2001: A Space Odyssey--Let's take another look

As I try to pick the rogue popcorn hulls from my molars with the tip of my tongue and type this, I can’t get the sound of Strauss’ “The Blue Danube” out of my head. It was humming relentlessly through my skull on the entire drive home from the movie theaters as well.



I just went to see my all time favorite movie that ever was—2001: A Space Odyssey. The biggest TV in my home is only 13 inches by 19” wide. I got to see 2001 on the VERY big screen for the first and probably only (I hope not!) time of my life. I have seen this movie at least a dozen times on small television sets and with various people and at different stages of my life. I was absolutely blown away today!



First of all, this movie came from a time when home video wasn’t a factor in film making. Movies like these were made only with the big screen in mind—and it shows! This was a stunning visual experience. Never has space looked so bold and intimidating, never has HAL looked more sinister, and never has the monolith achieved its full glory outside of the cinema. Kubrick’s images were clearly meant to be seen here in the theater and the home version now seems lackluster in comparison.



This is not exactly a review of the movie—this is a reminiscence and a celebration. The only people who post to this thread probably either really love this movie or really hate this movie. But, what is there really to hate about this movie?

It is quite a rare and unique gem in a catalog of Hollywood regurgitation. So few films achieve what this did—and the ones that attempt to rival it fall short. 2001 is an aesthetic adventure for the eyes as well as the spirit!



Any time I have tried to introduce this film to friends of mine, it has always been met with suspicion and animosity. Two people have asked me to stop the movie at the “Dawn of Man” sequence because they don’t believe in biological evolution—even at my insistence that this film is about “spiritual evolution” above all else.



Others have gotten bored at the intermissin point and had no desire to continue the film.

Some have even refused outright to watch the movie because it was deemed a relic of 1968 and not worthy of viewership now that the year 2001 is a distant memory.

I have heard this movie called “stupid,” “pointless,” and “boring.” I have heard people complain that nothing happens, that there is no plot, no character development, no meaningful dialogue, and that the special effects are highly forgettable. Almost all of that is true! (The special effects still look quite sleek if you ask me, and even more gorgeous on the big screen.)

Those that have made it past the intermission with me invariably lose interest at the “Beyond the Infinite” sequence.



The theater it was screened on today held 367 patrons, and wouldn’t you know it?—there were 358 empty seats by my count. The movie had 2 showings today only and very little advertisement about the event. There was a single box office poster advertising classic films near the exit—an afterthought that I am thankful for barely noticing after walking away from The Hobbit.

The intermission appeared to confuse a young couple when the lights went up—and after the film finished, I overheard some muttering about “not understanding the ending.”

The genius and fun of this movie is that it’s an interactive experience first and foremost! and not a plot-driven, character-driven saga.

This is a movie that forces the viewer to participate and to think. The viewer is presented with series of images and NO answers. It is up to the viewer to pose the questions and form an answer based on the images and little more. Ultimately, the experience finds fulfillment only after subjective interpretation is applied.



I find that the people who are unwilling to participate in this experience are the ones who “don’t understand it” and subsequently loathe the film. They expect to be spoon fed every little bit of information and get incensed when I tell them, “Hey, figure it out yourself. That’s what it’s for.”

The enjoyment of this movie is not derived from some grandiose message or revelation—unless of course you are willing to interpret the movie yourself. So many seem unwilling to do this! Instead, they look to me to explain the monolith, to explain the allegory of HAL, to explain the Infinite sequence of colors and spooky sounds, to explain the final bedroom scene, and finally, to explain the emergence of the Starchild.



This is a movie where you get out of it only what you put into it at the very least—or more if you’re imaginative. Kubrick is inviting us to think, to explore, and to meditate on the film. The Beyond Infinite sequence achieves this! I find myself lost in deep introspection during this scene and always discover something new within myself. If you are not doing this as you watch the movie, you have failed to participate in this interactive experience. And because this movie relies so heavily on subjective interpretation, there is bound to be a new experience with each new viewing...much like how a book is understood in a new light after reading it 10 years later. This movie just never stops giving as long as you are still growing.

The movie is filled with stunning images such as the star fields, the planetary penumbras,and an abundance of lights and glowing gadgets. Perhaps these images only make their most potent impression when viewed on the big screen. However, it has managed to capture my heart on small TVs as well.



