Kid Dabb

2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)

31 posts in this topic

Will be shown here on TCM at 8:00 PM EDT this evening.

 

I like this movie - a lot. Sometimes the part where Dave gets sucked into the monolith seems to take f-o-r-e-v-e-r.. , but I just go make a sandwich during that part. From reading posts here over the years, especially this past year, this film is not liked by so many - along with it's contemporary; Lawrence of Arabia.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kubrick's visionary film remains one of the masterpieces of a sci-fi cinema- yes it can be a bit slow at times-( it seems to take for ever to get to Jupiter. )  The still amazing special effects are timeless and this is still one of the most realistic depiction of space travel.  And like "Lawrence of Arabia" it's   movie that must be experience in a BIG SCREEN- why doesn't MGM re-released it for IMAX?!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will be shown here on TCM at 8:00 PM EDT this evening.

 

Sometimes the part where Dave gets sucked into the monolith seems to take f-o-r-e-v-e-r.. , but I just go make a sandwich during that part. 

 

Well, it won't let me out of the box after editing. KD, that's the best part! Just stay seated and groove!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"The nearest thing to an artist-in-residence from outer space." That's how Isaac Asimov once described Robert T. McCall, the renowned illustrator, conceptual artist, space-scene painter, official NASA artist, and creator of legendary movie posters including 2001: A Space Odyssey.

w19nn.jpgClick to enlarge

a0cc37.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, joe.

 

Here's some wiki:

 

On November 3, 2014, it was reported that Syfy had ordered a mini-series adaptation of 3001: The Final Odyssey into production for broadcast in 2015. The mini-series will be executive-produced by Ridley Scott, David W. Zucker and Stuart Beattie; the latter will also be the primary scriptwriter. The estates of both Clarke and 2001: A Space Odyssey director Stanley Kubrick were reported as having "offered their full support", but the extent of their involvement is not known at this time.

---------------------------

It was reported on Yahoo Entertainment in 2000 that MGM and actor/director Tom Hanks were in discussions regarding turning both 2061: Odyssey Three and 3001: The Final Odyssey into movies. (Hanks would reportedly play Frank Poole in the 3001 film.) An update in 2001 stated that there was no further development on the project.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Morgan Freeman has said the film adaptation will be made (in 3D !) - just needs to get a good script. I'm looking forward to this one myself. All I have to add is.. hurry up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 wish Ridley Scott would do it

 

Please for the love of God NOOOO!

 

2001 is a one-of-a-kind movie. Kubrick has a unique story telling style, so unlike Hollywood typical, spoon fed linear stories.

2010 the sequel was made in a typical linear style which some people prefer. That's enough. The original Kubrick version needs to be left alone.

 

It's akin to Kubrick's THE SHINING. The remake was horrible, while the original Kubrick is slowly becoming the classic art piece as more people see it and appreciate the genius of the storytelling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2001 is a one-of-a-kind movie. Kubrick has a unique story telling style, so unlike Hollywood typical, spoon fed linear stories.

Interesting point, although the movie still confuses me.

I just finished reading a biography of Alan Turing (as in The Imitation Game) and it seems his ideas (over 50 years before 2001) were used in creating HAL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 wish Ridley Scott would do it

 

Please for the love of God NOOOO!

 

2001 is a one-of-a-kind movie. Kubrick has a unique story telling style, so unlike Hollywood typical, spoon fed linear stories.

2010 the sequel was made in a typical linear style which some people prefer. That's enough. The original Kubrick version needs to be left alone.

 

It's akin to Kubrick's THE SHINING. The remake was horrible, while the original Kubrick is slowly becoming the classic art piece as more people see it and appreciate the genius of the storytelling.

 

A remake doesn't mess with the original.   Kubrick's version is being left alone by many.  They are NOT seeing it or even know it exist. But if a remake was made maybe people would seek out the Kubrick version.   This is often the case with a remake;  It beings attention to prior versions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any body know why Peter Hyams, who directed 2010, chose not do a film version of the book, and essentially rewrote it for the screen ?

The book is much more interesting than the film 2010, and a lot more uplifting.

Austin2

 

  

 

post-30068-0-88334500-1454720742_thumb.jpg

 

 

 

 

post-30068-0-88334500-1454720742_thumb.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If someone asks me what's my all time favorite movie, my answer will always be 2001: A Space Odyssey. Being a 20 year old college student, I don't think I ever saw a more visionary movie like 2001: A Space Odyssey. It is one that I'll always treasured in my heart. One time, I bought a one sheet poster of the movie down in Falmouth, Massachusetts. I still have that poster in my movie poster collection. I also own a DVD copy of the movie, as well.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any body know why Peter Hyams, who directed 2010, chose not do a film version of the book, and essentially rewrote it for the screen ?

The book is much more interesting than the film 2010, and a lot more uplifting.

Austin2

 

  

 

attachicon.gifLeonov meets Discovery.jpg

 

The only response I can offer to your query is a note from 2010's wiki:

 

When Clarke published his novel 2010: Odyssey Two in 1982, he telephoned Stanley Kubrick, and jokingly said, "Your job is to stop anybody [from] making it [into a movie] so I won't be bothered." Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM) subsequently worked out a contract to make a film adaptation, but Kubrick had no interest in directing it. However, Peter Hyams was interested and contacted both Clarke and Kubrick for their blessings:
 
I had a long conversation with Stanley and told him what was going on. If it met with his approval, I would do the film; and if it didn't, I wouldn't. I certainly would not have thought of doing the film if I had not gotten the blessing of Kubrick. He's one of my idols; simply one of the greatest talents that's ever walked the Earth. He more or less said, 'Sure. Go do it. I don't care.' And another time he said, 'Don't be afraid. Just go do your own movie.'
 
While he was writing the screenplay in 1983, Hyams (in Los Angeles) began communicating with Clarke (in Sri Lanka) via the then-pioneering medium of e-mail. The two would discuss the planning and production of the film on an almost daily basis using this method. Their correspondence was published in 1984 as The Odyssey File: The Making of 2010. The book illustrates Clarke's fascination with the new method of communication, and also includes Clarke's list of the top science fiction films ever made. In order to give the publishers enough lead-time to have it available for the release of the movie, the book terminates while the movie is still in pre-production. At the point of the last e-mail, Clarke had not yet read the script, and Roy Scheider was the only actor who had been cast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kubrick's A Space Odyssey does not need to be remade.  I won't be narrow-minded and say it's impossible to produce a quality remake, but why bother.  The dazzling imagery of the original, and the ambiguity, will continue to attract new viewers and discussions.  The philosophical questions the film posed -- What is existence? How do we acquire knowledge? Is artificial intelligence a threat to humanity? -- are more important today than in 1968.  I recommended A Space Odyssey to a friend in his twenties, an Xbox gamer with high standards for special effects, and he loved it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no director working now that can touch Kubrick's true visionary genius- "2001" is a timeless classic even in this age of CGI the Oscar winning hand crafted fx still work- why doesn't  MGM release this movie in IMAX?  Arthur C Clarke wrote other sequels to "2001" now the movie I really would love to see is "Rondesvouz with Rama"

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no director working now that can touch Kubrick's true visionary genius- "2001" is a timeless classic even in this age of CGI the Oscar winning hand crafted fx still work- why doesn't  MGM release this movie in IMAX?  Arthur C Clarke wrote other sequels to "2001" now the movie I really would love to see is "Rondesvouz with Rama"

 

"The Fountains of Paradise" would be one of ACC novels I would like to see as a movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember going to see "2001" while in high school.  It was like seeing modern art for the first time, not understanding exactly what was going on but enjoying the movie.  It took 2 or 3 more viewings to become comfortable and really start appreciating the film.  As I remember when it first came out, many critics panned the movie since it was so different.  Reading a book on the movie, it seems the technical consultant,Fred Ordway, kept after Kubrick to add a voice over / dialog / explanation at the beginning of the film but fortunately Kubrick refused.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will not argue that 2010: The Year We Make Contact is better, but I did enjoy it more than the original. It was more straightforward and didn't have a 10 minute long wormhole sequence :) I would say the closest thing to a sequel to 2001, style-wise, would be Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Anyone else think of that connection?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will not argue that 2010: The Year We Make Contact is better, but I did enjoy it more than the original. It was more straightforward and didn't have a 10 minute long wormhole sequence :) I would say the closest thing to a sequel to 2001, style-wise, would be Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Anyone else think of that connection?

Yeah Kubrick's film was obviously an influence on "Star Trek TMP"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kubrick's A Space Odyssey does not need to be remade. 

 

Kubrick often made films like a "dream"; sometimes random images that evoke emotions.

That works great for 2001A Space Odyssey 

 

Just look at 2010, typical linear story arc with lots of dialogue: bo-ring! 

2010 is a story, 2001 is art.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kubrick's A Space Odyssey does not need to be remade. 

 

Kubrick often made films like a "dream"; sometimes random images that evoke emotions.

That works great for 2001A Space Odyssey 

 

Just look at 2010, typical linear story arc with lots of dialogue: bo-ring! 

2010 is a story, 2001 is art.

"2010" was a good conventional sci-fi adventure- Kubrick was creating cinematic poetry in "2001" nothing is really explain that is whst the film is timeless ( even though some of the technology in it has dated)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us