talkmagic.co.uk

I just watched 2001: A Space Odyssey and I'm thoroughly confused. Can someone explain the last 20 or 30 minutes to me.

What was up with the kid in the ball?

Thanks?

Ian the Mental-Ian wrote:I just watched 2001: A Space Odyssey and I'm thoroughly confused. Can someone explain the last 20 or 30 minutes to me.

What was up with the kid in the ball?

Thanks?

Is it the next stage of human evolution, the starchild? Whatever it means, it's a Kubrick and just watching his cinematography pleases me greatly. As far as I'm aware, he only used three shot types: beautifully framed static shots where a tied off camera frames the action, long tracking shots, and hand-held work (including Steadycam in "The Shining").

I cant abbide 2001. And ive got to say i will be hard pushed to name any Kubrick film that i do like.

Strangelove, i watch because its filmed just arround the corner from me, ( the us airbase , is in fact a road on the slough trading estate ) and I like Ai, ( though not entirly a Kubrick movie). Buts that's it.

C'mon Dale.... you must like Spartacus??? I mean everybody likes Spartacus right?!?

(I once delivered a 2 hour lecture based around the jump cut in 2001 that goes from the monkey throwing the bone in the air to the spacecraft descending back down...... best edit in a movie ever... fact!! But I should probably get out more..)

Nope. Hate Sparticus.


That jump cut was good then, but i doubt very much it would cut the mustard these days. the two images are out of sync.
In fact if you look at it, the effects work was state of the art then, and thats the reason people of a cirtain age go dewy eyed over it.

that, and H.A.L.

Truly that voice is the child catcher of sience fiction.

( by the way my favorite jump cut.. close encounters of the 3rd kind. both audio and visuals exploding from the darkness.)

Nah, that cut is still the best thing since sliced bread... with extra mustard. The effects still hold up remarkably well today (next to the cgi rubbish) thanks to Douglas Trumbull using enormous 40ft models and huge exposure times.... oh and the use of front projection in the Dawn of Man scenes is so good most folk don't even know it's there.

But it would be a grey, dull world indeed if we all liked the same things

I'm retreating into my cave now, clutching my Kubrick boxset..... (although my favourite film is 'It's a Wonderful Life'.... go figure..)

If you read Arthur C Clarke's story, 'The Sentinel' which was used as the basis of 2001 you'll probably get a better idea of what was supposed to be behind it all.

Best part of that film was HAL and his over polite way of speaking, far more chilling than a vicious or threatening voice. Sounding like a typical politician, having killed everyone in sleep stasis and tried to kill the remaining astronauts, I reckon his best lines were:

Look Dave, I can see you're really upset about this.

I know I've made some very poor decisions recently, but I can give you my complete assurance that my work will be back to normal. I've still got the greatest enthusiasm and confidence in the mission. And I want to help you.

And please don't try to tell me that HAL being one letter ahead of IBM wasn't a co-incidence!

daleshrimpton wrote:I cant abbide 2001. And ive got to say i will be hard pushed to name any Kubrick film that i do like.

Strangelove, i watch because its filmed just arround the corner from me, ( the us airbase , is in fact a road on the slough trading estate ) and I like Ai, ( though not entirly a Kubrick movie). Buts that's it.

What about The Shining? That's a properly scary film, and superbly shot.

The Shining had quite amazing cinematography. It was revolutionary for it's time and has quite a good effect in today's time.

Smashing, scary film. Shot in England ('cos Kubrick is scared of flying) with some brilliant sets and model work...

And as Replicant probably knows, the main title helicopter shots of the mountains and windy roads ended up being used for the ending of Bladerunner...

I didn't see that "amazing" cut in 2001: Space Odyssey, it looked rather plain and I don't see where your coming from. (Unless of course it was a joke. )§

When the monkey tosses the bone in the air it's a symbol of man beginning to develop the tools and technology which will then take mankind eventually to space and "bang" - there's a spaceship filling the screen!!

So rather than have some titles saying "1 million years later...", the narrative is moved logically along by simply match cutting 2 images together rather than through 5 mins of unecessary exposition.

like mel brooks' jews in space jump cut?

haha, yup!! If you're gonna steal... steal from the best.. (although his Spaceballs missed the boat by about 10 years!!)

It still doesn't make it a great scene, nor does it make it a great movie. Although I do understand the movie better now. So...Ah well it's one of those movies that you either really like or really hate.