I am not a moviegoer by any means. I actually despise the countless remakes, reboots, and reimaginations of classic stories. My philosophy is that if a movie is good enough to be remade, then it doesn’t need to be remade. You dig? I am unimpressed with much of the drivel that I pay $9.50 to go see. 2001 has almost ruined movies for me entirely. There are few films that have inspired me and moved me in this way. And yet,it never bores me.

No other film really forces me to immerse myself in the imagery. No other film has invited my mind to wander and dig deep while listening to breathing through a space helmet. No other film has blown away my sense of logic as Dave Bowman literally witnesses his own transformation into an old man from alternating perspectives.

Seeing the big-screened version of the Starchild’s cherubic eyes gazing at me seconds before the screen went black nearly made me swell with joyful tears—but you know, I’m too macho for that I guess.



I saw this film for the first time around 2007-2008 and have been searching for a moving cinematic experience like this. I have failed—or perhaps, the movie industry has failed me. My standards and expectations have just been raised after seeing this on the big screen. They just don’t make films like this anymore—for better or for worse, 2001: A Space Odyssey is very special if only for its unprecedented style and nothing else. If you think there are better movies out there..please feel free to recommend them and tell me why it moves you the way 2001 moves me.

I could end this nostalgia rush with some reviews or a link to its imdb.com page, but instead—I want to invite you to share your feelings and experiences with this movie. Even if you don’t like it, tell me why!

In case you’re wondering—my other favorite movies include: Star Trek The Motion Picture (1979), Metropolis (1927), Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977), The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly (1966), The Truman Show (1998), and *Insert any Stanley Kubrick Movie*…and yes, I do like Shawshank haha.

Please share yours! and of course, tell me why..

Well written thread. I personally love 2001 and a lot of movies from that era. Its a shame people won't give it a chance because its old or hard to follow because it makes you think a bit..

reply to post by NarcolepticBuddha


Have you seen any of "The Cube" movies? They are pretty good. There's a lot of it that's left to subjective interpretation and they also touch on a 5th dimension in the sequel. It's a lower budget movie. But if you like movies that make you think and leave you filled with more mystery than when you started, you'd like these too.. You seen'em?

Originally posted by Theprimevoyager
Well written thread. I personally love 2001 and a lot of movies from that era. Its a shame people won't give it a chance because its old or hard to follow because it makes you think a bit..

I had one person tell me that nobody watches movies to think, but to escape having to think about anything ...although, it's really hard to argue with that one

reply to post by Theprimevoyager


I would be bold as to say that almost all big ticket movies are void of any real artistic expression. It's all cookie cutter BS to me... For the most part anyway. rarely do I find a good movie..

Always number one on my list,thank you for your wonderful thread.

It's kind of funny that those that think that and other old sci-fi movies are boring.
Where do you think the idea for a cell phone came from?

Originally posted by kdog1982
Always number one on my list,thank you for your wonderful thread.

It's kind of funny that those that think that and other old sci-fi movies are boring.
Where do you think the idea for a cell phone came from?

Yes, sci-fi is an interesting genre..they have put out some of the best and some of the worst (think syfy made-for-tv flops)

You know, I notice something new every time I watch 2001...I pick out some little detail and magnify it. I noticed that Dave Bowman and Frank Poole were watching their broadcast interview on iPads while sitting at the same table not even facing each other. Look familiar?

So many technological predictions from this film have been realized: microwaves, video phones, tablet computing, AI (and it beating a man at chess), etc.


Also, "Thus Spake Zarathustra" (the "song" at the intro and ending) shares a name with a short story by Nietzche about monotheism. Pretty brilliant choice if you ask me


And the film is shot in same aspect ratio as the monolith...in essence the film IS the monolith that is enlightening the audience.


Kubrick also asked Pink Floyd to score the film. They declined, but their song "Echoes" is the same length as the final chapter, "Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite" and seems to sync up quite well


Sorry for all the "fun facts" but this is my all-time favorite film and I can't talk about it enough haha

reply to post by NarcolepticBuddha


Ahhh, yes. Near the end of high school and into college I was a projectionist at the local theatre. I "ran" this movie a minimum of 14-15 times. It made a definate impression on me. From Hal's pleading with Dave as Dave deactivated him...to the Monolith's appearance...the Star Child...and all the rest...I've not seen another like this film. Thanks for evoking the memories! Mike

Here's "Echoes" with "Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite"

reply to post by Hawking


I have seen this video before but had no clue Floyd turned down the project or was even asked to get involved. Echoes is definitely their magnum opus!

