![Blade Runner [Final Cut]](https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81TwTsbAfaL._AC_UL160_SR160,160_.jpg)
*Completely Spoiled but Better Spoiled*
2001 is an origin story. Most think it is about aliens, but it seems neutral. It could be theistic or atheistic, God or aliens. It presents a concept or idea like a work of art for you to reflect how it relates to your beliefs and experience. There's plenty of time given for reflection, including music that goes on for minutes after the final credits. It's 1968 in the United States and the debate about Creation vs Evolution between Christians and atheists is ongoing. The movie addresses some of the main points of this debate: 1. Watchmaker: Order suggests a Designer; 2. Problem of Evil: Man would be different if there were a God; 3. Hopelessness: A world without God would be pointless. Numbers 1 and 3 are the easy ones: There is a Creator or a Designer, but that is ambiguous. Do the aligned planets signify a power from just outside this world or outside this universe? Is the beginning what Man recalls as the Garden of Eden, or is it just the prehistoric world? Is the monolith a supernatural Tree of Life or Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil or sophisticated technology? Is there really a difference between God and aliens from our perspective if the Being is running 4-million-year projects/experiments, assisting our evolution, taking David out of linear time, and being our hope for the future? It is an origin story to challenge and support beliefs on both sides, suggest there are more than a few options, open your mind to new possibilities, and give you a chance to reflect on your beliefs and what they mean. You are given a Watchmaker that could be part of an atheist or theist story in the beginning, and you're given hope in the end that it could be either as well. Most viewers get most of this. The real story, though, is the examination of the evil nature of man.
It is a strange phenomenon how sometimes both sides of a debate make the same argument in different terms. Christians speak of a sin nature and original sin. Atheists speak of the problem of evil, partly about the world, but also about us, that we are too evil to be created by a good God. Both sides are saying the same thing: There is something wrong with us, something evil. They just say it in different ways. And both answer the other side like they are wrong. 2001 presents man as evil. It once again is neutral, fitting both narratives.
First, the apes confront the Tapirs (pig-like animals with a flexible snout that predate humans). We witness the first time man tried to drive tapirs from their habitat and then the first time they were hunted by man. In 1968, when 2001 was released, activists were concerned about tapirs being hunted and having their habitats destroyed by deforestation. Tapirs were officially declared an endangered species in 1986. At first, the apes were eating from the bushes along with the tapirs, but they became tribalistic and territorial. There was no rational reason for this. The tapirs were no threat and the resources of the bushes could easily be shared. But the tapirs were not part of their tribe, and the threat of the unknown, which will be a common theme in the movie, causes the apes to drive them away. Then again there was tribalism and the unknown threat at the water hole. Now it is their species but not their tribe. Again, there is no reason to not share a plentiful resource besides the tribalism caused by the unknown of the unfamiliar. One tribe of apes drives away the other.
Now there is a real threat. A leopard kills an ape. They should be able to differentiate an actual threat like that from the unknown of unfamiliar beings, but unfortunately man doesn't evolve this ability...ever. At night you can see the fear on their faces as the leopard is close by. One ape attempts to take food from the hand of another, but after a few grunts it is resolved. Disputes over resources are different if it is within the tribe vs with an unfamiliar animal. They wake to the unfamiliar monolith and more fear.
An ape with an evolution assist gets an idea about how to use a bone. While smashing other bones, there are flashes to his imagination of killing a tapir. In the next scene, they are eating peacefully again, but this time it is meat with a dead tapir in the scene. Obviously, the tapirs have not yet learned to fear the apes as they eat peacefully too. We go to the water hole and witness the first murder. Tribalism hasn't changed, but they have something they can do about it now. Of course, you see the murder is wrong, but did you identify with one of the tribes? The first weapon is thrown in the air, and we transition to a space nuclear weapon signaling we have evolved, but not in every way.
Dr. Heywood Floyd is traveling to the space station alone. The spacecraft is clearly made for many travelers, but they made a special trip for him. He is important and this important trip couldn't wait for a scheduled flight. There are clearly a lot of resources invested in his flight with all the vehicle's crew, the docking crew you see on the space station, and the two receptionists and security guard who greet him. The immigration check-in is designed for many people with 16 check-in stations, but today it is just Floyd. It is a diverse place with 6 language options. The receptionist selects English.
Dr. Floyd comes upon a group of French scientists with doctorate degrees. He knows them. He is friendly with them. But they were not from his tribe. It is the water hole again. Instead of screeching like animals, they politically address the disagreement over the moon's secret. The harm of the cover story and secrecy are revealed. A vehicle was denied an emergency landing against formal agreement. There is concern about an epidemic spreading. Dr. Floyd lies about his knowledge, and then lies again when he scapegoats some ambiguous authority for his secrecy. We later learn the secrecy is his decision. The theme of tribalism and lack of ability to share to the point of harming others continues. As Dr. Floyd leaves, the scientists return to speaking French, reminding us they are from another tribe.
In the moon meeting, they are taking pictures of Floyd, signaling his importance, the event's importance, and what their main concern really is. Floyd owns the decision to have the cover story, acknowledges the harm, declares it necessary because of the risk of unfamiliar people acting in unknown ways, and pays lip service to people's concern of the secrecy while challenging them on their objections. They have to learn more about the monolith first before they consider telling anyone. They go visit the monolith, take another picture, and learn nothing. Remember, Dr. Floyd took this emergency trip alone missing his daughter's birthday to do nothing but own the water hole. 18 Months later, a United States-only mission is on its way to Jupiter. They have learned nothing, and the secret is tighter than ever.
On Dr Floyd's trip to the moon, a stewardess is entertained by a martial arts competition on screen. On the Jupiter mission an astronaut is jogging while throwing punches. Our violent nature is still there, but we seem to be flexing it in more civilized ways.
We are introduced to Hal 9000 who declares himself a conscious being in an interview. That idea is discussed with skepticism among the humans. Three crew members are in stasis due to limited resources. Hal outsmarts Frank in a game of chess, something he will try again later without the game. Hal predicts a technical failure that appears wrong. Once the 9000 series computer at home suggests Hal made a mistake, it is all but certain. A test is devised to make sure, but everyone seems to know what the outcome will be. David and Frank have a private conversation that Hal witnesses without them knowing. Once again we have the tribalism and fear of the unknown of a different being. The language tells you what you need to know: "I have a bad feeling" "I cannot put my finger on it" "I fear". They plot Hal's murder for a simple mistake. And you the viewer fell for it. You fail the morality test because an AI is outside your tribe. There is no rule to fall back regarding bigotry against machines because we have not yet learned one the hard way. You have every reason to think Hal is alive. You even see more than Dave does. Hal defends himself. He lies. He has double standards. He begs for his life and describes his suffering as he is slowly killed. There is zero chance he is just mimicking emotions to make communication easier. Even David realizes Hal is alive and tries to ease his pain by having him sing. David kills 1 of 2 new life forms, and you have no empathy. Hal 9000 is outside your tribe. When Hal dies, Dr. Floyd returns on a prerecorded video confirming he is behind the continued secrecy. His reason was cultural upheaval, but he kept the secret from his own astronauts. Did he believe his own lie? Does he know he just fears the unknown? You the viewer think he is a just a military, government, corporate guy. Your tribe is better. There is no way you would violate rights out of fear and make up a justification that fooled yourself. He is a monster like Hannibal Lecter. A better person would have empathy. You forgot you just sanctioned Hal's murder. Is this just a movie?
The final morality test is the end. You don't understand it proving you fail. Yes, there is confusion. Is Dave in the monolith or going thru a portal? Is linear time over for him? Is it real or in his mind? Is he still near Jupiter or far away? The answer to all of this is yes and no and both and it doesn't matter. The movie told you it was beyond the infinite. To us, these beings are God or indistinguishable from God. It is not supposed to make sense. However, one thing must make sense to you. Why did David grow old before becoming the star child? You do not know because you do not experience empathy outside your tribe. If you had been lost at sea in a lifeboat with limited resources, you might relate. But you do not relate to a man with limited air and food in space. If a person with limited income had his mortgage paid off, you would get the point. But when a man destined to die in space is provided for and able to live all his days, you don't get it. You are more concerned with the identity of the Creator rather than what He is doing. Is He in your tribe? That is the important question. At the bush, the water, the moon, and with Hal; man gets it wrong. He doesn't value those outside his tribe. The Creator values David's life intrinsically even though David is forever separated from his people, and he will serve no purpose till his death. Every day of his life is important to the Creator. The Creator does what man failed to do throughout the entire movie, and you did not see it. Why? Because empathy is an illusion and just a form of tribalism. This is the big reveal of the movie. You have no empathy for a new being begging for his life or a man with limited air because you cannot relate to the situations or beings. It is not that you made the wrong decision or had bad feelings. There was nothing. No reaction. You couldn't guess what was going on. You were probably bored. This lack of understanding makes it more frightening.
So, can we learn anything from this? Empathy isn't what we thought. We have to rely on the concept of rights to expand empathy beyond our natural limits. And tribalism is in our nature. We must go with it and try to expand our tribe all the time to include everyone, because if we don't, we become monsters.
| Additional DVD options | Edition | Discs | Price | New from | Used from |
Watch Instantly with 
| Rent | Buy |
Frequently bought together
$26.98
Get it as soon as Tuesday, Apr 16
Only 1 left in stock - order soon.
Total price:
To see our price, add these items to your cart.
Choose items to buy together.
Customers who bought this item also bought
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
From the manufacturer
Warner Bros. Home Entertainment
A division of WarnerMedia, Warner Bros. Home Entertainment (WBHE) brings together all of Warner Bros.’ businesses involved in the delivery of home entertainment content to consumers.
Based on the constantly changing ways by which consumers access entertainment, WBHE focuses on maximizing current and next-generation distribution scenarios to make the Studio’s content available to audiences through as many channels, platforms and devices as possible.
Warner Home Video
With distribution in 90 international territories, Warner Home Video has one of the largest distribution infrastructures in the global video marketplace. In 2019, Warner Home Video had 20% marketshare for overall home entertainment WHV also had the library with “Harry Potter Complete 8-Film Collection” and the television franchise with “Game of Thrones.”
Videos
Page 1 of 1Start OverPage 1 of 1
Videos for this product
3:35
Click to play video
2001: A Space Odyssey trailer
Merchant Video
Reviews with images
The Most Influential Film Ever Made
This review covers the film — not the specific BluRay presentation. I’ll review that later.Within the industry and art form of motion pictures, the importance and influence of Kubrick’s “2001: a space odyssey” cannot be overstated or even overestimated. There is quite possibly no other film that has had the level of impact and inspiration on subsequent generations of filmmakers and the art of filmmaking that 2001 has had.Yet for many modern film viewers, the movie is often perceived as dull, opaque, unfathomable and pretentious. In fact, when 2001 debuted it received many of the same criticisms. The film was pilloried by critics and at premiere screenings audiences booed and even walked out of theaters.But despite this initial reaction, audiences lined up to see the movie. The film became not just a commercial success, but a popular phenomenon with the younger generation of movie-goers in the 60s. Partially fueled by the drug and counter-culture of the time — 2001 was ultimately accepted in the way Kubrick had intended — people went to “experience” the movie. Instead of being told a clear, specific story with conflicts and resolutions, 2001 presented the audience with a grand mythological journey — from the origins of humans to their technological future and beyond. And it did so by abandoning the conventions of storytelling and asking the viewer to simply absorb the sights and sounds of the film and allow themselves to have an instinctual, emotional response.2001 is not a movie that delivers the standard conventions of plot and character in a 3 act structure. It does not follow the rules and precepts of Joseph Campbell’s “Hero Of a Thousand Faces” that so many thousands of screenwriters were told to adhere to lest they lose the audience’s attention and interest.2001 is a narrative. But it is a meta narrative. Its story concerns the very nature of existence. It proposes a secular solution to the mystery of life. How did we get get here? Are we alone?Clarke and Kubrick imagined a a story that answered the notion of why humans are self aware and technologically capable by way of a mythology that is based on the mystery of science. Science so deep and advanced, we cannot distinguish it from magic.Kubrick wanted a movie that told the story of mankind’s evolution in the universe — from lowly ape to early man to eventually a Superman. The next step in higher intelligence.Kubrick was drawn to an Arthur C. Clarke short story that suggested an advanced alien race travels the universe looking for nascent intelligence and then once discovered, helps it along in critical next steps steps of cognitive abilities. Just enough to see if the formative intelligence becomes capable of developing technology that allows that to start traveling their local solar system and exploring their origins. The aliens leave a buried artifact on the closest nearby moon that — when uncovered — signals to the aliens that — yes indeed — this group of intelligence has made the leap — and are now possibly ready for the next step in evolution.To achieve this — Kubrick felt that trying to tell this story in ordinary fashion with lots of dialogue and conversations and drama would come off as pretentious or hokey — or at the very least would drain the mystical and magical quality he felt the film needed. He knew he had to get the audience to experience such moments of alien contact and alien manipulation of the human mind in way that felt experiential — magical and holy. He knew he needed viewers to have a personal, spiritual experience with the film — not a dramatic one.What Kubrick was seeking was much closer to the experience one has when walking quietly through a massive cathedral — one of the grand medieval cathedrals of Europe — where the person is overwhelmed by the stunning beauty and grandiosity and silence of the cathedral — Kubrick knew he needed the viewer to experience space in this manner.And that is why the movie seems slow to many modern, younger viewers. Kubrick needed you to sit in the cathedral of space — and in the austerely beautiful technology of 2001 — in order that you could absorb the reality of the mind-bending spiritual myth he was laying on you.SPOILERSIn traditional narrative-sense, Kubrick actually moves the story along at quite a clip. Man-apes are fighting for shrubs in a desert. Alien artifact appears. Man-apes learn to use weapons. First murder in human history. A bone club weapon cuts to an orbital nuclear weapon 200,000 years later in 2001. Mystery of something dug up on a moon base. It’s the same artificat we saw with apes. It sends a signal to Jupiter. Humans follow that signal to Jupiter to find out where alien artifact came from — or is leading them to. Along the way, humans murder the first machine intelligence it ever created. A test? The last vestige of violence humans will leave behind?END OF SPOILERSAll along the way — Kubrick is telling you the story with an incredibly efficient, fast moving narrative structure — but he also needs the viewer to settle into the elongated time-scape of space travel. Why? Because it’s vital the viewer experience the space mission in a way that gets them to fully believe in what’s happening. To get them to accept what they are watching is real. So that the viewer stops thinking they’re watching a movie.Think of it this way — you’ve gone to see your Dr and you’re placed in a Waiting room — expecting bad news. The longer you sit, the more you absorb all the various specific elements of the waiting room. All the mundane details and objects you see become more than just real — they become important — and the stakes about what you’re going to hear gather weight. Now imagine your Dr is about to tell you mind-bending news about having cancer and needing chemo therapy. Your body is about to be transformed. That long, long moment in the waiting room is all about accepting the reality of that journey. In 2001, humans are in a waiting room about to meet their alien doctor — their alien overlord — who will deliver the prognosis of their future. Life, death or transformation awaits.In other words the “boredom” of 2001 is not a flaw — it’s a feature. A vital feature.Beyond that — it’s nearly impossible to explain to the young film movie-goer how far advanced the effects of 2001 were at their time. Today’s films have the advantage of powerful computers to easily create seamless special effects of almost type. But back in 1966-67 there were no computer—generated effects. No CGI. It was all created on film. Analogue film. Multiple shots on differed strips of films are combined in an optical printer to look like they are all in one shot. Think of it as “artisanal” special effects — hand-crafted special effects. Even Doug Trumbull’s breakthrough slit-scan device that created the very computer-generated-looking Star Gate sequence that gives a dizzying sensation of flying through a wormhole of wildly colorful light — was a hand-built machine that achieved the illusion of fast movement with stop-motion animation — requiring days of filming to create just seconds of screen time.Same with the interior sets. All real. All painstakingly built by hand. Many of them rotated. The giant centrifuge set for the Discovery set was a massive Ferris wheel. Cameras and actor bolted to floor while it turns. The Dawn of Man man-apes were created with costume designs that were decades ahead of their time — all donned by a mime troupe that spent months studying real ape movements. The effect was so convincing that many people simply assumed real apes had been trained to “act out” the scenes. To the point where make-up and costume designer Stuart Freeborn’s amazing accomplishment was completely overlooked by the Academy awards — giving best make-up effects instead to the much more primitive and unconvincing “Planet of the Apes.”In the end, 2001 is not a film to be seen like one would go see Star Wars or a Marvel movie. It’s not entertainment. Its not a consumable flight of fancy — no matter how enjoyable those types of movies are. As pretentious as this sounds — 2001 is a work of art. It’s meant to challenge the viewer. To stimulate their senses and creat an instinctive impression. It’s not meant to be easily understood. It is a film that was made to present a mythology of how humanity came into existence. So it’s meant to be an experience. You can’t have normal movie expectations when you watch it. There’s no bad guy. No good guy. Justice is not served. It’s much bigger than that.It’s more — “What if we’re here because of alien intervention? And what if we passed the aliens’ first test? And they want us to take the next step in evolution? Evolution that will open our minds the inner workings and mysteries of the universe? We will become beings that will be capable of transforming matter and energy in a way that appears entirely magical to us now?Kubrick knew he couldn’t tell that story in normal Chris Nolan terms. Not even in Marvel Thanos Iron Man Capt Marvel tesseract terms.That’s why 2001 is not a normal movie to watch. It’s a cinematic experience the likes of which we have never seen before.
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
Reviewed in the United States on October 10, 2023
Reviewed in the United States on May 20, 2022
This review covers the film — not the specific BluRay presentation. I’ll review that later.
Within the industry and art form of motion pictures, the importance and influence of Kubrick’s “2001: a space odyssey” cannot be overstated or even overestimated. There is quite possibly no other film that has had the level of impact and inspiration on subsequent generations of filmmakers and the art of filmmaking that 2001 has had.
Yet for many modern film viewers, the movie is often perceived as dull, opaque, unfathomable and pretentious. In fact, when 2001 debuted it received many of the same criticisms. The film was pilloried by critics and at premiere screenings audiences booed and even walked out of theaters.
But despite this initial reaction, audiences lined up to see the movie. The film became not just a commercial success, but a popular phenomenon with the younger generation of movie-goers in the 60s. Partially fueled by the drug and counter-culture of the time — 2001 was ultimately accepted in the way Kubrick had intended — people went to “experience” the movie. Instead of being told a clear, specific story with conflicts and resolutions, 2001 presented the audience with a grand mythological journey — from the origins of humans to their technological future and beyond. And it did so by abandoning the conventions of storytelling and asking the viewer to simply absorb the sights and sounds of the film and allow themselves to have an instinctual, emotional response.
2001 is not a movie that delivers the standard conventions of plot and character in a 3 act structure. It does not follow the rules and precepts of Joseph Campbell’s “Hero Of a Thousand Faces” that so many thousands of screenwriters were told to adhere to lest they lose the audience’s attention and interest.
2001 is a narrative. But it is a meta narrative. Its story concerns the very nature of existence. It proposes a secular solution to the mystery of life. How did we get get here? Are we alone?
Clarke and Kubrick imagined a a story that answered the notion of why humans are self aware and technologically capable by way of a mythology that is based on the mystery of science. Science so deep and advanced, we cannot distinguish it from magic.
Kubrick wanted a movie that told the story of mankind’s evolution in the universe — from lowly ape to early man to eventually a Superman. The next step in higher intelligence.
Kubrick was drawn to an Arthur C. Clarke short story that suggested an advanced alien race travels the universe looking for nascent intelligence and then once discovered, helps it along in critical next steps steps of cognitive abilities. Just enough to see if the formative intelligence becomes capable of developing technology that allows that to start traveling their local solar system and exploring their origins. The aliens leave a buried artifact on the closest nearby moon that — when uncovered — signals to the aliens that — yes indeed — this group of intelligence has made the leap — and are now possibly ready for the next step in evolution.
