in my opinion HAL also represent Ha-el which is the most high. and the fact that HAL was disconnected is that kubrick is trying to show that God will need to be taken out of man's life in the question of humanity's apotheosis.
@paologizzle or maybe part of the equipment was manufactured by diferent companies,and all that just appens to be a big coincidence,but you'll never know with kubrick
I get the IBM on the wrist thing. I think it's highly likely that the letters across his face are the MEM it shows on the screen as suggested at 4:13 I think it's funny so much hype over a maybe dig by kubrick at IBM. Should be focusing your paranoia at the 9/11 coverup maan!
If this film were made today, I'd say that the ATM reference might be wink to IBM's pioneering technology. But I think it is not. Toward the end of this video, during the chess sequence, ATM appears on one of the screens. Moments later, HIB appears on another close by, leading me to believe that they are systems updates with ATM signifying "atmosphere" and HIB signifying "hibernation" as in the hibernation chambers. The letters on Dave's face may suggest that we're seeing a HAL's eye view.
Possibly he knew that IBM had invented punch-card machines for the Nazi's to enable them to keep track of Jews and undesirables much more efficiently. Hell, IBM practically automated the holocaust.
@SHiTJuFro743 But they could see the iPad (or generally any tablet). In the HD version you can clearly see IBM TELE PAD they used to watch TV streams. It's around the one hour mark.
@SHiTJuFro743 I wouldn't say that either. Surely you know the IBM Watson, right? And they're still a big player in the supercomputer, mainframe and general server business. And they're one of few companies still working on state of the art silicon manufacturing technologies. As the 31st largest firm with almost half a milion employees I don't think they're out yet.
@Vlakpage nice story bro. -_- Now you can collect your IBM advertisement royalties.
I wrote it in the sense that Kubrick wrote this in the 60's, and has these large references to a company where most people today would say: "IBM? Who gives one about IBM?"
I for one enjoy these analysis pieces. I have also read 'IBM and the Holocaust'. The super-sensitivity of 'corporate image' and 'branding' is so over argued in modern times. Its the equivalent of a post-modern 'religious reflex'; personally, trying to 'lay' culpability to a fictious or historical event for modern times is rather a bizarre world view. I rely on technology every day when I microwave a potato or flush a toilet. IBM leased computers, it didn't run death camps.
@granddad2002 Yeah I'm not saying IBM ran death camps, but there are lots of examples of western corporations aiding the Nazis before and during WW2 in breach of the Trading With The Enemy Act. It was equally rife in the cold war. US technology sold and given (sometimes production plants even being built on Soviet soil by western personnel) to the "enemy" and then being passed on to the Viet Cong to kill American troops despite FBI agents reporting to congress. It's an important issue.
Glad I finally found a place to make a comment. Robag, awesome work on the background and symbolism of this movie. Your review has elevated my respect for this movie and Kubrick as a director. I can't wait to watch it again with the knowledge of your thoughts!
On yesterdays episode of “Jeopardy!,” contestants competed against an IBM supercomputer named Watson, and it’s exactly like the HAL 9000 in “2001.” Despite its immense intelligence, the supercomputer did have a tendency to make mistakes, much like HAL in the film. All this is definitive proof that Kubrick was way, way ahead of his time back in the 1960s and “2001” is a truly great film!
@Chenstrapftw Yeah that ATM thing kept playing on my mind when I watched it. According to Wiki ATM machines started being used broadly around the time 2001 was made. Nice point about the barcodes.
My comment below also proves that you can't believe 'everything' Kubrick and Clarke said / wanted you to think about the film, especially since the IBM / HAL argument has been now proven true. Considering how long both Kubrick and Clarke kept denying the IBM relation, proves that there's aspects of 2001 that they were more than willing to 'Cover Up' or 'Lie' about to hide the true meaning of things in this film to the vast majority.
FYI, Arthur C. Clarke can be seen/heard on a documentary FINALLY admitting that the relation between HAL and IBM is of course, NOT a coincidence at all. And also that IBM was actually quite proud of the HAL / IBM connection. It was one of the documentaries featured in the bonus content of the 2001 A Space Odyssey BluRay. Great work on your analysis, btw
Right now I'm working on a paper on 2001, and I'm choosing to write about how the film potrays technology. Clearly HAL represents the dangers of technology, but do you think Kubrick is also conveying a positive message about technology and communication, or even predicting the Technological Singularity? After all, the apes never would have been able to evolve if they hadn't learned how to use tools, and the astronauts wouldn't be able to live in space without their life support.
@TheBackOfTheBoat Is Kubrick making the point that technology could one day free humanity from its own physical constraints i.e. make us all "Star Children?"
@robag88 I got that idea too. Interpreting the ending in regards to the theme of technology was what I found most difficult. I'm tempted to believe that Kubrick is either encouraging an embrace of future technology, which would lead us to become greater than just mere physical human beings, or a rejection of it, and thus a return or "odyssey" back to our original state as being a part of nature. But I guess it doesn't have to necessarily be one or the other- I doubt Kubrick is that simple.
Good question. I think Kubrick and Clarke wanted to convey both the positives as well as the negatives one of man's ultimate inventions: technology. If you think about it, there's good points and bad points to virtually everything man creates.
Also the letters FLX visible in this clip become GMY - the language code for Mycenean Greek which Homer, author of the Odyssey, described in the Iliad. Clutching at straws? Perhaps... Perhaps not, knowing Kubrick.
Following the lines of HAL = IBM, the letters CNT which feature prominently on HAL's display become DOU; could this be representative of Document of Understanding - a device to make us understand HAL is IBM, as well as reminding us of documents potentially used between IBM and the Nazi party?
@Sandcat87 CNT turns to DOU - I haven't checked it in the film yet, but if you're right then that pretty much nails the HAL = IBM pattern of each letter shifting forward by one. Thanks for that.
IBM=Iacobus Burgundus Molensis(the last Grand Master of the Knights Templar) also Freemasonery, HAL has numeric value 36 in Hebrew, 6x6, 6 is number of Sun, also 1+2+3+4+5...+36=666=Sorath, Spirith of Sun in Kabballah. Red eye is simbol of Shiva on TAROT card Death-of ego. All Kubrick work is encrypted.It's not for Hollywood junkies. Space Oddissey is a symbolic saga that describe initiation over Kabbalistic Tree of Life, from Earth,Moon, Jupiter, and after Abbyss... Kubrick was great artist!
I just watched this film on Youtube...thinking about the film being released in '68 before the space race (USA vs. RUSSIA), it is one of the greatest films ever made. Part of Kubrick's brilliance in making the film was that he was able to 'see' where man was headed technologically.
@jm31563 He was scarily ahead of his time, which can only be the result of determined and meticulous reseach. I often suspect he'd mixed with powerful people to know the stuff he was onto.
Anyone who can give me a *fundamentally* new approach to viewing the Art of a director whose films I've already admired, without reservation, for more than thirty years, deserves my genuine thanks and admiration, himself, in return. Well done, Mr Ager! But it was re: The Shining and Eyes Wide Shut that your system of analysis has done me the most good, "rehabilitating" two films whose *apparent* flaws I'd been puzzled/disappointed by for so long. You should be teaching a Uni-level film course.
Kubrick being one of the best film directors of all time, spending years on years with research and systematic analysis of every object he put in front of his camera, little to nothing can possibly be coincidental. Not only did he choose everything on the set, he watched through every frame several times. I admire Rob Ager for his interpretation and insight, with an ability to actually see and connect all these objects together. You people who complain or whine, why not analysis it yourselves?
In the end of your review you asked what the skull in the beginning was about. I think it might be a tribute to C.M. Russell who would always sign his paintings with a buffalo skull. The desert that the scene takes place in also looks a lot like one of his drawings.
@robag88 It's not that there is a single drawing, but that he signs all of his paintings with a cow skull. Also he paints the American west, so a lot of his paintings focus on desert landscapes. If you just do a google image search of C. M. Russell you can find some of his paintings.
Kubrick is one weird motherfucker. I mean really why bother with all those little details? Only people who obsess over movies (no offense btw) give a damn about that stuff anyway.
If you want to have a message in your Movie, then make it Visible for everybody and not just people who put god knows how much work into analysing your Films.
@BuecherFuerAlle If he'd have made the stuff obvious he wouldn't have got any funds from IBM, Nasa etc. I think there are three additional reasons for his level of subtlety 1) That most of the messages would remain hidden until after his career was over 2) To avoid being sued by the investors (he could always just claim the details had other meanings or were accidental) 3) To make people earn their understanding by studying the films on a level of complexity that enhances their thought process
@robag88 Interesting analysis like always. I've been intrigued by something, despite doing some searching otherplace. Most people are stuck on the idea that HAL made a mistake and Frank & Dave freaked out over it.
Nobody talks about HAL intentionally lying about the error, so he could get the communication disconnected. It makes perfect sense, considering HAL's capable of lying and thinking ahead, like he does in the chess game with Frank.
It also supports your theory that HAL is evil, right?
Because movies shouldn't have to cater to people who don't want to bother putting the proper amount of effort into interpreting them. Does a high quality piece of artwork bash you over the head with it's social meaning? No. It makes you think. Well, movies are art. Some are terrible because they cram a message down your throat. Others, like 2001, are high art because they actually employ *gasp* subtlety!
@BuecherFuerAlle - You shouldn't underestimate the power of subliminal suggestion too. What the conscious mind misses, the subconscious mind picks up on. In fact, subliminals tend to bypass rational thought, so in a way they tend to "stick" even more
wow and if you think about it computers by 2001 and even more now hold tons of information about almost anything they may not be a simulation of intelligence yet, but in a way they do "control" the information of society, Kubrick really was ahead of his time!
Wow. What a site! I read all 14 chapters on 2001 & although I didn't see eye to eye with every point you made I still learned a lot about the movie I never would have divined. Thank you!
One question regarding your theory that Floyd &the council had been planning to eliminate all the astronauts from the git go: If that is so, then what's the point of Floyd's pre-recorded message? Wouldn't it have been announced to corpses?
@filthyphillyboy It's so long since I wrote the 2001 article I can't remember even saying the astronauts were suppoed to be killed off. The article is also incomplete as I need to get down to the Kubrick archives in London to look at his research materials again.
The numbers on the arms of concentration camp prisoners are actually IBM computer code which classifies them according to Nazi doctrine, i.e. homosexual, communist, gyspsy, terrorist, Jew, etc.
However, one need not see some dark conspiracy or willful participation of IBM into the holocaust at all, as IBM was the main computer manufacturer in the world at that time, and simply sold computers to the Germans prior to the war in the late 1930s, as it did with dozens of other countries.
To further my point, The monkeys that initially take over the pond, Floyd's crew, HAL9000, and Kubrick himself seem to be the oppressors of the movie, those are the all seeing, all knowing eyes of the movie, and the monolith is the doorway to break free from the oppression of the high beings. That's why the scene with the monolith on the moon is so significant. The ringing noise, followed by the shot of the monolith and the blind eye apex is saying they aren't the right guys to go through.
I see HAL as the eye of providence. He's the all seeing eye, and I also interpret the "all seeing eye" as "God". HAL has a god-like presence in the movie, and I noticed that so does Kubrick. Maybe Kubrick and HAL are parallels? Bowman must overcome both, first by shutting HAL off, then when be becomes aware of the movie itself, he must overcome the obstacle of reaching the monolith by defeating Kubrick and touching the monolith in a 2D perspective. That's what I think of HAL.
Don't take this the wrong way, but your attacking of Jacnas and others here makes me feel ill at ease. While I enjoy your movie analysis, this video starts with a belief (that the HAL and IBM theme was intentional) and then finding moments which justify that belief. You cite Kubrick's alleged eccentricity, overlaying a clip in which Kubrick's wife dispels those accusations. Occam's razor; your unsimple analysis belies a much more simpler, coincidence-heavy, reality of the movie in question.
It was Jacnas who attacked me as being a "conspiracy crackpot" so I refuted that comment.
As for your assertion that I started with a belief and then found points to support it ... I don't approach film analysis like that. I studied the film and it's production history not knowing what patterns would emerge. The many references to IBM were too specific and too inter-related to be accidental.
@robag88 Yes, there were many references to IBM. As you stated yourself, IBM was to be featured very prominently in the film. Due to issues, most of that was (as TV Tropes would put it) Dummied Out of the film. You're looking at the cinematic equivalent of deleted content on a video game CD and generating entire plotlines off of it. A character in the game Deus Ex talks about a type of monster called a Red Greasel. What value does it add? Nothing, because the RGs are deleted content. Irrelevant.
I completely disagree with the video games comparison. I play computer games from time to time and even worked in that field as an animator pre the 3d revolution of the first games console. I never witten a review claiming subliminal hidden plotlines in a computer game, but the way you're using that example implies that you think no film ever has a hidden plotline. IBM cerainly didn't feel that way, they asked their employees not to watch the film.
@robag88 Correction re: above I should have said "first 3d games console - the playstation". Something else I think you're ignoring is plausible deniability. If Kubrick had made his IBM critique themes too obvious he may have gotten sued. By building plausible deniability into the details of the subtext he wouldn't be pinned down in a court room.
@robag88 Your experience as an animator is irrelevent to the issue at hand. Deus Ex had Red Greasels. Halo 3 had Flood Juggernauts. Half-Life had an enemy that would rape the player to death. Sonic The Hedgehog 2 had levels that were deleted. The value or merit of those items is nil, because they don't exist. The traces of IBM in 2001 exist because they got past the cutting razor. Your assertion that it was a subtle hidden thing makes your argument look very questionable.
@chriscumbag Don't raise a topic and then say my experience of it is irrelevant. Is your experience of computer games irrelevant? No. Neither is mine. Eg. Game makers sometimes throw subtle little in jokes into the content of the games. I've seen it happen. Citing a few known examples of mistaken interpretations of computer games doesn't mean all interpretations of computer games (or films) are wrong. And again "the razor" is a flawed perceptual tool. Simplicity does not = reality per se.
@robag88 You claim you don't approach film analysis, but I would argue (and given your comments here and elsewhere I'd read, others would too) that is exactly what you're doing. It's called Apophenia; finding patterns where none exist. IBM wants its logo in the movie. They realize the movie makes them look bad. Some remain. From those remains, you've created an entire belief that Kubrick was intentionally lacing the belief in his movie; disputed by the man himself.
@chriscumbag As if Kubrick would publicly verify the themes mentioned in this video and open himself to litigation. The letters HAL being a letter each behind IBM was announced and denied by Kubrick in an interview about the film - he said it without saying it, knowing full well it would spark rumours of it being true. (cont)
1) Dying HAL describes his birth - refers to IBM's first talking computer.
2) Poole talks of something about HAL he can't quite put his finger on ... Bowman's finger almost touches an IBM button on his forearm while changing the AE-35 unit.
3) An unrealistic display of light on Bowman's face forms letters as he says "Do you read me HAL?"
4) HAL lies in the chess game before the AE-35 fault.
Please explain how and why Kubrick included these details.
@robag88 Yes, I've watched the video, and you've said these things there. The problem is, you're still seeing them as proof of an intended statement. Hal's birth is just that, a reference to a historical event. The use of "can't put a finger on it" and the button-scene are coincidental, and only exists because they couldn't change the IBM button in time. The unrealistic lighting is a cinematic choice, proof of nothing. HAL lies because he was ordered to lie. Very simple answers. Occam's razor.
@chriscumbag Look I'll have to be honest with you here, and I don't mean offense. Those are very lame attempts to disregard the details I've listed. You're doing a good job of discrediting Occam's Razor. You're basically stating unfounded (and unconvincing) assumptions about how those details came to be in the film and claiming that the simplicity of your assumptions means they're more accurate. Sorry but you're wasting my time with that stuff.
@robag88 'Said it without saying it'? You wonder why people accuse you of a conspiratorial bent in this review, when you use the very same logic that those who believe in the existence of the Illuminati, Majestic 12, or House Dimir use. The absence of evidence (or, in this case, evidence from sources of authority that directly opposes your belief) is not evidence of your belief. Do you believe Puff The Magic Dragon is a song about weed? The authors of it say that it is not, but people believe.
@chriscumbag Hold on. In your fist comment you said you didn't like how I dealt with those who disagree with my vids, and you cited jacnas example. I explained he called me a "conspiracy crackpot" to which I insulted the guy back. Now you've just gone around the world trying to cite Occam's Razor to say that your opinion of the IBM refs in the film overrides mine by default (it doesn't). And now you're basically calling me a "conspiracy crackpot" in so many words ...
@robag88 ... So you're basically resorting to insult / label tactics in the absence of a conclusive argument to prove your theory that the IBM refs were accidental ... much like when people call each other left / right wingers, fascists / bleeding heart liberals etc as a way of scoring cheap points. If you want an intelligent and reasoned conversation then have one. If you want to make accusations about my mental health then you'll lose ... I've worked in the field for thirteen years.
Occam's Razor by the way is not a good perceptual principle. I call it Occam's Perceptual Limitation because reality is in fact far more complex that humans perceive it to be. For example, the periodic table (and its complexities) has replaced older, simpler models of base elements that we now know to be wrong.
This "reviewer" is a conspiracy crackpot and like most crackpots he's actually correct about some things, like the movie's love-hate relationship with technology. First of all Kubrick didn't have to employ elaborate measures to hide any narratives from producers because he was already respected and renowned enough to not have to suffer MGM people twisting his hand. In fact no MGM employees were allowed on the set. Both Kubrick and Clarke were embarassed by the IBM-HAL conspiracy.
"Conspiracy crackpot" ... that's a typical lame insult thrown about by dull minds who prefer to try and character attack a person they disagree with rather than present their own argument for what it is. Yes, Kubrick did employ elaborate measures to hide stuff from investors / producers - read his biographies. You just said yourself no MGM employees were allowed on set (they actually were once so Kubrick had a mock room of irrelevevant diagrams and paperwork set up to appease them).
@robag88 You're a numerologist of film analysis. You're connecting some vague, nebulous clues in a disordered manner and somehow weave them together into a vast conspiracy. It's a joke, not an analysis.
Wrong, I'm not into numerology or 23 enigma garbage so don't waste your time. "Vague, nebulous clues" ... So you're saying the "Langley ... Urbana ... Illinois" refs spoken by a dying HAL (all three letters one short of IBM) and the singing of "daisy" (first ever synch speech at said location) are all accidental? You're a coincidence theorist, probably driven by a desire to avoid the idea that a film maker like Kubrick could place things in his films that went over your head.
@robag88 HAL's last words and location were chosen because, as you cited, the first time a computer sang was there, and that was the song. That was intentional. Your assertion that because it was an IBM computer that first did it, the line was chosen to further a HAL/IBM assumption that relies on the idea that Kubrick (and perhaps others involved) was a bold-faced liar, and that everyone involved that has said otherwise was lying or ignorant of the truth.
@chriscumbag Although I love the bones of Kubrick for the incredible films he made, the guy did specifically throw up smoke screens (including lying) to avoid talking about certain details in his films ... read the bigraphies on him by John Baxter and Vincent Lobrutto and read the interviews he did. As for "others involved" his cast, crew and co-writers were frequently baffled by what he was up to so they wouldn't have to lie if they didn't know.
This is fucking retarded. References to IBM? It's almost as if ... as if IBM were the biggest computer company at the time the movie was made. Gasp! This isn't a serious analysis. This is a conspiracy theory, that TRIVIALIZE a brilliant and sublime movie.
IBM helped fund the film not for art's sake, but to promote technology and the company name. They were very unhappy with the result because HAL turned out to be a murderous computer so they told their employees not to watch the film. As the video shows Kubrick packed the film with references between HAL and IBM. So where's the conspiracy theory?
@robag88 What makes it conspiratorial, is that you make an inference from a pattern in the film, as to what the authors' intentions were. Look up "the intentional fallacy". If your analysis made the film MORE interesting, then I'd take it to heart. But in fact, it makes it less interesting. Personally, the effect of these references (to IBM, Hilton Hotels, etc.) is realism. HAL lipreading the chess moves however, is a very nice catch indeed!
That's quite a loose set of criteria you have for something being conspiratorial. "Intentional fallacy" is a theory on criticism and is thus ironically a demonstration of itself. I can pretty much guarantee you that the folks who coined the term "intentional fallacy" would completely miss the subliminal stuff in my own fiction films. They would be thinking literal, and hence missing out on metaphors communicated through deliberate patterns of sensory repetition.
Whenever I watch the Shinning or 2001. I just see a man who shot what was in the book. I think people gave him too much credit and that he went with it.
@Spartanoffaith The Shining film is famously very different to the book. Stephen King hated the film and Kubrick didn't even look at King's screenplay for his own book. As for 2001, the book was written, despite the common myth, as the film was being shot. Kubrick would shoot scenes and then have Clarke write an interpretation of them that didn't necessarily match Kubrick's. There are very detailed articles about both films on my site that go into the writing process :)
I've said it before rob, why is the toilet in The Shining(where Torrance meets Grady) the same colour scheme as the landing bay we see in 2001? Great work as always.
The analysis on your website is very impressive. Though my familiarity with the film is not so great, I would just suggest that perhaps the "Renaissance" room is in fact an "Enlightenment" room, judging from the appearance of the furniture and the types of dress depicted in the paintings. We are dealing with 18th century court dress here, and the Age of Enlightenment is much more suited to your themes of Dave's intellectual evolution and his casting off his oppressor (French Revolution).
i am 27 years old and have just finished seeing 2001 for the first time. it was a spiritual experience for me. it was faith and love and lots of other things. now comes religion - analysing the experience.
Arthur C. Clarke discusses this in his autobiography, if you want to look it up (I had it on audio book).
IBM was the big computer company back then, much as Microsoft is now, so it is logical to have them build it. I think 2001 is a lot about humans becoming like machines - as someone's pointed out, a lot of the scientists are very mechanical.
I was looking for any reality cues Kubrik may have used to bring this issue directly to the audience's attention.
Based on your 2001 film analysis, I think the IBM/ethics message is even more salient: the rectangle at 2:38 is very similar to the monoliths and theater screen dimensions too. I suspect that pressing the button next to the rectangle alludes to themes of being oblivious to technological/organizational dependence and potentially human/evolutionary failure as well. Brilliant motif!
the thing about these films is that looked at from any angle, they seem to stand up. Kubrick could succeed in multiple cinematic ideals at once.
My analogy is this: artistically speaking, one can rotate works 360 and they look the same; with Kubrick's films, you have to turn them at least 540 degrees before you can behold the same thing you did before. His films aren't tangible things. To me his films are sub-atomic in this way
Rob, do you think there is a connection between the grated appearance of Hals memory and the IBM logo, IBM machines themselves which have a grated motif. This grating horizontal and vertical motif are strongly associated with the IBM brand.
One thing anyone familiar with Kubrick should know is that he carefully and deliberately planned every scene in his movies. This is an excellent and engaging video that would be wonderful for a film class discussion.
i also think there could be a connection to a lot of big name companies with similar generic 3 letter abbreviations. in the opening of the film as the music finishes we see a 3 letter logo of mgm and then it cuts back to cinematic darkness. there are similarities to the consoles in the pilot areas and the logo,both are two toned colour schemes which use a computer-esq font.
thanks for this ,great watch and fascinating hearing your thoughts.
interesting that it says 'logic memory center' on the door to the hals main hub and the words on the screens in the pilot area read 'com' and 'mem' abbreviations of 'computer' and 'memory' perhaps? another 3 letter word which pops up is the word 'hib' could this be an abbreviation of the word 'hibernation' ? the word 'nuc' also appears too.
I was chatting to someone last week who said they were intending to go through the film and make detilaed notes on everything that appears on those computer screens. I doubt it was all just random stuff.
It took a very long time before you uploaded something, but it was worth the wait. Great analysis, but I am hoping to see more unanalysed films analysed.
I was very appreciative of Kubrick's seemingly elementary visual style, but it wasn't till your analysis videos that I realized his true genius and the vast depth that is hidden from the average moviegoer. Thanks.
Beautiful.really enjoyed that.i watched 10 mins of space odysey and never had the chance to watch it again. Kubrik was way ahead of his time, he knew about Freemasons, he was exposing them, best film of Kubrik Clock Work Orange= Sun Worship and Eyes wide shut = Dont look into the Real World!
I've seen that Clockwork Orange = Sun worship video. The only problem is that a lot of the details they ascribe to Kubrick are actually originally from the novel by Burgess, and Kubrick has incorporated them into the film.
I didn't think much of that video, but one thing I will say is that Kubrick often took details (and stories) by other writers and transformed their meanings.
"Kubrick often took details (and stories) by other writers and transformed their meanings." - I've no quarrel with you there Rob, but think the problem comes about when people haven't read the novels that his films R based on. (I'venot read "Red Alert, Traumnovelle (the originals of Strangelove/EWS) etc) Some elements in 2001&ACO definitely originate with Burgess&Clarke. The beauty of 2001's it's 1 o the few true SF (as opposed2"Sci-fi") films, since Kubrick "got" Clarke's mysticism&fascinations
2001 is a tricky one in terms of what came from who. The popular myth is that the film was based on the book, but if you check the biographies of Kubrick, the book was being written as the film was made and Kubrick would often shoot stuff, show it to Clarke and let Clarke write an interpretation of it. The original short stories have very little in common with the film content. Kubrick also had a 60/40 deal on the book and authority to tell Clarke to make specific changes to the text.
Aye, I know the two were pretty much written at the same time, but Arthur C. Clarke was very much interested in esoterica, mysticism etc, whether it's his novels like "Childhood's End", or his series such as "Arthur C. Clarke's Mysterious World". A lot of his short stories deal with it. As Clarke once said himself - "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"
i just watch the 1080p remastered version of the film, and the letters in daves face read clearly MEM, as in memory, and the sae goes for the MGM theory, it just says MEM. But yes there are a lot of IBM logos across the film, just like BELL, HILTON, PAN AM, i think is just a coment on how deep space exploration as our world today is shaped by corporations.
Yes, the video shows the screen featuring the letters MEM. I think Kubrick was just giving himself plausible deniability so the crew wouldn't know what he was up to - the displaying of MEM on the contours of Dave's face very cleverly form the letters IBM.
IBM themselves knew that Kubrick had stuck it to them with this film. they denounced it and advised their own employees not to watch it.
See the full 14 chapter analysis on my site for a breakdown of many more themes in the film :)
This is a very popular theory and you make some very interesting points, Rob. I especially like the "Daisy Bell" connection.
I only have one criticisms: It sounds to me like Frank is saying, "him." Of course I'm not 100%, but after repeatedly playing the dialogue back, he doesn't seem to be saying, "them," which is what you're implying.
My reason for showing that clip was because of the words "can't quite put my finger on it" - as in Bowman's finger almost touching the IBM button on his forearm console. I wasn't implying the word "them" :)
in my opinion HAL also represent Ha-el which is the most high. and the fact that HAL was disconnected is that kubrick is trying to show that God will need to be taken out of man's life in the question of humanity's apotheosis.
glower125 1 day ago
Ok who thinks IBM should have been inverted for that? I'm sure somebody brought that up before
superniokas 1 week ago
you got this from Alan Watt
ambush77 1 week ago
Great video. I don't know if I agree with your analysis, but it's very interesting. I'll read the article and come back.
splumer 1 week ago
KUBRICK is another name for GENIUS !
GoFdu50 1 week ago
@paologizzle or maybe part of the equipment was manufactured by diferent companies,and all that just appens to be a big coincidence,but you'll never know with kubrick
lamecasuelas2 1 week ago
cracked.com brought me here XD
ProtoNecron 1 week ago
All I could think throughout this was... Is that Ringo Starr narrating?
ThePyjamaPirate 1 week ago
@ThePyjamaPirate Good, that'll keep you consciously occupied while everything else sinks in unconsciously :)
robag88 1 week ago
I get the IBM on the wrist thing. I think it's highly likely that the letters across his face are the MEM it shows on the screen as suggested at 4:13 I think it's funny so much hype over a maybe dig by kubrick at IBM. Should be focusing your paranoia at the 9/11 coverup maan!
dannymac77 1 week ago
@dannymac77 911 cover up? I haven't posted anything on the subject maan :)
robag88 1 week ago
That is not the way to pronounce the letter H.
Babyshaking 1 week ago
yeah we're coming.
dr3amstat3s 1 week ago
brace yourselves, CRACKED users are coming
m3talmast3er 1 week ago
My friend works for IBM.
parsleysprigs 1 month ago
cool stuff!
josephd183 2 months ago
@paologizzle "one step ahead". I like that.
robag88 3 months ago 6
At 2:20 "I sense something strange about him"....Dr. Strangelove, the Nazi who proposed the use of a computer to determine who should live or die?
cortneydream 3 months ago
@cortneydream Kubrick's prior film :)
robag88 1 week ago
I liked this one too. Great video/analysis
cynikalb 6 months ago
If this film were made today, I'd say that the ATM reference might be wink to IBM's pioneering technology. But I think it is not. Toward the end of this video, during the chess sequence, ATM appears on one of the screens. Moments later, HIB appears on another close by, leading me to believe that they are systems updates with ATM signifying "atmosphere" and HIB signifying "hibernation" as in the hibernation chambers. The letters on Dave's face may suggest that we're seeing a HAL's eye view.
diogenetic1 6 months ago in playlist Film Analysis
@diogenetic1 Yeah the ATM thing is bizarre
robag88 1 week ago
i still hate this movie
qtzlctl2012 6 months ago
@qtzlctl2012 yet you still find it interesting enough to watch analysis videos of it :)
robag88 1 week ago
@robag88 hahahahahahaha you're so clever!
hahahahahahahaha
so smart
qtzlctl2012 1 week ago
Possibly he knew that IBM had invented punch-card machines for the Nazi's to enable them to keep track of Jews and undesirables much more efficiently. Hell, IBM practically automated the holocaust.
SoapClawtooth 7 months ago
I think the Reason that Stanley Kubrick doesn't Like IBM is because, of The Holocaust theory, Kubrick was Jewish.
MatauReviews 8 months ago
HAHAHA, IBM. Everyone knows it's all 'bout Apple now. Noobs in the 60's couldn't see iPhone blowing up in the way it did.
SHiTJuFro743 8 months ago
@SHiTJuFro743 But they could see the iPad (or generally any tablet). In the HD version you can clearly see IBM TELE PAD they used to watch TV streams. It's around the one hour mark.
Vlakpage 7 months ago
@Vlakpage :P I was just sort of saying that IBM is nobody now.
SHiTJuFro743 7 months ago
@SHiTJuFro743 I wouldn't say that either. Surely you know the IBM Watson, right? And they're still a big player in the supercomputer, mainframe and general server business. And they're one of few companies still working on state of the art silicon manufacturing technologies. As the 31st largest firm with almost half a milion employees I don't think they're out yet.
Vlakpage 7 months ago
@Vlakpage nice story bro. -_- Now you can collect your IBM advertisement royalties.
I wrote it in the sense that Kubrick wrote this in the 60's, and has these large references to a company where most people today would say: "IBM? Who gives one about IBM?"
SHiTJuFro743 7 months ago
Wow this makes Watson seem 10x scarier.
Nightmonkey17 9 months ago
I for one enjoy these analysis pieces. I have also read 'IBM and the Holocaust'. The super-sensitivity of 'corporate image' and 'branding' is so over argued in modern times. Its the equivalent of a post-modern 'religious reflex'; personally, trying to 'lay' culpability to a fictious or historical event for modern times is rather a bizarre world view. I rely on technology every day when I microwave a potato or flush a toilet. IBM leased computers, it didn't run death camps.
granddad2002 9 months ago
@granddad2002 Yeah I'm not saying IBM ran death camps, but there are lots of examples of western corporations aiding the Nazis before and during WW2 in breach of the Trading With The Enemy Act. It was equally rife in the cold war. US technology sold and given (sometimes production plants even being built on Soviet soil by western personnel) to the "enemy" and then being passed on to the Viet Cong to kill American troops despite FBI agents reporting to congress. It's an important issue.
robag88 3 months ago 3
Glad I finally found a place to make a comment. Robag, awesome work on the background and symbolism of this movie. Your review has elevated my respect for this movie and Kubrick as a director. I can't wait to watch it again with the knowledge of your thoughts!
jatroup12 11 months ago
On yesterdays episode of “Jeopardy!,” contestants competed against an IBM supercomputer named Watson, and it’s exactly like the HAL 9000 in “2001.” Despite its immense intelligence, the supercomputer did have a tendency to make mistakes, much like HAL in the film. All this is definitive proof that Kubrick was way, way ahead of his time back in the 1960s and “2001” is a truly great film!
Beale64 1 year ago
Heh.. I think the whole IBM Nazi connection is much more damming than their connection to a fictional murderous computer.. Lol.
Sigrafix 1 year ago
keep vids comming
redscribbler 1 year ago
Well, i may have found more HAL=IBM references. The white lines going across Daves face could be symbolic of a bar code. IBM invented barcodes.
Also, if you pause this video at 5:53, the bottom left screen reads ATM. IBM invented ATM machines.
Chenstrapftw 1 year ago 8
@Chenstrapftw Yeah that ATM thing kept playing on my mind when I watched it. According to Wiki ATM machines started being used broadly around the time 2001 was made. Nice point about the barcodes.
robag88 11 months ago
My comment below also proves that you can't believe 'everything' Kubrick and Clarke said / wanted you to think about the film, especially since the IBM / HAL argument has been now proven true. Considering how long both Kubrick and Clarke kept denying the IBM relation, proves that there's aspects of 2001 that they were more than willing to 'Cover Up' or 'Lie' about to hide the true meaning of things in this film to the vast majority.
-C
XthreeXstrikesX 1 year ago
@XthreeXstrikesX Good point :)
robag88 1 year ago
FYI, Arthur C. Clarke can be seen/heard on a documentary FINALLY admitting that the relation between HAL and IBM is of course, NOT a coincidence at all. And also that IBM was actually quite proud of the HAL / IBM connection. It was one of the documentaries featured in the bonus content of the 2001 A Space Odyssey BluRay. Great work on your analysis, btw
XthreeXstrikesX 1 year ago
Great video clip. I'd never noticed the IBM details before.
Incidentally, really great film too.
MrAngry61 1 year ago
look up mystery babylon by william cooper he went into detail about this movies symblolism like by going to the next letter in the alphabet hal = ibm
dubbud2 1 year ago
IBM units were actually used under the holocaust :)
denzel9 1 year ago
Right now I'm working on a paper on 2001, and I'm choosing to write about how the film potrays technology. Clearly HAL represents the dangers of technology, but do you think Kubrick is also conveying a positive message about technology and communication, or even predicting the Technological Singularity? After all, the apes never would have been able to evolve if they hadn't learned how to use tools, and the astronauts wouldn't be able to live in space without their life support.
TheBackOfTheBoat 1 year ago
@TheBackOfTheBoat Is Kubrick making the point that technology could one day free humanity from its own physical constraints i.e. make us all "Star Children?"
TheBackOfTheBoat 1 year ago
@TheBackOfTheBoat I don't think so. I think he's warning that corrupt application of technology could one day enslave us.
robag88 1 year ago
@TheBackOfTheBoat I don't think he's knocking technology itself, but rather the dangers of monopolized totalitarian use of technology.
robag88 1 year ago 2
@robag88 I got that idea too. Interpreting the ending in regards to the theme of technology was what I found most difficult. I'm tempted to believe that Kubrick is either encouraging an embrace of future technology, which would lead us to become greater than just mere physical human beings, or a rejection of it, and thus a return or "odyssey" back to our original state as being a part of nature. But I guess it doesn't have to necessarily be one or the other- I doubt Kubrick is that simple.
TheBackOfTheBoat 1 year ago
@TheBackOfTheBoat
Good question. I think Kubrick and Clarke wanted to convey both the positives as well as the negatives one of man's ultimate inventions: technology. If you think about it, there's good points and bad points to virtually everything man creates.
jm31563 1 year ago
why would he want to tell us this and why are there monliths built to help us?
lumpyfishful 1 year ago
@lumpyfishful See expanded analysis on my website.
robag88 1 year ago
Also the letters FLX visible in this clip become GMY - the language code for Mycenean Greek which Homer, author of the Odyssey, described in the Iliad. Clutching at straws? Perhaps... Perhaps not, knowing Kubrick.
Sandcat87 1 year ago
@Sandcat87 Not clutching at staws - FLX becoming GMY further confirms the single letter shift pattern.
robag88 1 year ago
Following the lines of HAL = IBM, the letters CNT which feature prominently on HAL's display become DOU; could this be representative of Document of Understanding - a device to make us understand HAL is IBM, as well as reminding us of documents potentially used between IBM and the Nazi party?
Sandcat87 1 year ago
@Sandcat87 CNT turns to DOU - I haven't checked it in the film yet, but if you're right then that pretty much nails the HAL = IBM pattern of each letter shifting forward by one. Thanks for that.
robag88 1 year ago
Thanks for bringing to light some incredible details from what is, I believe, the best film of all time.
Sandcat87 1 year ago
4:39 this part is creepy
Deader87 1 year ago
IBM=Iacobus Burgundus Molensis(the last Grand Master of the Knights Templar) also Freemasonery, HAL has numeric value 36 in Hebrew, 6x6, 6 is number of Sun, also 1+2+3+4+5...+36=666=Sorath, Spirith of Sun in Kabballah. Red eye is simbol of Shiva on TAROT card Death-of ego. All Kubrick work is encrypted.It's not for Hollywood junkies. Space Oddissey is a symbolic saga that describe initiation over Kabbalistic Tree of Life, from Earth,Moon, Jupiter, and after Abbyss... Kubrick was great artist!
GordanNia 1 year ago
I just watched this film on Youtube...thinking about the film being released in '68 before the space race (USA vs. RUSSIA), it is one of the greatest films ever made. Part of Kubrick's brilliance in making the film was that he was able to 'see' where man was headed technologically.
jm31563 1 year ago
@jm31563 He was scarily ahead of his time, which can only be the result of determined and meticulous reseach. I often suspect he'd mixed with powerful people to know the stuff he was onto.
robag88 1 year ago
@robag88
Absolutely. His research is what led to the film being the masterpiece that it is today.
jm31563 1 year ago
Comment removed
The0Endless0Thread 1 year ago
(accidentally posted a duplicate)
The0Endless0Thread 1 year ago
Anyone who can give me a *fundamentally* new approach to viewing the Art of a director whose films I've already admired, without reservation, for more than thirty years, deserves my genuine thanks and admiration, himself, in return. Well done, Mr Ager! But it was re: The Shining and Eyes Wide Shut that your system of analysis has done me the most good, "rehabilitating" two films whose *apparent* flaws I'd been puzzled/disappointed by for so long. You should be teaching a Uni-level film course.
The0Endless0Thread 1 year ago
@The0Endless0Thread Thanks. That's one of the best compliments I've had :)
robag88 1 year ago
Sounds very Kasparov vs Deep Blue to me.
BahaVII 1 year ago
Kubrick being one of the best film directors of all time, spending years on years with research and systematic analysis of every object he put in front of his camera, little to nothing can possibly be coincidental. Not only did he choose everything on the set, he watched through every frame several times. I admire Rob Ager for his interpretation and insight, with an ability to actually see and connect all these objects together. You people who complain or whine, why not analysis it yourselves?
Poleschs 1 year ago
In the end of your review you asked what the skull in the beginning was about. I think it might be a tribute to C.M. Russell who would always sign his paintings with a buffalo skull. The desert that the scene takes place in also looks a lot like one of his drawings.
nookdew 1 year ago
@nookdew Can you name that drawing so I can take a look?
robag88 1 year ago
@robag88 It's not that there is a single drawing, but that he signs all of his paintings with a cow skull. Also he paints the American west, so a lot of his paintings focus on desert landscapes. If you just do a google image search of C. M. Russell you can find some of his paintings.
nookdew 1 year ago
Kubrick is one weird motherfucker. I mean really why bother with all those little details? Only people who obsess over movies (no offense btw) give a damn about that stuff anyway.
If you want to have a message in your Movie, then make it Visible for everybody and not just people who put god knows how much work into analysing your Films.
BuecherFuerAlle 1 year ago
@BuecherFuerAlle If he'd have made the stuff obvious he wouldn't have got any funds from IBM, Nasa etc. I think there are three additional reasons for his level of subtlety 1) That most of the messages would remain hidden until after his career was over 2) To avoid being sued by the investors (he could always just claim the details had other meanings or were accidental) 3) To make people earn their understanding by studying the films on a level of complexity that enhances their thought process
robag88 1 year ago 19
@robag88 Interesting analysis like always. I've been intrigued by something, despite doing some searching otherplace. Most people are stuck on the idea that HAL made a mistake and Frank & Dave freaked out over it.
Nobody talks about HAL intentionally lying about the error, so he could get the communication disconnected. It makes perfect sense, considering HAL's capable of lying and thinking ahead, like he does in the chess game with Frank.
It also supports your theory that HAL is evil, right?
Kubrick101Fan 3 months ago
@BuecherFuerAlle
Because movies shouldn't have to cater to people who don't want to bother putting the proper amount of effort into interpreting them. Does a high quality piece of artwork bash you over the head with it's social meaning? No. It makes you think. Well, movies are art. Some are terrible because they cram a message down your throat. Others, like 2001, are high art because they actually employ *gasp* subtlety!
chinchychilla 1 year ago
@BuecherFuerAlle - You shouldn't underestimate the power of subliminal suggestion too. What the conscious mind misses, the subconscious mind picks up on. In fact, subliminals tend to bypass rational thought, so in a way they tend to "stick" even more
bitterbonker 1 year ago
i always felt sorry for Hal. although he killed he seems very human. but mixed emotions because HAL was goin to leave bowman out in space
TURBODORK2 1 year ago
wow and if you think about it computers by 2001 and even more now hold tons of information about almost anything they may not be a simulation of intelligence yet, but in a way they do "control" the information of society, Kubrick really was ahead of his time!
mrvendetor 1 year ago
Wow. What a site! I read all 14 chapters on 2001 & although I didn't see eye to eye with every point you made I still learned a lot about the movie I never would have divined. Thank you!
One question regarding your theory that Floyd &the council had been planning to eliminate all the astronauts from the git go: If that is so, then what's the point of Floyd's pre-recorded message? Wouldn't it have been announced to corpses?
filthyphillyboy 1 year ago
@filthyphillyboy It's so long since I wrote the 2001 article I can't remember even saying the astronauts were suppoed to be killed off. The article is also incomplete as I need to get down to the Kubrick archives in London to look at his research materials again.
robag88 1 year ago
The numbers on the arms of concentration camp prisoners are actually IBM computer code which classifies them according to Nazi doctrine, i.e. homosexual, communist, gyspsy, terrorist, Jew, etc.
However, one need not see some dark conspiracy or willful participation of IBM into the holocaust at all, as IBM was the main computer manufacturer in the world at that time, and simply sold computers to the Germans prior to the war in the late 1930s, as it did with dozens of other countries.
USA4July1776 1 year ago
To further my point, The monkeys that initially take over the pond, Floyd's crew, HAL9000, and Kubrick himself seem to be the oppressors of the movie, those are the all seeing, all knowing eyes of the movie, and the monolith is the doorway to break free from the oppression of the high beings. That's why the scene with the monolith on the moon is so significant. The ringing noise, followed by the shot of the monolith and the blind eye apex is saying they aren't the right guys to go through.
Bassbait 1 year ago
I see HAL as the eye of providence. He's the all seeing eye, and I also interpret the "all seeing eye" as "God". HAL has a god-like presence in the movie, and I noticed that so does Kubrick. Maybe Kubrick and HAL are parallels? Bowman must overcome both, first by shutting HAL off, then when be becomes aware of the movie itself, he must overcome the obstacle of reaching the monolith by defeating Kubrick and touching the monolith in a 2D perspective. That's what I think of HAL.
Bassbait 1 year ago
Don't take this the wrong way, but your attacking of Jacnas and others here makes me feel ill at ease. While I enjoy your movie analysis, this video starts with a belief (that the HAL and IBM theme was intentional) and then finding moments which justify that belief. You cite Kubrick's alleged eccentricity, overlaying a clip in which Kubrick's wife dispels those accusations. Occam's razor; your unsimple analysis belies a much more simpler, coincidence-heavy, reality of the movie in question.
chriscumbag 1 year ago
@chriscumbag
Opinion respected though I disagree.
It was Jacnas who attacked me as being a "conspiracy crackpot" so I refuted that comment.
As for your assertion that I started with a belief and then found points to support it ... I don't approach film analysis like that. I studied the film and it's production history not knowing what patterns would emerge. The many references to IBM were too specific and too inter-related to be accidental.
robag88 1 year ago
@robag88 Yes, there were many references to IBM. As you stated yourself, IBM was to be featured very prominently in the film. Due to issues, most of that was (as TV Tropes would put it) Dummied Out of the film. You're looking at the cinematic equivalent of deleted content on a video game CD and generating entire plotlines off of it. A character in the game Deus Ex talks about a type of monster called a Red Greasel. What value does it add? Nothing, because the RGs are deleted content. Irrelevant.
chriscumbag 1 year ago
@chriscumbag
I completely disagree with the video games comparison. I play computer games from time to time and even worked in that field as an animator pre the 3d revolution of the first games console. I never witten a review claiming subliminal hidden plotlines in a computer game, but the way you're using that example implies that you think no film ever has a hidden plotline. IBM cerainly didn't feel that way, they asked their employees not to watch the film.
robag88 1 year ago
@robag88 Correction re: above I should have said "first 3d games console - the playstation". Something else I think you're ignoring is plausible deniability. If Kubrick had made his IBM critique themes too obvious he may have gotten sued. By building plausible deniability into the details of the subtext he wouldn't be pinned down in a court room.
robag88 1 year ago
@robag88 Your experience as an animator is irrelevent to the issue at hand. Deus Ex had Red Greasels. Halo 3 had Flood Juggernauts. Half-Life had an enemy that would rape the player to death. Sonic The Hedgehog 2 had levels that were deleted. The value or merit of those items is nil, because they don't exist. The traces of IBM in 2001 exist because they got past the cutting razor. Your assertion that it was a subtle hidden thing makes your argument look very questionable.
chriscumbag 1 year ago
@chriscumbag Don't raise a topic and then say my experience of it is irrelevant. Is your experience of computer games irrelevant? No. Neither is mine. Eg. Game makers sometimes throw subtle little in jokes into the content of the games. I've seen it happen. Citing a few known examples of mistaken interpretations of computer games doesn't mean all interpretations of computer games (or films) are wrong. And again "the razor" is a flawed perceptual tool. Simplicity does not = reality per se.
robag88 1 year ago
@robag88 You claim you don't approach film analysis, but I would argue (and given your comments here and elsewhere I'd read, others would too) that is exactly what you're doing. It's called Apophenia; finding patterns where none exist. IBM wants its logo in the movie. They realize the movie makes them look bad. Some remain. From those remains, you've created an entire belief that Kubrick was intentionally lacing the belief in his movie; disputed by the man himself.
chriscumbag 1 year ago
@chriscumbag As if Kubrick would publicly verify the themes mentioned in this video and open himself to litigation. The letters HAL being a letter each behind IBM was announced and denied by Kubrick in an interview about the film - he said it without saying it, knowing full well it would spark rumours of it being true. (cont)
robag88 1 year ago
(cont) Simple facts.
1) Dying HAL describes his birth - refers to IBM's first talking computer.
2) Poole talks of something about HAL he can't quite put his finger on ... Bowman's finger almost touches an IBM button on his forearm while changing the AE-35 unit.
3) An unrealistic display of light on Bowman's face forms letters as he says "Do you read me HAL?"
4) HAL lies in the chess game before the AE-35 fault.
Please explain how and why Kubrick included these details.
robag88 1 year ago
@robag88 Yes, I've watched the video, and you've said these things there. The problem is, you're still seeing them as proof of an intended statement. Hal's birth is just that, a reference to a historical event. The use of "can't put a finger on it" and the button-scene are coincidental, and only exists because they couldn't change the IBM button in time. The unrealistic lighting is a cinematic choice, proof of nothing. HAL lies because he was ordered to lie. Very simple answers. Occam's razor.
chriscumbag 1 year ago
@chriscumbag Look I'll have to be honest with you here, and I don't mean offense. Those are very lame attempts to disregard the details I've listed. You're doing a good job of discrediting Occam's Razor. You're basically stating unfounded (and unconvincing) assumptions about how those details came to be in the film and claiming that the simplicity of your assumptions means they're more accurate. Sorry but you're wasting my time with that stuff.
robag88 1 year ago
@robag88 'Said it without saying it'? You wonder why people accuse you of a conspiratorial bent in this review, when you use the very same logic that those who believe in the existence of the Illuminati, Majestic 12, or House Dimir use. The absence of evidence (or, in this case, evidence from sources of authority that directly opposes your belief) is not evidence of your belief. Do you believe Puff The Magic Dragon is a song about weed? The authors of it say that it is not, but people believe.
chriscumbag 1 year ago
@chriscumbag Hold on. In your fist comment you said you didn't like how I dealt with those who disagree with my vids, and you cited jacnas example. I explained he called me a "conspiracy crackpot" to which I insulted the guy back. Now you've just gone around the world trying to cite Occam's Razor to say that your opinion of the IBM refs in the film overrides mine by default (it doesn't). And now you're basically calling me a "conspiracy crackpot" in so many words ...
robag88 1 year ago
@robag88 ... So you're basically resorting to insult / label tactics in the absence of a conclusive argument to prove your theory that the IBM refs were accidental ... much like when people call each other left / right wingers, fascists / bleeding heart liberals etc as a way of scoring cheap points. If you want an intelligent and reasoned conversation then have one. If you want to make accusations about my mental health then you'll lose ... I've worked in the field for thirteen years.
robag88 1 year ago
@chriscumbag
Occam's Razor by the way is not a good perceptual principle. I call it Occam's Perceptual Limitation because reality is in fact far more complex that humans perceive it to be. For example, the periodic table (and its complexities) has replaced older, simpler models of base elements that we now know to be wrong.
robag88 1 year ago
This "reviewer" is a conspiracy crackpot and like most crackpots he's actually correct about some things, like the movie's love-hate relationship with technology. First of all Kubrick didn't have to employ elaborate measures to hide any narratives from producers because he was already respected and renowned enough to not have to suffer MGM people twisting his hand. In fact no MGM employees were allowed on the set. Both Kubrick and Clarke were embarassed by the IBM-HAL conspiracy.
Jacnas 1 year ago
@Jacnas
"Conspiracy crackpot" ... that's a typical lame insult thrown about by dull minds who prefer to try and character attack a person they disagree with rather than present their own argument for what it is. Yes, Kubrick did employ elaborate measures to hide stuff from investors / producers - read his biographies. You just said yourself no MGM employees were allowed on set (they actually were once so Kubrick had a mock room of irrelevevant diagrams and paperwork set up to appease them).
robag88 1 year ago
@robag88 You're a numerologist of film analysis. You're connecting some vague, nebulous clues in a disordered manner and somehow weave them together into a vast conspiracy. It's a joke, not an analysis.
Jacnas 1 year ago
@Jacnas
Wrong, I'm not into numerology or 23 enigma garbage so don't waste your time. "Vague, nebulous clues" ... So you're saying the "Langley ... Urbana ... Illinois" refs spoken by a dying HAL (all three letters one short of IBM) and the singing of "daisy" (first ever synch speech at said location) are all accidental? You're a coincidence theorist, probably driven by a desire to avoid the idea that a film maker like Kubrick could place things in his films that went over your head.
robag88 1 year ago 13
@robag88 HAL's last words and location were chosen because, as you cited, the first time a computer sang was there, and that was the song. That was intentional. Your assertion that because it was an IBM computer that first did it, the line was chosen to further a HAL/IBM assumption that relies on the idea that Kubrick (and perhaps others involved) was a bold-faced liar, and that everyone involved that has said otherwise was lying or ignorant of the truth.
chriscumbag 1 year ago
@chriscumbag Although I love the bones of Kubrick for the incredible films he made, the guy did specifically throw up smoke screens (including lying) to avoid talking about certain details in his films ... read the bigraphies on him by John Baxter and Vincent Lobrutto and read the interviews he did. As for "others involved" his cast, crew and co-writers were frequently baffled by what he was up to so they wouldn't have to lie if they didn't know.
robag88 1 year ago
@robag88
Hi , great vids and website, what are your views on the theory that it was actually Kubrick who filmed the NASA Moon Landings? Cheers.
jawjawellll 1 year ago
@robag88 You're an idiot. Kubrick and Clarke both clearly said that was a coincidence. Now go fuck yourself you little intolerant bitch.
Saruman38 1 year ago
@Jacnas I think you contradicted yourself in that comment
acebunny17 1 year ago
Comment removed
Jacnas 1 year ago
Better off with a Mac
AntiStalinist 1 year ago
This is fucking retarded. References to IBM? It's almost as if ... as if IBM were the biggest computer company at the time the movie was made. Gasp! This isn't a serious analysis. This is a conspiracy theory, that TRIVIALIZE a brilliant and sublime movie.
sosiopat 1 year ago
@sosiopat
IBM helped fund the film not for art's sake, but to promote technology and the company name. They were very unhappy with the result because HAL turned out to be a murderous computer so they told their employees not to watch the film. As the video shows Kubrick packed the film with references between HAL and IBM. So where's the conspiracy theory?
robag88 1 year ago
@robag88 What makes it conspiratorial, is that you make an inference from a pattern in the film, as to what the authors' intentions were. Look up "the intentional fallacy". If your analysis made the film MORE interesting, then I'd take it to heart. But in fact, it makes it less interesting. Personally, the effect of these references (to IBM, Hilton Hotels, etc.) is realism. HAL lipreading the chess moves however, is a very nice catch indeed!
sosiopat 1 year ago 2
@sosiopat
That's quite a loose set of criteria you have for something being conspiratorial. "Intentional fallacy" is a theory on criticism and is thus ironically a demonstration of itself. I can pretty much guarantee you that the folks who coined the term "intentional fallacy" would completely miss the subliminal stuff in my own fiction films. They would be thinking literal, and hence missing out on metaphors communicated through deliberate patterns of sensory repetition.
robag88 1 year ago
@robag88 I'm quite sure they'd miss it, yes.
sosiopat 1 year ago
Whenever I watch the Shinning or 2001. I just see a man who shot what was in the book. I think people gave him too much credit and that he went with it.
Spartanoffaith 1 year ago
@Spartanoffaith The Shining film is famously very different to the book. Stephen King hated the film and Kubrick didn't even look at King's screenplay for his own book. As for 2001, the book was written, despite the common myth, as the film was being shot. Kubrick would shoot scenes and then have Clarke write an interpretation of them that didn't necessarily match Kubrick's. There are very detailed articles about both films on my site that go into the writing process :)
robag88 1 year ago
I've said it before rob, why is the toilet in The Shining(where Torrance meets Grady) the same colour scheme as the landing bay we see in 2001? Great work as always.
IfIfsandands 1 year ago
Yeah there's a lot of similarities in layout between the bathrooms of The Shining and 2001.
robag88 1 year ago
IBM is going to be putting RFID chips in everyone soon. IBM is evil.
weiliiiiiii 1 year ago
Outstanding analysis; I teach history and IBM's role in facilitating mass murder is of particular interest to me.
But when are you going to get off your arse and get to work on the definitive commentary of Death Wish THREE?!
Lacedaemonia 1 year ago 3
Lol. I love the Death Wish films, but have to say the second is my fave.
robag88 1 year ago
The analysis on your website is very impressive. Though my familiarity with the film is not so great, I would just suggest that perhaps the "Renaissance" room is in fact an "Enlightenment" room, judging from the appearance of the furniture and the types of dress depicted in the paintings. We are dealing with 18th century court dress here, and the Age of Enlightenment is much more suited to your themes of Dave's intellectual evolution and his casting off his oppressor (French Revolution).
jdsowa 1 year ago
thank you so much.
very interesting.
i am 27 years old and have just finished seeing 2001 for the first time. it was a spiritual experience for me. it was faith and love and lots of other things. now comes religion - analysing the experience.
yaronimus1 2 years ago
HI Rob - good stuff as always.
