2001: A Space Odyssey
Discussion
For a limited period starting from 28 November, "2001" is being released again for a cinematic showing .
I've not seen it in a cinema since 1979 when it was re-released on the back of the success of "Star Wars".
If you haven't seen this on the big screen, this is a rare opportunity to see it as Mr Kubrick intended.
http://www.bfi.org.uk/whats-on/bfi-film-releases/2...
I've not seen it in a cinema since 1979 when it was re-released on the back of the success of "Star Wars".
If you haven't seen this on the big screen, this is a rare opportunity to see it as Mr Kubrick intended.
http://www.bfi.org.uk/whats-on/bfi-film-releases/2...
MC Bodge said:
If the film requires knowledge of the book in order for it to be comprehensible, is the film then lacking as a stand-alone work?
Perhaps - but we now live in a multi-media world and a lot of films have stakes in other media - such as books, comics, computer games etc. Maybe 2001 was ahead of its time.And I like the fact that it doesn't have a clear meaning.
tombar said:
Eric, you are a complete star! I wouldn't have seen this otherwise. I was only 3 in 1968 but saw it 3 times in the 1979 reissues, I became obsessed. It simply doesn't have the same power on the tv!
I saw it on the 1979 re-issue as well.I don't think the prints that were issued in 1979 were anything like as good as the 1968/69 release - which I actually saw in a Cinerama cinema (Dublin's only one).
I am hoping that the latest issue will be top notch.
At the age of 11 (when I first saw the film) I hadn't realised that Arthur C Clarke had anything to do with the film or that there was a novel version of it. In fact, at that time I was the proud possessor of only one Arthur C Clarke book, "The Challenge of the Sea" which was factual. I wasn't even aware he wrote science fiction.
I finally discovered his SF stories about two years later and quickly found the book version of "2001". I also very quickly discovered his short stories and "The Sentinel".
I finally discovered his SF stories about two years later and quickly found the book version of "2001". I also very quickly discovered his short stories and "The Sentinel".
moribund said:
Just got back from the Pictureville in Bradford. What a film this must have been in the 60's.
Reading 2001 was my gateway to an obsession with "hard" sci-if from the age of 10 onwards. This is the first time I've seen the film in a proper cinema and it was excellent, except for them sticking an intermission in the middle which completely broke the spell for a while.
I came away thinking this must be the only on-screen example of proper science fiction. By that I mean a film that is driven by a plot based principally on ideas not just an emotional journey, with science that stands up to at least moderate scrutiny. Dave and Frank behaved exactly as you'd expect a professional astronaut to behave - task oriented, professional, they knew their ship and systems inside out and all their actions made sense in context. None of the gung-ho bulls
t that Hollywood apply to every other space movie I've ever seen.
I enjoyed the spectacle of Intersteller, but it's fundamentally dodgy story makes it a massive disappointment compared to 2001 even with its slow pacing and excessive discordant music.
I'm glad you enjoyed it. I'm really looking forward to it.Reading 2001 was my gateway to an obsession with "hard" sci-if from the age of 10 onwards. This is the first time I've seen the film in a proper cinema and it was excellent, except for them sticking an intermission in the middle which completely broke the spell for a while.
I came away thinking this must be the only on-screen example of proper science fiction. By that I mean a film that is driven by a plot based principally on ideas not just an emotional journey, with science that stands up to at least moderate scrutiny. Dave and Frank behaved exactly as you'd expect a professional astronaut to behave - task oriented, professional, they knew their ship and systems inside out and all their actions made sense in context. None of the gung-ho bulls
t that Hollywood apply to every other space movie I've ever seen.I enjoyed the spectacle of Intersteller, but it's fundamentally dodgy story makes it a massive disappointment compared to 2001 even with its slow pacing and excessive discordant music.
I am quite interested in your comments on the use of an Intermission. The Intermission in this film was put in from the very beginning. Intermissions in long films were quite common back then and I sometimes wonder if cinemas aren't missing a trick by inserting them in modern long running movies.
The tradition of an Intermission would have been inherited from the world of live theatre where an Interval has always been part of the performance. When cinema going started to become popular in the 1920s, the audiences would have been coming from a history of attending theatre and shows and would have expected a break part way through the performance.
Right up until the end of the 1960s the cinema interval was quite normal I remember "Grand Prix" having one as well - and if you watch a DVD of it today you will see where the fade out to the intermission break is.
Modern cinema audiences come to cinemas with TV as their main performance arts influence and, with TV, there isn't ever a formal "half-way" break (although there are lots of breaks for ads etc).
The "TV experience" is also what encourages people in cinemas to talk all the way through the picture. mess with their phones etc. They have forgotten the protocols of behaviour at public performances.
Shows how times and expectations change.
Because they expected an intermission, it didn't cause them a problem - any more than an interval between Acts 1 and 2 of play or musical causes a problem for modern audiences.
I don't think people in the 1960s would have used the word "immersive" in describing a cinematic experience. I am sure that comes from computer gaming where the player becomes part of the story.
Because they expected an intermission, it didn't cause them a problem - any more than an interval between Acts 1 and 2 of play or musical causes a problem for modern audiences.
I don't think people in the 1960s would have used the word "immersive" in describing a cinematic experience. I am sure that comes from computer gaming where the player becomes part of the story.
Edited by Eric Mc on Sunday 30th November 10:41
Found this on the BBC iPlayer. Again, well worth listening to -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p02crrv3/2001...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p02crrv3/2001...
Yes. I think I've read all of Clarke's "2001" related books. My favourite was "The Lost Worlds of 2001" which was very good at tracing the evolution of the story - both as a film and novel.
Clarke had never intended to write any sequels. But the discoveries of the Voyager probes at Jupiter rekindled his interest in the story.
Clarke had never intended to write any sequels. But the discoveries of the Voyager probes at Jupiter rekindled his interest in the story.
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff