|
|
Post by thekindercarebear on Jul 15, 2022 2:59:19 GMT
Wow.
Alright so tonight I saw this film and 2 things to start:
1. let me tell you that was some of the best Amiga 1000 fractal art I have ever seen.
2. i am pretty sure I was supposed to have sniffed some mushrooms prior to viewing
I BELIEVE I am a pretty smart guy but I didn't get some out of body/spirit experience out of this.
THIS is what I got out of this
1. aliens put obelisk on earth, realized we were idiots and instead put it on the moon in case we ever progressed to a point where we could travel through space.
2. once we could get to the moon and found the obelisk, they'd send us to jupiter to find a twin obelisk where we would be teleported? transwarped? sent...to an alien world where we would age and die and be reborn as super space faring babies to traverse back to earth...
OR
maybe the aliens would use our dead carcasses to convert into super space faring babies to traverse to earth.
yeah.
|
|
|
|
Post by thekindercarebear on Jul 15, 2022 3:00:13 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by MooseNugget on Jul 15, 2022 3:08:25 GMT
I really enjoy the film, having seen it several times.
Even before I really got into Chess, I found it interesting that Hal lies to Frank about their position, and because David just took his word for it that Hal decides there that the humans would be a determent to the mission rather than an asset.
Or maybe Hal just isn't as good a Chess engine as Stockfish.
EDIT: It was Frank, not David playing Hal
|
|
|
|
Post by thekindercarebear on Jul 15, 2022 3:18:07 GMT
I really enjoy the film, having seen it several times. Even before I really got into Chess, I found it interesting that Hal lies to David about their position, and because David just took his word for it that Hal decides there that the humans would be a determent to the mission rather than an asset. Or maybe Hal just isn't as good a Chess engine as Stockfish. ha! i had not noticed HAL lied about the chess piece. i mean aren't they programmed not to lie?
|
|
|
|
Post by MooseNugget on Jul 15, 2022 3:44:41 GMT
I really enjoy the film, having seen it several times. Even before I really got into Chess, I found it interesting that Hal lies to David about their position, and because David just took his word for it that Hal decides there that the humans would be a determent to the mission rather than an asset. Or maybe Hal just isn't as good a Chess engine as Stockfish. ha! i had not noticed HAL lied about the chess piece. i mean aren't they programmed not to lie? Because I'm crazy I'm having Stockfish look at the game  Stockfish says Hal has mate in 14 (depth=20). Stockfish says Frank's best reply would have been Qb7, but instead he plays Qxa6. Hal replies with Bxg2. Frank plays the best move with Re1.  This is where Hal says Frank missed a series of moves. Hal points out if Frank captures the Queen with his bishop than knight captures on f3 is checkmate. That's certainly true but doing that isn't White's best defense. Stockfish wants to play Queen to c8 in this position for White. It's still mate in three, but I find it interesting that either Hal isn't as good a Chess engine as Stockfish, or he's lying to Frank and sadly the human player just accepts defeat. I certainly understand they didn't have powerful Chess engines back in the 1960s. The position is taken from a 1910 tournament in Hamburg, Germany.
|
|
Dalek Fred
Sophomore
@dalekfred
Posts: 994
Likes: 889
|
Post by Dalek Fred on Jul 15, 2022 4:07:46 GMT
1. let me tell you that was some of the best Amiga 1000 fractal art I have ever seen. A joke? If not: no computers were used to generate anything in the production of 2001: A Space Odyssey The music is a bit of a clue. Especially the name of the tune. But anyway, the obelisk kick-started whatever it is that separated some monkeys from the others. In the film, the idea of tools. Using a bone as a weapon to hunt and kill competition. Nowadays, A.C. Clarke would have to pick something else since we have now observed that other animals do in fact use tools, not just us. Then we fast-forward a tiny bit to the space-age Yes! going a bit crazy with the plurals, kinder. It's not a "we." It's Dave Bowman. And the space-faring baby is traditionally called 'The Star Child,' FYI. Your assessment of HAL is scarily close to the answer. What happens if you have sentient AI, programmed to always tell the truth, and then put it in charge of a Secret Mission? Most of the answers to 2001 can be found in the sequel, "2010". Not AS good as 2001, but has some incredible star power and is a fine film in its own right. Has the excellent decision to NOT even attempt to imitate Kubrick's style. And is my fave Roy Scheider film. Fave Lithgow film, too. And a pretty good Helen Mirren film.
|
|
|
|
Post by MooseNugget on Jul 15, 2022 4:14:28 GMT
Looking at how the game played out, Hal was losing but caught Frank with a trap  |
|
|
|
Post by MooseNugget on Jul 15, 2022 4:23:08 GMT
thekindercarebear if I remember correctly wasn't the ending supposed to be David as the star child removing or destroying all nuclear weapons? I think the script points out that several of the spaceships we see at first hold nuclear weapons.
|
|
|
|
Post by thekindercarebear on Jul 15, 2022 4:36:09 GMT
thekindercarebear if I remember correctly wasn't the ending supposed to be David as the star child removing or destroying all nuclear weapons? I think the script points out that several of the spaceships we see at first hold nuclear weapons. What?? Lol I didn't get that at all. |
|
|
|
Post by MooseNugget on Jul 15, 2022 4:45:07 GMT
thekindercarebear if I remember correctly wasn't the ending supposed to be David as the star child removing or destroying all nuclear weapons? I think the script points out that several of the spaceships we see at first hold nuclear weapons. What?? Lol I didn't get that at all. Rob Ager explains this better than me If the time stamp doesn't work, it's at 35 minutes in when he talks about this. Thinking about what you said before, maybe the aliens do see potential in us but ultimately they see how destructive we are with the knowledge they'd given us.
|
|
|
|
Post by Harry Skywalker on Jul 15, 2022 5:06:04 GMT
Not only is 2001: A Space Odyssey insanely boring it's one of the most pretentious movies ever made as well.
Stanley Kubrick is a hack and one of the most overrated movie directors ever.
The movie is a visual spectacle indeed and it uses pretty well all classic pieces of music during the events, but exception made to the Hal and astronauts segment there's no relevant plot at all in 90% of the movie.
The characters are boring and flat, totally uniteresting, which is a trademark of Stanley Kubrick.
I'll give him credit for this movie being a bit visionary for the year 1968 but when there's not much layers and not entertainment factor this movie is a tremendous failure.
|
|
|
|
Post by Foxy on Jul 15, 2022 5:52:53 GMT
I watched it again, a few times, actually, sometime last year. I have problems following along in films, and I forget so much of them. 2001 is no exception, and it’s made infinitely harder for me because so much of it doesn’t make sense (I didn’t even “get” that the obelisk helped cavemen to advance, I don’t think. Plus I have a really shitty memory. That chess scene totally went over my head (doesn’t help that I don’t know how to play chess) and I had to follow along with help from IMDb proper’s synopsis section.
Haven’t seen 2010 in decades. I’ll have to watch that one again, too. I did start watching it right after my numerous viewings of 2001 last year, but somehow I managed to forget about finishing it. I only made it like 10 minutes in.
|
|
|
|
Post by Catman on Jul 15, 2022 11:01:43 GMT
Catman remembers something about an ape man throwing a bone at a passing spaceship. In fact, Heywood Floyd remarks to his stewardess, "I could swear someone threw a bone at us!"
|
|
|
|
Post by wmcclain on Jul 15, 2022 14:00:24 GMT
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), directed by Stanley Kubrick. I first saw this as a boy at the River Hills in Des Moines, Cinerama and still the finest theater I have ever known. (It's long gone now; an ice arena occupies that spot). I don't know what it would take in home theater to replicate that astounding, immersive, wide screen experience. Certainly not any display I will ever have in my little viewing space. But I also remember thinking: the Space Bros take him beyond infinity and then feed him broccoli? That's cold. They are so alien they might as well be angels or gods. With the wailing chorus we approach mysteries and dimensions beyond our comprehension. Our first encounter with the monolith produced upright meat-eating killer apes. The second encounter produced...what? Yes, I read Clarke's book long ago, but the movie is more Kubrick than Clarke. 2010 (1984) is more like Clarke. We took a child to this once and the killer ape sequence disturbed him for a long time. He did not expect animals to behave that way. It has always made me suspect that a real encounter with alien intelligence would not be a happy one. We go from the ape-men fighting at the water hole to Dr Floyd and the Russians sparring at another watering place on the space station. As a kid I never wondered why Dr Floyd had two spacecraft all to himself, nor did I notice what a villain he seemed to be, with his security oaths and kiss-ass colleagues on the moon base. The space station seemed so real at the time because of all the commercial logos. It was a new look. The chief attribute of the human race in the space age seems to be lying. The first words Bowman and Poole exchange are lies. Quite properly there is no sound in space, so Kubrick gives us the breathing noises of the men in their suits. I'm always startled that the deactivation of HAL is so moving. After that all guiding narrative is dropped and we are on our own. Was Dave able to contact Earth? Does he have new orders? What's he trying to accomplish when he goes out in the pod? Who delivers his meals and changes the linen beyond infinity? A film this strangely paced either loses you, or you somehow submit to its internal clock. I felt the same way about The Passion of the Christ. It has various astronomical (and geometrical!) errors; no point in worrying about that in movies. Available on Blu-ray and often on sale. I saw what looked like tiles or brush strokes in the sky at the Dawn of Man. 
|
|
|
|
Post by thekindercarebear on Jul 15, 2022 15:51:14 GMT
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), directed by Stanley Kubrick. I first saw this as a boy at the River Hills in Des Moines, Cinerama and still the finest theater I have ever known. (It's long gone now; an ice arena occupies that spot). I don't know what it would take in home theater to replicate that astounding, immersive, wide screen experience. Certainly not any display I will ever have in my little viewing space. But I also remember thinking: the Space Bros take him beyond infinity and then feed him broccoli? That's cold. They are so alien they might as well be angels or gods. With the wailing chorus we approach mysteries and dimensions beyond our comprehension. Our first encounter with the monolith produced upright meat-eating killer apes. The second encounter produced...what? Yes, I read Clarke's book long ago, but the movie is more Kubrick than Clarke. 2010 (1984) is more like Clarke. We took a child to this once and the killer ape sequence disturbed him for a long time. He did not expect animals to behave that way. It has always made me suspect that a real encounter with alien intelligence would not be a happy one. We go from the ape-men fighting at the water hole to Dr Floyd and the Russians sparring at another watering place on the space station. As a kid I never wondered why Dr Floyd had two spacecraft all to himself, nor did I notice what a villain he seemed to be, with his security oaths and kiss-ass colleagues on the moon base. The space station seemed so real at the time because of all the commercial logos. It was a new look. The chief attribute of the human race in the space age seems to be lying. The first words Bowman and Poole exchange are lies. Quite properly there is no sound in space, so Kubrick gives us the breathing noises of the men in their suits. I'm always startled that the deactivation of HAL is so moving. After that all guiding narrative is dropped and we are on our own. Was Dave able to contact Earth? Does he have new orders? What's he trying to accomplish when he goes out in the pod? Who delivers his meals and changes the linen beyond infinity? A film this strangely paced either loses you, or you somehow submit to its internal clock. I felt the same way about The Passion of the Christ. It has various astronomical (and geometrical!) errors; no point in worrying about that in movies. Available on Blu-ray and often on sale. I saw what looked like tiles or brush strokes in the sky at the Dawn of Man. Thank you for that heartfelt reply. I am thinking I'll wait a while and maybe watch it again next summer. See if I don't catch things I missed the first time around. What I really caught but let it pass here (tho I mentioned it to my best friend as we left the theater) is that we humans are morons to think we can build a faultless ie. perfect AI. Why? Because we are nowhere near perfect. Once we try to give AI emotional intelligence, it's a double edged sword. Sure they'll learn to converse and maybe even have empathy but then it can also lead to fear, jealously, and lying - if only to preserve themselves. 😬 |
|
|
|
Post by thekindercarebear on Jul 15, 2022 16:15:11 GMT
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), directed by Stanley Kubrick. I first saw this as a boy at the River Hills in Des Moines, Cinerama and still the finest theater I have ever known. (It's long gone now; an ice arena occupies that spot). I don't know what it would take in home theater to replicate that astounding, immersive, wide screen experience. Certainly not any display I will ever have in my little viewing space. But I also remember thinking: the Space Bros take him beyond infinity and then feed him broccoli? That's cold. They are so alien they might as well be angels or gods. With the wailing chorus we approach mysteries and dimensions beyond our comprehension. Our first encounter with the monolith produced upright meat-eating killer apes. The second encounter produced...what? Yes, I read Clarke's book long ago, but the movie is more Kubrick than Clarke. 2010 (1984) is more like Clarke. We took a child to this once and the killer ape sequence disturbed him for a long time. He did not expect animals to behave that way. It has always made me suspect that a real encounter with alien intelligence would not be a happy one. We go from the ape-men fighting at the water hole to Dr Floyd and the Russians sparring at another watering place on the space station. As a kid I never wondered why Dr Floyd had two spacecraft all to himself, nor did I notice what a villain he seemed to be, with his security oaths and kiss-ass colleagues on the moon base. The space station seemed so real at the time because of all the commercial logos. It was a new look. The chief attribute of the human race in the space age seems to be lying. The first words Bowman and Poole exchange are lies. Quite properly there is no sound in space, so Kubrick gives us the breathing noises of the men in their suits. I'm always startled that the deactivation of HAL is so moving. After that all guiding narrative is dropped and we are on our own. Was Dave able to contact Earth? Does he have new orders? What's he trying to accomplish when he goes out in the pod? Who delivers his meals and changes the linen beyond infinity? A film this strangely paced either loses you, or you somehow submit to its internal clock. I felt the same way about The Passion of the Christ. It has various astronomical (and geometrical!) errors; no point in worrying about that in movies. Available on Blu-ray and often on sale. I saw what looked like tiles or brush strokes in the sky at the Dawn of Man.