Arthur C. Clarke discusses this in his autobiography, if you want to look it up (I had it on audio book).
IBM was the big computer company back then, much as Microsoft is now, so it is logical to have them build it. I think 2001 is a lot about humans becoming like machines - as someone's pointed out, a lot of the scientists are very mechanical.
BobMonkfish 2 years ago
I was looking for any reality cues Kubrik may have used to bring this issue directly to the audience's attention.
Based on your 2001 film analysis, I think the IBM/ethics message is even more salient: the rectangle at 2:38 is very similar to the monoliths and theater screen dimensions too. I suspect that pressing the button next to the rectangle alludes to themes of being oblivious to technological/organizational dependence and potentially human/evolutionary failure as well. Brilliant motif!
OfGreatLakes 2 years ago
@OfGreatLakes Oops, I'd like to rescind the word "failure" with endeavor if I may.
OfGreatLakes 2 years ago
the thing about these films is that looked at from any angle, they seem to stand up. Kubrick could succeed in multiple cinematic ideals at once.
My analogy is this: artistically speaking, one can rotate works 360 and they look the same; with Kubrick's films, you have to turn them at least 540 degrees before you can behold the same thing you did before. His films aren't tangible things. To me his films are sub-atomic in this way
munkybrain 2 years ago
Rob, do you think there is a connection between the grated appearance of Hals memory and the IBM logo, IBM machines themselves which have a grated motif. This grating horizontal and vertical motif are strongly associated with the IBM brand.
steveoco1 2 years ago
Probably.
robag88 2 years ago
This is unrelated to this video, but does anyone see any connection between "Bowman" and another, non-fictional astronaut, Frank Borman?
youvebeenthunderstru 2 years ago
Never disappointed!!, robag88!! You do deserve!!! Turan and Ebert!, eat your commercial hearts out!. there was once atime,..now all are aware!
MAY1EXPRES 2 years ago
One thing anyone familiar with Kubrick should know is that he carefully and deliberately planned every scene in his movies. This is an excellent and engaging video that would be wonderful for a film class discussion.
Great work.
Thanks.
bluesgurugod 2 years ago 9
Ace
Bruce777999 2 years ago
i also think there could be a connection to a lot of big name companies with similar generic 3 letter abbreviations. in the opening of the film as the music finishes we see a 3 letter logo of mgm and then it cuts back to cinematic darkness. there are similarities to the consoles in the pilot areas and the logo,both are two toned colour schemes which use a computer-esq font.
intavent 2 years ago
thanks for this ,great watch and fascinating hearing your thoughts.
interesting that it says 'logic memory center' on the door to the hals main hub and the words on the screens in the pilot area read 'com' and 'mem' abbreviations of 'computer' and 'memory' perhaps? another 3 letter word which pops up is the word 'hib' could this be an abbreviation of the word 'hibernation' ? the word 'nuc' also appears too.
intavent 2 years ago
I was chatting to someone last week who said they were intending to go through the film and make detilaed notes on everything that appears on those computer screens. I doubt it was all just random stuff.
robag88 2 years ago
The NUC could be the readout of nuclear power plant... :P
eddievhfan1984 2 years ago
It took a very long time before you uploaded something, but it was worth the wait. Great analysis, but I am hoping to see more unanalysed films analysed.
hasanordek 2 years ago
I was very appreciative of Kubrick's seemingly elementary visual style, but it wasn't till your analysis videos that I realized his true genius and the vast depth that is hidden from the average moviegoer. Thanks.
samdeyoung 2 years ago
Very good vid mate, Kubrick´s films are perfection in so many ways.
Levinitus 2 years ago
I find the analysis a little unlikely, but definitely possible, and therefore endlessly fascinating!
vicepresidentfru1tly 2 years ago
Do you think all those IBM references were accidental? I think the odds are stacked vastly against it.
robag88 2 years ago
The IBM letter shifting is mentioned in 2010 if Im not mistaking.
snakecharmer133 2 years ago
That's mentioned in the video :)
robag88 2 years ago
What I ment was that the HAL connection is wrong, HAL most likely has nothing to do with computers but represents something else.
snakecharmer133 2 years ago
Hi Rob - great stuff. Very convincing. Your analysis is really penetrating - thanks!
*****analysis
♥as well ... looking forward to your next one.
DragonYearJoji 2 years ago
Beautiful.really enjoyed that.i watched 10 mins of space odysey and never had the chance to watch it again. Kubrik was way ahead of his time, he knew about Freemasons, he was exposing them, best film of Kubrik Clock Work Orange= Sun Worship and Eyes wide shut = Dont look into the Real World!
drfreemason 2 years ago
I've seen that Clockwork Orange = Sun worship video. The only problem is that a lot of the details they ascribe to Kubrick are actually originally from the novel by Burgess, and Kubrick has incorporated them into the film.
BobMonkfish 2 years ago
I didn't think much of that video, but one thing I will say is that Kubrick often took details (and stories) by other writers and transformed their meanings.
robag88 2 years ago
"Kubrick often took details (and stories) by other writers and transformed their meanings." - I've no quarrel with you there Rob, but think the problem comes about when people haven't read the novels that his films R based on. (I'venot read "Red Alert, Traumnovelle (the originals of Strangelove/EWS) etc) Some elements in 2001&ACO definitely originate with Burgess&Clarke. The beauty of 2001's it's 1 o the few true SF (as opposed2"Sci-fi") films, since Kubrick "got" Clarke's mysticism&fascinations
BobMonkfish 2 years ago
2001 is a tricky one in terms of what came from who. The popular myth is that the film was based on the book, but if you check the biographies of Kubrick, the book was being written as the film was made and Kubrick would often shoot stuff, show it to Clarke and let Clarke write an interpretation of it. The original short stories have very little in common with the film content. Kubrick also had a 60/40 deal on the book and authority to tell Clarke to make specific changes to the text.
robag88 2 years ago
Aye, I know the two were pretty much written at the same time, but Arthur C. Clarke was very much interested in esoterica, mysticism etc, whether it's his novels like "Childhood's End", or his series such as "Arthur C. Clarke's Mysterious World". A lot of his short stories deal with it. As Clarke once said himself - "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"
BobMonkfish 2 years ago
Yep. If I was reviewing the book i'd talk about that stuff.
robag88 2 years ago
Just pointing out that there is a definite Clarkean flavour to the film as well...
BobMonkfish 2 years ago
i just watch the 1080p remastered version of the film, and the letters in daves face read clearly MEM, as in memory, and the sae goes for the MGM theory, it just says MEM. But yes there are a lot of IBM logos across the film, just like BELL, HILTON, PAN AM, i think is just a coment on how deep space exploration as our world today is shaped by corporations.
revozuela 2 years ago
Yes, the video shows the screen featuring the letters MEM. I think Kubrick was just giving himself plausible deniability so the crew wouldn't know what he was up to - the displaying of MEM on the contours of Dave's face very cleverly form the letters IBM.
IBM themselves knew that Kubrick had stuck it to them with this film. they denounced it and advised their own employees not to watch it.
See the full 14 chapter analysis on my site for a breakdown of many more themes in the film :)
robag88 2 years ago
This is a very popular theory and you make some very interesting points, Rob. I especially like the "Daisy Bell" connection.
I only have one criticisms: It sounds to me like Frank is saying, "him." Of course I'm not 100%, but after repeatedly playing the dialogue back, he doesn't seem to be saying, "them," which is what you're implying.
Beale64 2 years ago
My reason for showing that clip was because of the words "can't quite put my finger on it" - as in Bowman's finger almost touching the IBM button on his forearm console. I wasn't implying the word "them" :)
robag88 2 years ago
Oh, okay. Sorry about the misunderstanding.
Beale64 2 years ago
No problem at all :)
robag88 2 years ago
How about reviewing Natural Born Killers, it is chock full of subliminal msgs. 5*
byronrush1 2 years ago 2
Good stuff.
***** from me.
RedScorcher7 2 years ago