To achieve this — Kubrick felt that trying to tell this story in ordinary fashion with lots of dialogue and conversations and drama would come off as pretentious or hokey — or at the very least would drain the mystical and magical quality he felt the film needed. He knew he had to get the audience to experience such moments of alien contact and alien manipulation of the human mind in way that felt experiential — magical and holy. He knew he needed viewers to have a personal, spiritual experience with the film — not a dramatic one.
What Kubrick was seeking was much closer to the experience one has when walking quietly through a massive cathedral — one of the grand medieval cathedrals of Europe — where the person is overwhelmed by the stunning beauty and grandiosity and silence of the cathedral — Kubrick knew he needed the viewer to experience space in this manner.
And that is why the movie seems slow to many modern, younger viewers. Kubrick needed you to sit in the cathedral of space — and in the austerely beautiful technology of 2001 — in order that you could absorb the reality of the mind-bending spiritual myth he was laying on you.
SPOILERS
In traditional narrative-sense, Kubrick actually moves the story along at quite a clip. Man-apes are fighting for shrubs in a desert. Alien artifact appears. Man-apes learn to use weapons. First murder in human history. A bone club weapon cuts to an orbital nuclear weapon 200,000 years later in 2001. Mystery of something dug up on a moon base. It’s the same artificat we saw with apes. It sends a signal to Jupiter. Humans follow that signal to Jupiter to find out where alien artifact came from — or is leading them to. Along the way, humans murder the first machine intelligence it ever created. A test? The last vestige of violence humans will leave behind?
END OF SPOILERS
All along the way — Kubrick is telling you the story with an incredibly efficient, fast moving narrative structure — but he also needs the viewer to settle into the elongated time-scape of space travel. Why? Because it’s vital the viewer experience the space mission in a way that gets them to fully believe in what’s happening. To get them to accept what they are watching is real. So that the viewer stops thinking they’re watching a movie.
Think of it this way — you’ve gone to see your Dr and you’re placed in a Waiting room — expecting bad news. The longer you sit, the more you absorb all the various specific elements of the waiting room. All the mundane details and objects you see become more than just real — they become important — and the stakes about what you’re going to hear gather weight. Now imagine your Dr is about to tell you mind-bending news about having cancer and needing chemo therapy. Your body is about to be transformed. That long, long moment in the waiting room is all about accepting the reality of that journey. In 2001, humans are in a waiting room about to meet their alien doctor — their alien overlord — who will deliver the prognosis of their future. Life, death or transformation awaits.
In other words the “boredom” of 2001 is not a flaw — it’s a feature. A vital feature.
Beyond that — it’s nearly impossible to explain to the young film movie-goer how far advanced the effects of 2001 were at their time. Today’s films have the advantage of powerful computers to easily create seamless special effects of almost type. But back in 1966-67 there were no computer—generated effects. No CGI. It was all created on film. Analogue film. Multiple shots on differed strips of films are combined in an optical printer to look like they are all in one shot. Think of it as “artisanal” special effects — hand-crafted special effects. Even Doug Trumbull’s breakthrough slit-scan device that created the very computer-generated-looking Star Gate sequence that gives a dizzying sensation of flying through a wormhole of wildly colorful light — was a hand-built machine that achieved the illusion of fast movement with stop-motion animation — requiring days of filming to create just seconds of screen time.
Same with the interior sets. All real. All painstakingly built by hand. Many of them rotated. The giant centrifuge set for the Discovery set was a massive Ferris wheel. Cameras and actor bolted to floor while it turns. The Dawn of Man man-apes were created with costume designs that were decades ahead of their time — all donned by a mime troupe that spent months studying real ape movements. The effect was so convincing that many people simply assumed real apes had been trained to “act out” the scenes. To the point where make-up and costume designer Stuart Freeborn’s amazing accomplishment was completely overlooked by the Academy awards — giving best make-up effects instead to the much more primitive and unconvincing “Planet of the Apes.”
In the end, 2001 is not a film to be seen like one would go see Star Wars or a Marvel movie. It’s not entertainment. Its not a consumable flight of fancy — no matter how enjoyable those types of movies are. As pretentious as this sounds — 2001 is a work of art. It’s meant to challenge the viewer. To stimulate their senses and creat an instinctive impression. It’s not meant to be easily understood. It is a film that was made to present a mythology of how humanity came into existence. So it’s meant to be an experience. You can’t have normal movie expectations when you watch it. There’s no bad guy. No good guy. Justice is not served. It’s much bigger than that.
It’s more — “What if we’re here because of alien intervention? And what if we passed the aliens’ first test? And they want us to take the next step in evolution? Evolution that will open our minds the inner workings and mysteries of the universe? We will become beings that will be capable of transforming matter and energy in a way that appears entirely magical to us now?
Kubrick knew he couldn’t tell that story in normal Chris Nolan terms. Not even in Marvel Thanos Iron Man Capt Marvel tesseract terms.
That’s why 2001 is not a normal movie to watch. It’s a cinematic experience the likes of which we have never seen before.
Within the industry and art form of motion pictures, the importance and influence of Kubrick’s “2001: a space odyssey” cannot be overstated or even overestimated. There is quite possibly no other film that has had the level of impact and inspiration on subsequent generations of filmmakers and the art of filmmaking that 2001 has had.
Yet for many modern film viewers, the movie is often perceived as dull, opaque, unfathomable and pretentious. In fact, when 2001 debuted it received many of the same criticisms. The film was pilloried by critics and at premiere screenings audiences booed and even walked out of theaters.
But despite this initial reaction, audiences lined up to see the movie. The film became not just a commercial success, but a popular phenomenon with the younger generation of movie-goers in the 60s. Partially fueled by the drug and counter-culture of the time — 2001 was ultimately accepted in the way Kubrick had intended — people went to “experience” the movie. Instead of being told a clear, specific story with conflicts and resolutions, 2001 presented the audience with a grand mythological journey — from the origins of humans to their technological future and beyond. And it did so by abandoning the conventions of storytelling and asking the viewer to simply absorb the sights and sounds of the film and allow themselves to have an instinctual, emotional response.
2001 is not a movie that delivers the standard conventions of plot and character in a 3 act structure. It does not follow the rules and precepts of Joseph Campbell’s “Hero Of a Thousand Faces” that so many thousands of screenwriters were told to adhere to lest they lose the audience’s attention and interest.
2001 is a narrative. But it is a meta narrative. Its story concerns the very nature of existence. It proposes a secular solution to the mystery of life. How did we get get here? Are we alone?
Clarke and Kubrick imagined a a story that answered the notion of why humans are self aware and technologically capable by way of a mythology that is based on the mystery of science. Science so deep and advanced, we cannot distinguish it from magic.
Kubrick wanted a movie that told the story of mankind’s evolution in the universe — from lowly ape to early man to eventually a Superman. The next step in higher intelligence.
Kubrick was drawn to an Arthur C. Clarke short story that suggested an advanced alien race travels the universe looking for nascent intelligence and then once discovered, helps it along in critical next steps steps of cognitive abilities. Just enough to see if the formative intelligence becomes capable of developing technology that allows that to start traveling their local solar system and exploring their origins. The aliens leave a buried artifact on the closest nearby moon that — when uncovered — signals to the aliens that — yes indeed — this group of intelligence has made the leap — and are now possibly ready for the next step in evolution.
To achieve this — Kubrick felt that trying to tell this story in ordinary fashion with lots of dialogue and conversations and drama would come off as pretentious or hokey — or at the very least would drain the mystical and magical quality he felt the film needed. He knew he had to get the audience to experience such moments of alien contact and alien manipulation of the human mind in way that felt experiential — magical and holy. He knew he needed viewers to have a personal, spiritual experience with the film — not a dramatic one.
What Kubrick was seeking was much closer to the experience one has when walking quietly through a massive cathedral — one of the grand medieval cathedrals of Europe — where the person is overwhelmed by the stunning beauty and grandiosity and silence of the cathedral — Kubrick knew he needed the viewer to experience space in this manner.
And that is why the movie seems slow to many modern, younger viewers. Kubrick needed you to sit in the cathedral of space — and in the austerely beautiful technology of 2001 — in order that you could absorb the reality of the mind-bending spiritual myth he was laying on you.
