U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Entertainment and Arts > Movies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-16-2018, 09:26 PM
 
Location: Tennessee/Michigan
27,998 posts, read 46,395,848 times
Reputation: 19403

Advertisements

Ever wondered what Stanley Kubrick's classic sci-fi film 2001: A Space Odyssey is all about? Well, keep wondering, but an excerpt from an unreleased Japanese documentary has Kubrick explaining the film's mysterious ending, BoingBoing reports.

Director of '2001: A Space Odyssey' Finally Explains the Film's Ending
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-17-2018, 03:56 AM
 
Location: Somewhere in northern Alabama
16,864 posts, read 51,384,651 times
Reputation: 27750
"he is transformed into some kind of super being and sent back to Earth, transformed and made into some sort of superman. We have to only guess what happens when he goes back." ...

Except that Clark (the author) was much more direct. The "star child" watches as the orbiting nuclear warheads, seen in the beginning of the shuttle docking sequence, all start exploding, with the inference that the star child has either instigated the destruction of life on Earth or is content to just passively watch as it happens. Kubrick chose to leave off the end, to make the film more enigmatic and avoid backlash. The book came out before the movie, so this is no startling news to sci-fi readers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2018, 06:35 AM
 
17,959 posts, read 9,869,523 times
Reputation: 17461
Quote:
Originally Posted by John1960 View Post
Ever wondered what Stanley Kubrick's classic sci-fi film 2001: A Space Odyssey is all about? Well, keep wondering, but an excerpt from an unreleased Japanese documentary has Kubrick explaining the film's mysterious ending, BoingBoing reports.

Director of '2001: A Space Odyssey' Finally Explains the Film's Ending
I knew that from the book 'way back in 1968.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2018, 08:06 PM
 
727 posts, read 67,636 times
Reputation: 325
I was glad to read that!!!!!

An excellent movie..... I cant decide which is better the first or 2010 (I have seen both)

I guess the first! -- I love space!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2018, 12:26 AM
 
1,404 posts, read 728,553 times
Reputation: 1443
That explanation filled in some of the blanks (the style of furniture and the meaning behind it)... but I'm pretty sure most viewers figured out the ending by themselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2018, 08:07 PM
 
8,606 posts, read 11,894,715 times
Reputation: 3135
I can't see how anyone could understand that type of ending just from seeing the movie alone. I have to wonder if Stanley Kubrick was perhaps more interested in the symbolic meaning of the imagery, rather than the author's intended meaning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2018, 08:08 PM
 
17,959 posts, read 9,869,523 times
Reputation: 17461
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules View Post
I can't see how anyone could understand that type of ending just from seeing the movie alone. I have to wonder if Stanley Kubrick was perhaps more interested in the symbolic meaning of the imagery, rather than the author's intended meaning.
Yeah, we came to that conclusion in 1968.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2018, 07:10 AM
 
Location: Maine
15,098 posts, read 19,745,581 times
Reputation: 17220
Quote:
Originally Posted by scotthouse View Post
An excellent movie..... I cant decide which is better the first or 2010 (I have seen both)
2001 is a greater work of art. It really is a cinematic masterpiece.

But 2010 is a better story. It has actual characters and not just plot conveyors.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2018, 07:52 AM
 
17,959 posts, read 9,869,523 times
Reputation: 17461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark S. View Post
2001 is a greater work of art. It really is a cinematic masterpiece.

But 2010 is a better story. It has actual characters and not just plot conveyors.
This is true. 2001 is a cinematic masterpiece, and still holds up from that standpoint.

But 2010 is a more commercially viable movie.

Someone had mentioned earlier that 2001 intentionally removed some of the humanity of the humans. I'd say that Kubrick (not necessarily Clarke) was making a point that like the homo erectus in the prelude, homo sapiens had reached a point that it needed another "kick in the pants" from the monolith makers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2018, 08:36 AM
 
Location: Maine
15,098 posts, read 19,745,581 times
Reputation: 17220
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk View Post
Someone had mentioned earlier that 2001 intentionally removed some of the humanity of the humans. I'd say that Kubrick (not necessarily Clarke) was making a point that like the homo erectus in the prelude, homo sapiens had reached a point that it needed another "kick in the pants" from the monolith makers.
It's really hard to separate Clarke from Kubrick with 2001 because they worked together so closely developing the story. But based on their previous work, I'm not sure this is an either/or situation so much as a both/and situation.

Clarke was a great Idea Man, but in all of his fiction he is obviously much more interested in science and aliens than in his human characters. Clarke's characters aren't even two-dimensional. They're barely one-dimensional. They exist in his stories only to find out about the aliens or the scientific discoveries. Clarke had absolutely no talent for writing interesting characters, because he seemed interested in humanity only as a collective concept and not as individuals.

Kubrick was very much the same way. Even in his best movies, his characters are merely pawns that he moves around on his chessboard. They're all very cold. Kubrick characters are concepts, not people. The only movie he ever directed that had any real heart or humanity was SPARTACUS, which was the one movie he later completely disavowed.

A friend of mine who was a film studies wrote his senior paper on a analysis of Kubrick movies, postulating that Kubrick himself was a high-functioning sociopath, completely lacking in all human empathy. He made a good case.

If I had to sum up the difference between 2001 and 2010, it would be ...

2001 is a story about humanity taking its first steps into its next mode of existence.

2010 is a story about humans taking their first steps into humanity's next mode of existence.

I mean just look at one character both films shared: Heywood Floyd. In 2001 he has all the personality and warmth of a coat rack. He is a mannequin speaking dialogue. But in 2010 he's a great character full of passion and warmth and fear and drive. I'd love to sit and have a beer with 2010's Floyd. I'd be a little nervous sitting next to 2001's Floyd on the bus.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Entertainment and Arts > Movies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top