so where I saw this film was at the byrd theater - named after a white supremist/segregationist family so i have heard.
i am surprised there has not been a push to rename it yet.
it is pretty magnificent for being 94 years old.
if you guys ever stop through Richmond, VA - maybe you'll be able to catch a movie here. 
it used to be a $1 revival theater but now it is a $8 revival theater thanks to inflation and soaring operating costs even before inflation hit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rissa on Jul 15, 2022 16:38:50 GMT
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), directed by Stanley Kubrick. I first saw this as a boy at the River Hills in Des Moines, Cinerama and still the finest theater I have ever known. (It's long gone now; an ice arena occupies that spot). I don't know what it would take in home theater to replicate that astounding, immersive, wide screen experience. Certainly not any display I will ever have in my little viewing space. But I also remember thinking: the Space Bros take him beyond infinity and then feed him broccoli? That's cold. They are so alien they might as well be angels or gods. With the wailing chorus we approach mysteries and dimensions beyond our comprehension. Our first encounter with the monolith produced upright meat-eating killer apes. The second encounter produced...what? Yes, I read Clarke's book long ago, but the movie is more Kubrick than Clarke. 2010 (1984) is more like Clarke. We took a child to this once and the killer ape sequence disturbed him for a long time. He did not expect animals to behave that way. It has always made me suspect that a real encounter with alien intelligence would not be a happy one. We go from the ape-men fighting at the water hole to Dr Floyd and the Russians sparring at another watering place on the space station. As a kid I never wondered why Dr Floyd had two spacecraft all to himself, nor did I notice what a villain he seemed to be, with his security oaths and kiss-ass colleagues on the moon base. The space station seemed so real at the time because of all the commercial logos. It was a new look. The chief attribute of the human race in the space age seems to be lying. The first words Bowman and Poole exchange are lies. Quite properly there is no sound in space, so Kubrick gives us the breathing noises of the men in their suits. I'm always startled that the deactivation of HAL is so moving. After that all guiding narrative is dropped and we are on our own. Was Dave able to contact Earth? Does he have new orders? What's he trying to accomplish when he goes out in the pod? Who delivers his meals and changes the linen beyond infinity? A film this strangely paced either loses you, or you somehow submit to its internal clock. I felt the same way about The Passion of the Christ. It has various astronomical (and geometrical!) errors; no point in worrying about that in movies. Available on Blu-ray and often on sale. I saw what looked like tiles or brush strokes in the sky at the Dawn of Man.
so where I saw this film was at the byrd theater - named after a white supremist/segregationist family so i have heard.
i am surprised there has not been a push to rename it yet.
it is pretty magnificent for being 94 years old.
if you guys ever stop through Richmond, VA - maybe you'll be able to catch a movie here.
it used to be a $1 revival theater but now it is a $8 revival theater thanks to inflation and soaring operating costs even before inflation hit.
It’s been awhile since I’ve been there. Hope to go back soon though. |
|
|
|
Post by thekindercarebear on Jul 15, 2022 16:51:32 GMT
 ... bartlesby any input you would like to share?
|
|
|
|
Post by Cat on Jul 15, 2022 17:17:30 GMT
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), directed by Stanley Kubrick. I first saw this as a boy at the River Hills in Des Moines, Cinerama and still the finest theater I have ever known. (It's long gone now; an ice arena occupies that spot). I don't know what it would take in home theater to replicate that astounding, immersive, wide screen experience. Certainly not any display I will ever have in my little viewing space. But I also remember thinking: the Space Bros take him beyond infinity and then feed him broccoli? That's cold. They are so alien they might as well be angels or gods. With the wailing chorus we approach mysteries and dimensions beyond our comprehension. Our first encounter with the monolith produced upright meat-eating killer apes. The second encounter produced...what? Yes, I read Clarke's book long ago, but the movie is more Kubrick than Clarke. 2010 (1984) is more like Clarke. We took a child to this once and the killer ape sequence disturbed him for a long time. He did not expect animals to behave that way. It has always made me suspect that a real encounter with alien intelligence would not be a happy one. We go from the ape-men fighting at the water hole to Dr Floyd and the Russians sparring at another watering place on the space station. As a kid I never wondered why Dr Floyd had two spacecraft all to himself, nor did I notice what a villain he seemed to be, with his security oaths and kiss-ass colleagues on the moon base. The space station seemed so real at the time because of all the commercial logos. It was a new look. The chief attribute of the human race in the space age seems to be lying. The first words Bowman and Poole exchange are lies. Quite properly there is no sound in space, so Kubrick gives us the breathing noises of the men in their suits. I'm always startled that the deactivation of HAL is so moving. After that all guiding narrative is dropped and we are on our own. Was Dave able to contact Earth? Does he have new orders? What's he trying to accomplish when he goes out in the pod? Who delivers his meals and changes the linen beyond infinity? A film this strangely paced either loses you, or you somehow submit to its internal clock. I felt the same way about The Passion of the Christ. It has various astronomical (and geometrical!) errors; no point in worrying about that in movies. Available on Blu-ray and often on sale. I saw what looked like tiles or brush strokes in the sky at the Dawn of Man.
so where I saw this film was at the byrd theater - named after a white supremist/segregationist family so i have heard.
i am surprised there has not been a push to rename it yet.
it is pretty magnificent for being 94 years old.
if you guys ever stop through Richmond, VA - maybe you'll be able to catch a movie here.
it used to be a $1 revival theater but now it is a $8 revival theater thanks to inflation and soaring operating costs even before inflation hit.
That looks incredible. I would watch a documentary about the history of shoe tongues there. Wow what a nice looking place. It looks like the place where the people from Eyes Wide Shut watch movies.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikemonger on Jul 15, 2022 17:33:44 GMT
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), directed by Stanley Kubrick. I first saw this as a boy at the River Hills in Des Moines, Cinerama and still the finest theater I have ever known. (It's long gone now; an ice arena occupies that spot). I don't know what it would take in home theater to replicate that astounding, immersive, wide screen experience. Certainly not any display I will ever have in my little viewing space. But I also remember thinking: the Space Bros take him beyond infinity and then feed him broccoli? That's cold. They are so alien they might as well be angels or gods. With the wailing chorus we approach mysteries and dimensions beyond our comprehension. Our first encounter with the monolith produced upright meat-eating killer apes. The second encounter produced...what? Yes, I read Clarke's book long ago, but the movie is more Kubrick than Clarke. 2010 (1984) is more like Clarke. We took a child to this once and the killer ape sequence disturbed him for a long time. He did not expect animals to behave that way. It has always made me suspect that a real encounter with alien intelligence would not be a happy one. We go from the ape-men fighting at the water hole to Dr Floyd and the Russians sparring at another watering place on the space station. As a kid I never wondered why Dr Floyd had two spacecraft all to himself, nor did I notice what a villain he seemed to be, with his security oaths and kiss-ass colleagues on the moon base. The space station seemed so real at the time because of all the commercial logos. It was a new look. The chief attribute of the human race in the space age seems to be lying. The first words Bowman and Poole exchange are lies. Quite properly there is no sound in space, so Kubrick gives us the breathing noises of the men in their suits. I'm always startled that the deactivation of HAL is so moving. After that all guiding narrative is dropped and we are on our own. Was Dave able to contact Earth? Does he have new orders? What's he trying to accomplish when he goes out in the pod? Who delivers his meals and changes the linen beyond infinity? A film this strangely paced either loses you, or you somehow submit to its internal clock. I felt the same way about The Passion of the Christ. It has various astronomical (and geometrical!) errors; no point in worrying about that in movies. Available on Blu-ray and often on sale. I saw what looked like tiles or brush strokes in the sky at the Dawn of Man.
so where I saw this film was at the byrd theater - named after a white supremist/segregationist family so i have heard.
i am surprised there has not been a push to rename it yet.
it is pretty magnificent for being 94 years old.
if you guys ever stop through Richmond, VA - maybe you'll be able to catch a movie here.
it used to be a $1 revival theater but now it is a $8 revival theater thanks to inflation and soaring operating costs even before inflation hit.
I actually saw something there once at some point, but I can't for the life of me remember what. It's been a long time.... |
|