Hmm, I wonder why they turned it down though. They did the soundtrack for More (1969) and for La Vallee (aka Obscured by Clouds in 1972), did they not?

I tell ya, Pink Floyd just confuses me over some of the stuff they turned down and some of the stuff they accepted Ha.

Thanks for posting the video

On a similar note, I remember somebody telling me about John Lennon stating that a temple should be built to screen 2001 24/7 Haha. I can't verify that quote and don't remember seeing that in 2 of his biographies I've read, but it sounds like something he'd shoot for

Originally posted by Hawking
Sorry for all the "fun facts" but this is my all-time favorite film and I can't talk about it enough haha

Don't apologize! Posts like yours are exactly why I made this thread. Shame on me for not watching any of the special features, commentaries, or behind-the-scenes stuff on my dvd copy (something I plan to rectify very soon.)

I've also been trying to find where I misplaced my copy of the Arthur C. Clarke novel. I started reading it on a plane one time and never saw it again. I'm pretty sure I have it stuffed away somewhere though. Just gotta find it!

Many ,many moons ago that I had read Arthur C Clarks novels.
en.wikipedia.org...

What always stands out,to me that is,is the adaptation for the sequel 2010.
Europa ,the moon orbiting Jupiter and the beginning of a new life form.

Oh, man, 2001 is on my short list of movies I need to see on the big screen. You're so lucky. It's such a beautiful looking movie.

I was, however, able to see one of my favorite movies, and yours, The Good, The Bad and the Ugly at a drive-in and that was amazing.

Originally posted by SaulGoodman
Oh, man, 2001 is on my short list of movies I need to see on the big screen. You're so lucky. It's such a beautiful looking movie.

I was, however, able to see one of my favorite movies, and yours, The Good, The Bad and the Ugly at a drive-in and that was amazing.

My old man was a big Clint Eastwood fan,heck we even had the sound tracks to most of those westerns on,wait for it,a big vinyl disc that spun around .Thats right,the ol' lp.



I heard Clint was Chuck Norris' daddy.

reply to post by SaulGoodman


Oohhh I haven't been to the drive-in in a very, very long time. I wonder if the local drive-in is still in operation...it seems pretty derelict these days.

I would recommend keeping tabs on your local cinema. The one I went to today hardly advertised it, but I will definitely be checking back to see what other classic movies they screen.

As you could probably tell, I am of the younger generation and didn't grow up during the release of some of the movies on my list. Indeed, I felt very privileged and excited getting the chance to see it the way it was meant to be seen. It was very special for me to see this on the big screen at least once Now if I can just convince them to show Close Encounters!

reply to post by NarcolepticBuddha


Yeah, if you pay attention you'll find some good stuff in theaters. This last year I saw Reservoir Dogs and Lawrence of Arabia. Also, if you live near a college town, keep tabs on what their local theaters are showing. The one near me was showing Jaws during the summer. I didn't go, but that would've been awesome to see.

Originally posted by kdog1982
Many ,many moons ago that I had read Arthur C Clarks novels.
en.wikipedia.org...

What always stands out,to me that is,is the adaptation for the sequel 2010.
Europa ,the moon orbiting Jupiter and the beginning of a new life form.

Interesting, I had no idea there was a whole series of books. I knew about the sequel 2010 and saw bits and pieces of it. Even though I'm a big Bob Balaban fan, I just didn't get hooked into that movie the way I did with Kubrick's interpretation.

Even though all of Kubrick's films are based off of novels, I have yet to read a single one besides The Shining I will diligently seek out my copy of Clarke's 2001 though.

reply to post by NarcolepticBuddha

I also found 2001 to be a deeply thought provoking movie,and the special effects still stand the test of time.However,my all time fravourite movie for the big screen is Bladerunner,based on Phillip K Dick's "Do androids dream of electric sheep",I find Dick's writing to be the most beautiful experience that I have had(of the printed word anyway!) and to me bladerunner perfectly captured the essence of Dick's short story completely.