by computers and robots. Which we will have to overcome.

The music is associated in the film with the first entry of man's consciousness into the universe - -and with the eventual passage of that consciousness onto a new level, symbolized by the Star Child at the end of the film. -Roger Ebert

Reviewers McClay and Roger Ebert have noted that the monolith is the main element of mystery in the film, Ebert writing of "The shock of the monolith's straight edges and square corners among the weathered rocks".

reply to post by ImaFungi


I think you'll like "Cloud Atlas" when it comes out.

Originally posted by ImaFungi

stanley kubrick hated the elite,,,

Ive seen all of his films & i think Stanley was an elite. Anyone allowed rights to create movies that millions of humans will then watch and soak up subconsciously, is an elite or has elite ties. Film is power. Which is why children are starving in some countries, while Hollywood is cooking up $100 million budget films for us.

reply to post by waltdisney

Great thread always thanks for re introducing.


Dave represents humanity in time and space from 2001 and on. He realizes that what we have created up until then is destructive and cannot be trusted. He doesn’t talk much about it but intuitively knows that there is a secret agenda, whether it is accidental or fully planned matters to him not. He represents all of the transformation humanity is going through, In seeing through the illusion of what man has created for himself. As Jupiter transforms (currently happening)so does he, those transformations are at times strange,lonely and mind blowing. Hal, rather than representing machines, represents humans that are cold,intelligent that just follow orders and ingnore the soul. That is what he unplugs in humanity, those who are like that computer also get unplugged.
Once he is reborn, he realizes the sky is the limit and that the real power of being true to yourself is awesome. In 2010 he is in a higher dimension and from their continues his work.
best wishes to us all.

It's easy to overplay the symbolism of the movie. In some sense it was overly dramatic. For example, the opening scene is of semi-arrid desert with a rising sun and the bottom of the screen proclaims, "The Dawn of Man." A friend of mine just laughed out loud when he saw that. "Like we couldn't figure it out!" he prociaimed. We were college students when the movie came out.

And Moonwatcher was an ape, not a monkey. Planet of the Apes had come out about the same time (68 vs 69)and won a bunch of contests for best costuming. One of Kubrick's assistants said they didn't win because the judges didn't realize they weren't real apes. I prefer to think the Alien Guys (tm) just gave Moonwatcher and his buddies a small nudge. They didn't "invent" humanity; they just gave the existing apes an idea to nudge them forward. You can see it in the next scene after the monolith where Moonwatcher is playing with the bones. They are starving amidst plenty, yet have to resort to becoming meat eaters to move themselves forward. Interesting issues there.

I also liked it when Moonwatcher threw up the bone that had just been used to commit the first murder and it turned into a space station, but there's no hint it was a nuclear weapons platform. It was a joint cooperative space station for all nationalities, as was amply portrayed by the props. That scene was there to reassure us that the future came out of the past, like the Bell System, which did not. But the Hilton is there, which did.

There's also no hidden agenda. The story comes from Clarke's short story called "The Sentinel" which he had published years before the movie. Anyone who had read The Sentinel new immediately that's the origin of the story. It covered finding the monolith on the Moon, and that was about it. Clarke recounted that issue many times after the movie became famous.

reply to post by waltdisney


"However, i cant get over the fact that Bowman kills Hal 9000, then appears in a room with no technology. This has to symbolize humans evolving. Imagine our world without technology...it doesnt even seem plausible.
Yet it may be our next step. Either that or a world completely dominated by computers and robots. Which we will have to overcome."


i dont know,,, i think the room represents imagination,, or a mystical,, advanced,, realm,.,.

i dont think things in that room are explained rationally,.,, his food just appears,,, he is always there and ages? he doesnt have to leave to live,.,.,. he is alone.,.,,. he doesnt speak outloud.,,.,.,. like in dreams or imagination we dont need technical physical logical outcomes to get from point to point,, in a dream,, or imagination,, when in thought we can leave out certain physical laws we are bound by,,, there can be a lit room with no outlets,.,. i think that room represents man alone in his mind,,,. and perhaps that room is inside the gestating baby fetus,,, some type of limbo or purgatory.,,. until he sufficiently grows and understands enough to move on,, to be born,,, or to evolve,.,.,. thats my take anyway,.,,, its not that the room is forshadowing a loss of technology,,, its that the room is his mind,,,, and he is dead,,, its a depiction of the after life.,.,,. the whole room scene can be taking place in 1 of our earth seconds,, or a hundread of our earths years,,,,

Originally posted by Junkheap
reply to post by ImaFungi

 

I think you'll like "Cloud Atlas" when it comes out.

for sure i will.,.,,. was kind of bummed when i saw it,,, and ( jealously) hate them for making the matrix,,.,. cloud atlas seems to be another unconventional,, groundbreaking,, masterpiece/ epic.,.,..,

Im trying to write a sci fi screen play myself,.,.,. and find it almost impossible to not run into themes and techniques already used by the greats,.,.,. the matrix is perfect,.,.,. bladerunner and philip k dicks work in general is awesome,.., issac asimov,,, 2001: space odyssey is what made me see that movies could be more the movies.,.,

Originally posted by waltdisney

Originally posted by ImaFungi

stanley kubrick hated the elite,,,

Ive seen all of his films & i think Stanley was an elite. Anyone allowed rights to create movies that millions of humans will then watch and soak up subconsciously, is an elite or has elite ties. Film is power. Which is why children are starving in some countries, while Hollywood is cooking up $100 million budget films for us.

I agree to an extent.,,.,.,. hollywood cooks up movies with 100 million dollar budgets because free market economy exists.,.,,. supply and demand,.,. industries.,,.,. and entertainment in the life of the modern human is seen as a valuable commodity,,

reply to post by schuyler


"They are starving amidst plenty, yet have to resort to becoming meat eaters to move themselves forward. Interesting issues there. "


this is interesting,,, i have a pet theory ,,,, that the fruit of life,..,. fruit of knowledge of good and evil in the garden of eden story,, is meat,..,,,

and perhaps it was snakes which taught monkeys that they can devour mammalian flesh..,,, the meat gave them strength and power and aided in their evolution,,, in my theory i also thought there may be a link to cain and abel,.,.,.., cain being a plant eater ( sacrificer) abel being a meat eater..,,. the meat making abel more able,, thus showing that god favored abel and the meat sacrifice,, making cain jealous and killing his brother over his physical betterness,.,.,,. i know there are parts of this idea conflicting,,, like god not wanting them to eat the fruit of knowedge of good and evil in the beginning,, etc.. but yea,, just something ive tried thinking about,,, when thinking about how disgusting it is ,, especially if there is a god,,, for making us have to eat other creatures for the continuation of our own self,.,.,.

I like 2001 its a masterpiece for sure. people who say its boring annoy me, cause they may as well be saying todays world of Ipads mobile phones, computers is boring which this movie is like a snap shot of today taken in the 1968. Still there is things whihc havent been surpassed in the movie. We still see no sign of Nasa making the Juptiers explorer ship anytime too soon.

All the future technology in the film was down to Arthur C Clarke. All Kubrick did was to illustrate Clarke's ideas. Arthur C Clarke was a man who had a fantastic vision of what the future may hold for man kind. He was talking about satellites being put in space back in the 1940's.

www.guardian.co.uk...

reply to post by AthlonSavage
don't forget we don't see everything! and we are not told everything.None the less I feel its more about the meaning of giant Jupiter and how that relates to mankind.