|
Post by damngumby on Jul 17, 2022 15:32:20 GMT
I didn't see the monolith as causing our evolution. Sentiment beings will use their environment to build, defend, and attack. I mean did beavers touch the monolith? No? Then how do they know how to build dams? 😏 I think the aliens knew we were morons and were not ready to meet them for thousands if not 10s of thousands of years. So they took their monolith and set it on the moon and left us alone. I think the movie was pretty clear that simply picking up a bone and bonking someone on the head wasn’t sufficient indication of intelligence. The bone morphed into a satellite. If building rudimentary structures is a sign of intelligence, then wasps … ants … birds.
|
|
|
Post by thekindercarebear on Jul 17, 2022 15:36:24 GMT
I didn't see the monolith as causing our evolution. Sentiment beings will use their environment to build, defend, and attack. I mean did beavers touch the monolith? No? Then how do they know how to build dams? 😏 I think the aliens knew we were morons and were not ready to meet them for thousands if not 10s of thousands of years. So they took their monolith and set it on the moon and left us alone. I think the movie was pretty clear that simply picking up a bone and bonking someone on the head wasn’t sufficient indication of intelligence. The bone morphed into a satellite. If building rudimentary structures is a sign of intelligence, then wasps … ants … birds. I agree. I think the monolith was more of a test, one we failed terribly as prehistoric man. The one one the moon was another test, one we passed as it started to receive a signal from the one by Jupiter. This is all IMHO of course, the film is designed so abstract to warrant discourse.
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Jul 17, 2022 15:38:24 GMT
Are you suggesting the monoliths were not alien devices? I'm suggesting the movie left it ambiguous. A monolith suddenly appearing on primitive earth. Another one buried on the moon, which sent a radio signal to a third one orbiting Jupiter. Not obviously alien constructs? Oooookay …
|
|
|
Post by thekindercarebear on Jul 17, 2022 15:41:15 GMT
I'm suggesting the movie left it ambiguous. A monolith suddenly appearing on primitive earth. Another one buried on the moon, which sent a radio signal to a third one orbiting Jupiter. Not obviously alien constructs? Oooookay … And someone or something must have taken the one on earth away as it's not referenced again til we get to the moon.
|
|
|
Post by dlancer on Jul 17, 2022 15:53:14 GMT
I'm suggesting the movie left it ambiguous. A monolith suddenly appearing on primitive earth. Another one buried on the moon, which sent a radio signal to a third one orbiting Jupiter. Not obviously alien constructs? Oooookay … Nope, not obvious. Could be aliens. Could be god. Could be ourselves from the future Interstellar style.
But leave it up to Gumbo to find something to argue about outside the politics board.
|
|
|
Post by thekindercarebear on Jul 17, 2022 15:57:18 GMT
A monolith suddenly appearing on primitive earth. Another one buried on the moon, which sent a radio signal to a third one orbiting Jupiter. Not obviously alien constructs? Oooookay … Nope, not obvious. Could be aliens. Could be god. Could be ourselves from the future Interstellar style.
But leave it up to Gumbo to find something to argue about outside the politics board.
Lol Well the film is made to be open to interpretation so there aren't supposed to be wrong answers within certain parameters. I mean we get a space faring super baby ar the end of this film. A bigger WTF moment I can't recall...since HAL killing those 3 poor souks in cryo sleep...
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Jul 17, 2022 15:57:41 GMT
I think the movie was pretty clear that simply picking up a bone and bonking someone on the head wasn’t sufficient indication of intelligence. The bone morphed into a satellite. If building rudimentary structures is a sign of intelligence, then wasps … ants … birds. I agree. I think the monolith was more of a test, one we failed terribly as prehistoric man. The one one the moon was another test, one we passed as it started to receive a signal from the one by Jupiter. This is all IMHO of course, the film is designed so abstract to warrant discourse. What sort of test do you think it was? If the first monolith was just testing protohumans to see if they were sufficiently advanced to qualify as star child material, then the film wouldn’t have spent so much time on the discovery of tool use following the appearance of the monolith. If the ability to travel to the moon was an indicator that a species had become advanced enough to take the next step, then the first monolith (as a test) was rather pointless. BTW, the moon monolith sent a signal to the Jupiter monolith when it was exposed to sunlight, not the other way around.
|
|
|
Post by thekindercarebear on Jul 17, 2022 16:02:50 GMT
I agree. I think the monolith was more of a test, one we failed terribly as prehistoric man. The one one the moon was another test, one we passed as it started to receive a signal from the one by Jupiter. This is all IMHO of course, the film is designed so abstract to warrant discourse. What sort of test do you think it was? If the first monolith was just testing protohumans to see if they were sufficiently advanced to qualify as star child material, then the film wouldn’t have spent so much time on the discovery of tool use following the appearance of the monolith. If the ability to travel to the moon was an indicator that a species had become advanced enough to take the next step, then the first monolith (as a test) was rather pointless. BTW, the moon monolith sent a signal to the Jupiter monolith when it was exposed to sunlight, not the other way around. Thanks for the clarification. That said i just didn't feel the obelisk made us what we are. IF the aliens were so advanced and powerful, seems off we'd need 50k years to progress to a point just to get to the moon.
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Jul 17, 2022 16:08:28 GMT
A monolith suddenly appearing on primitive earth. Another one buried on the moon, which sent a radio signal to a third one orbiting Jupiter. Not obviously alien constructs? Oooookay … Nope, not obvious. Could be aliens. Could be god. Could be ourselves from the future Interstellar style.
But leave it up to Gumbo to find something to argue about outside the politics board.
“What does God need with a starship monolith?” - Captain Kirk Humans from the future, despite there being no indication that time travel was a thing in this story? Could be unicorns, I guess. BTW, we’re not “arguing”. We’re having a discussion.
|
|
|
Post by dlancer on Jul 17, 2022 16:22:06 GMT
Nope, not obvious. Could be aliens. Could be god. Could be ourselves from the future Interstellar style.
But leave it up to Gumbo to find something to argue about outside the politics board.
Lol Well the film is made to be open to interpretation so there aren't supposed to be wrong answers within certain parameters. I mean we get a space faring super baby ar the end of this film. A bigger WTF moment I can't recall...since HAL killing those 3 poor souks in cryo sleep... Exactly. 2001 is perhaps the most interpretive movie out there, that was worth seeing anyway.
There's nothing that screams aliens about it, but there's nothing that screams not aliens either. It seems like Kubrick intentionally left it ambiguous.
|
|
|
Post by dlancer on Jul 17, 2022 16:23:25 GMT
Nope, not obvious. Could be aliens. Could be god. Could be ourselves from the future Interstellar style.
But leave it up to Gumbo to find something to argue about outside the politics board.
“What does God need with a starship monolith?” - Captain Kirk Humans from the future, despite there being no indication that time travel was a thing in this story? Could be unicorns, I guess. BTW, we’re not “arguing”. We’re having a discussion. Well, first you misrepresented what I said. I said god an aliens were the ambiguity, you claimed I said the monolith was the ambiguity even though god and aliens was right there for you to read. And when you got caught in that mistake, you tried to warp reality that I must've been talking about the monolith and not gods and aliens because aliens was soooooo obvious. But they weren't. The monolith was left as this mysterious object in Kubrick's version because he wanted that ambiguity.
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Jul 17, 2022 16:32:40 GMT
What sort of test do you think it was? If the first monolith was just testing protohumans to see if they were sufficiently advanced to qualify as star child material, then the film wouldn’t have spent so much time on the discovery of tool use following the appearance of the monolith. If the ability to travel to the moon was an indicator that a species had become advanced enough to take the next step, then the first monolith (as a test) was rather pointless. BTW, the moon monolith sent a signal to the Jupiter monolith when it was exposed to sunlight, not the other way around. Thanks for the clarification. That said i just didn't feel the obelisk made us what we are. IF the aliens were so advanced and powerful, seems off we'd need 50k years to progress to a point just to get to the moon. I’m trying to avoid inserting explanations from the book into this discussion. Just what was presented in the movie. The unnatural appearance of the monolith indicates that it was constructed by … someone. It’s never revealed who, so we can just call them “aliens”. It certainly wasn’t corporeal humans or any other species known to man. If it was some sort of time traveling future star child human offspring, then I think it’s reasonable to view them as aliens as well. Cosmically speaking, 50k years is a blink in time. I think it is reasonable to view the entire procedure as one long test. The first monolith started us on the path. The second monolith determined that we passed the test by reaching the moon. The third monolith performs the final transformation.
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Jul 17, 2022 17:08:49 GMT
“What does God need with a starship monolith?” - Captain Kirk Humans from the future, despite there being no indication that time travel was a thing in this story? Could be unicorns, I guess. BTW, we’re not “arguing”. We’re having a discussion. Well, first you misrepresented what I said. I said god an aliens were the ambiguity, you claimed I said the monolith was the ambiguity even though god and aliens was right there for you to read. And when you got caught in that mistake, you tried to warp reality that I must've been talking about the monolith and not gods and aliens because aliens was soooooo obvious. But they weren't. The monolith was left as this mysterious object in Kubrick's version because he wanted that ambiguity. I never “claimed” you said anything, though I will now. You said it was ambiguous that some sort of intelligence (a god, or aliens) was responsible for our evolution, leading one to believe that you were suggesting it was a natural occurrence, independent from an external influence. I simply reiterated that the monolith indicated that someone (gods, or aliens) was responsible. If it was just a case of you not being entirely clear, that pretty much flew out the window when you also said it was ambiguous that the monoliths were devices of alien origin. Let’s keep the douchbaggery to the Politics forum, mmkay?
|
|
|
Post by dlancer on Jul 17, 2022 17:43:13 GMT
Well, first you misrepresented what I said. I said god an aliens were the ambiguity, you claimed I said the monolith was the ambiguity even though god and aliens was right there for you to read. And when you got caught in that mistake, you tried to warp reality that I must've been talking about the monolith and not gods and aliens because aliens was soooooo obvious. But they weren't. The monolith was left as this mysterious object in Kubrick's version because he wanted that ambiguity. I never “claimed” you said anything, though I will now. You said it was ambiguous that some sort of intelligence (a god, or aliens) was responsible for our evolution, leading one to believe that you were suggesting it was a natural occurrence, independent from an external influence. I simply reiterated that the monolith indicated that someone (gods, or aliens) was responsible. If it was just a case of you not being entirely clear, that pretty much flew out the window when you also said it was ambiguous that the monoliths were devices of alien origin. Let’s keep the douchbaggery to the Politics forum, mmkay? I said the monolith was ambiguous as far as being god or aliens. If push comes to shove, and someone wanted to interject that it was something else, they have that freedom within the confines of Kubrick's film, but that's a whole other can of worms and not what my original statement was about.
There was never any implication that the monolith was because of aliens over god, or god over aliens. That was my statement.
But you had to make an argument out of it because you thought I said the monolith's ambiguity related to it's ability to make people evolve. Which wasn't my statement at all.
A simple "my bad" would've sufficed, but here you are still going at it.
|
|