SPOILERS
In traditional narrative-sense, Kubrick actually moves the story along at quite a clip. Man-apes are fighting for shrubs in a desert. Alien artifact appears. Man-apes learn to use weapons. First murder in human history. A bone club weapon cuts to an orbital nuclear weapon 200,000 years later in 2001. Mystery of something dug up on a moon base. It’s the same artificat we saw with apes. It sends a signal to Jupiter. Humans follow that signal to Jupiter to find out where alien artifact came from — or is leading them to. Along the way, humans murder the first machine intelligence it ever created. A test? The last vestige of violence humans will leave behind?
END OF SPOILERS
All along the way — Kubrick is telling you the story with an incredibly efficient, fast moving narrative structure — but he also needs the viewer to settle into the elongated time-scape of space travel. Why? Because it’s vital the viewer experience the space mission in a way that gets them to fully believe in what’s happening. To get them to accept what they are watching is real. So that the viewer stops thinking they’re watching a movie.
Think of it this way — you’ve gone to see your Dr and you’re placed in a Waiting room — expecting bad news. The longer you sit, the more you absorb all the various specific elements of the waiting room. All the mundane details and objects you see become more than just real — they become important — and the stakes about what you’re going to hear gather weight. Now imagine your Dr is about to tell you mind-bending news about having cancer and needing chemo therapy. Your body is about to be transformed. That long, long moment in the waiting room is all about accepting the reality of that journey. In 2001, humans are in a waiting room about to meet their alien doctor — their alien overlord — who will deliver the prognosis of their future. Life, death or transformation awaits.
In other words the “boredom” of 2001 is not a flaw — it’s a feature. A vital feature.
Beyond that — it’s nearly impossible to explain to the young film movie-goer how far advanced the effects of 2001 were at their time. Today’s films have the advantage of powerful computers to easily create seamless special effects of almost type. But back in 1966-67 there were no computer—generated effects. No CGI. It was all created on film. Analogue film. Multiple shots on differed strips of films are combined in an optical printer to look like they are all in one shot. Think of it as “artisanal” special effects — hand-crafted special effects. Even Doug Trumbull’s breakthrough slit-scan device that created the very computer-generated-looking Star Gate sequence that gives a dizzying sensation of flying through a wormhole of wildly colorful light — was a hand-built machine that achieved the illusion of fast movement with stop-motion animation — requiring days of filming to create just seconds of screen time.
Same with the interior sets. All real. All painstakingly built by hand. Many of them rotated. The giant centrifuge set for the Discovery set was a massive Ferris wheel. Cameras and actor bolted to floor while it turns. The Dawn of Man man-apes were created with costume designs that were decades ahead of their time — all donned by a mime troupe that spent months studying real ape movements. The effect was so convincing that many people simply assumed real apes had been trained to “act out” the scenes. To the point where make-up and costume designer Stuart Freeborn’s amazing accomplishment was completely overlooked by the Academy awards — giving best make-up effects instead to the much more primitive and unconvincing “Planet of the Apes.”
In the end, 2001 is not a film to be seen like one would go see Star Wars or a Marvel movie. It’s not entertainment. Its not a consumable flight of fancy — no matter how enjoyable those types of movies are. As pretentious as this sounds — 2001 is a work of art. It’s meant to challenge the viewer. To stimulate their senses and creat an instinctive impression. It’s not meant to be easily understood. It is a film that was made to present a mythology of how humanity came into existence. So it’s meant to be an experience. You can’t have normal movie expectations when you watch it. There’s no bad guy. No good guy. Justice is not served. It’s much bigger than that.
It’s more — “What if we’re here because of alien intervention? And what if we passed the aliens’ first test? And they want us to take the next step in evolution? Evolution that will open our minds the inner workings and mysteries of the universe? We will become beings that will be capable of transforming matter and energy in a way that appears entirely magical to us now?
Kubrick knew he couldn’t tell that story in normal Chris Nolan terms. Not even in Marvel Thanos Iron Man Capt Marvel tesseract terms.
That’s why 2001 is not a normal movie to watch. It’s a cinematic experience the likes of which we have never seen before.
Images in this review
Top reviews from other countries
Rafael Santiago
Blu-ray Enluvado, Duplo e com dublagem em português do Brasil
Reviewed in Brazil on April 4, 2023
