12/24/2023 0 Comments 2001 a space odyssey 1968![]() ![]() The book also depicts a crucial utterance by Bowman when he enters the portal via the monolith his last statement is "Oh my God-it's full of stars!" This statement is not shown in the movie, but becomes crucial in the 1984 sequel 2010: The Year We Make Contact, based on the novel 2010: Odyssey Two. It depicts Bowman traveling through some kind of interstellar switching station which the book refers to as "Grand Central," in which travelers go into a central hub and then are routed to their individual destinations. The book explains the monolith much more specifically than the movie, depicting the first (on Earth) as a device capable of inducing a higher level of consciousness by directly interacting with the brain of pre-humans approaching it, the second (on the Moon) as an alarm signal designed to alert its creators that humanity had reached a sufficient technological level for space travel, and the third (near Jupiter in the movie but on a satellite of Saturn in the novel) as a gateway or portal to allow travel to other parts of the galaxy. ![]() Clarke's novel explicitly identifies the monolith as a tool created by extraterrestrials that have been through many stages of evolution, moving from organic forms, through biomechanics, and finally to a state of pure energy. It seems to explain the ending of the film more clearly. ![]() Clarke's novel of the same name was developed simultaneously with the film, though published after the film's release. He was willing then to give a fairly straightforward explanation of the plot on what he called the "simplest level", but unwilling to discuss the metaphysical interpretation of the film which he felt should be left up to the individual viewer. He said he did not deliberately strive for ambiguity, that it was simply an inevitable outcome of making the film non-verbal, though he acknowledged that this ambiguity was an invaluable asset to the film. In a subsequent discussion of the film with Joseph Gelmis, Kubrick said his main aim was to avoid "intellectual verbalization" and reach "the viewer's subconscious". Yet there is at least one logical structure-and sometimes more than one-behind everything that happens on the screen in "2001", and the ending does not consist of random enigmas, some critics to the contrary. What I meant was, of course, that because we were dealing with the mystery of the universe, and with powers and forces greater than man's comprehension, then by definition they could not be totally understandable. I still stand by this remark, which does not mean one can't enjoy the movie completely the first time around. The very nature of the visual experience in 2001 is to give the viewer an instantaneous, visceral reaction that does not-and should not-require further amplification." When told that Kubrick had called his comment 'facetious', Clarke responded Neither of the two creators equated openness to interpretation with meaninglessness, although it might seem that Clarke implied as much when he stated, shortly after the film's release, "If anyone understands it on the first viewing, we've failed in our intention." When told of the comment, Kubrick said "I believe he made it facetiously. You're free to speculate as you wish about the philosophical and allegorical meaning of the film-and such speculation is one indication that it has succeeded in gripping the audience at a deep level-but I don't want to spell out a verbal road map for 2001 that every viewer will feel obligated to pursue or else fear he's missed the point. In a 1968 interview with Playboy, Kubrick stated: Kubrick encouraged people to explore their own interpretations of the film, and refused to explain "what really happened" in the movie, preferring instead to let audiences embrace their own ideas and theories. Nonetheless, in July 2018, Kubrick's interpretation of the ending scene was presented after being newly found in an early interview. Clarke, wanted to leave the film open to philosophical and allegorical interpretation, purposely presenting the final sequences of the film without the underlying thread being apparent a concept illustrated by the final shot of the film, which contains the image of the embryonic "Starchild". The director of the film, Stanley Kubrick, and the writer, Arthur C. Since its premiere in 1968, the film 2001: A Space Odyssey has been analysed and interpreted by numerous people, ranging from professional movie critics to amateur writers and science fiction fans. Academic analyses of 2001: A Space Odyssey ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |