Added: 2 years ago
From: lampyman101
Views: 98,698
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (473)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • this movie isn't a movie at all, its a journey to mindfuck city

  • I had the great pleasure of working at a movie theater which had Keir Dullea doing a Q & A after 2001 and got to speak to him one to one although I only came up with questions I wshed I could have asked him a long time after. My own interpretation of the last shot (one that still makes me tear up a bit) is that this just the "Sentinals" have moved humanity forward in it's next evolutionary state. The Star Child seems to have his hands in a Hindu gesture of peace and greetings. This is hopeful.

  • Clarke and Kubrick did here prior to String and Superstring theory what H. G. Wells did for Relativity a decade before Einstein began work on it. Art mimics and foreshadows reality. The wormhole is an event horizon, the monolith a or The Singularity that not only loops light, but spacetime as well. Everything that came from it eventually must return to it.

  • Cont

    and man is at something of an emotional dead state by this point, (notice how Hal seems to have more humanity than just about any of the human characters in 2001 who have all the emotions of Dragnet 'just the facts' characters)

    but Dave is able to defeat him and progress to humanity's next stage in evolution. To the breaking of the glass at 5:39-5:54, Somehow I kind of always read that as a metaphor that imperfection is something that will always be an unescapable part of humanity.

  • I remember reading somewhere that 2001 is a basic take on the evolution of man which is 'jumpstarted' throughout history so to speak, for instance the monolith at the begining "Thus spoke Zarathustra" sequence in which man is on the verge of dying out but learns how to use a weapon (the bone) which transforms into a nuclear satellite when it's thrown up in the air, after a passage of time a monolith is buried on Jupiter waiting for man to advance enough to discover it

  • I liked 2010 okay, The Year We Make Contact.

  • I didn't really care for this movie to be honest with you, but the special effects with the monolith were pretty cool.

  • @Xwingpilot I would suggest you give it another watch. There's really nothing to not like. The movie is chalk full of good stuff.

  • As a matter of fact the movie is about us going from a type 0 to a type 1 civilization ... The monolith was put there to inform the alien race that built it that we had achived type 1 status .

  • Comment removed

  • i like it. ironic how we put so much hope in the future, dreaming of space traveling in 2001 and in 2012 we still in a dead end. Even the moon is too far for us.

  • whenever i have an orgasm and i close my eyes i see the stargate sequence , i think he was on to something

  • the word star gate is never used in the movie. its beyond the infinite

  • thanks for this. i never realised that the Monolith saw HAL as a threat to their pet project, Homo Sapiens. Fortunately, "Terminator's" SkyNet does not exist. Actually, it does but it's sensory organs are called Echelon. As Sting said, ..."I'll be watching you"

  • my interpretation is that we are seeing his own manifestations as he moves up to the 5th dimension as his soul departs from the cage of time, ever moment becomes eternal. Many religions mention the Merkabah, a vehicle of light that is used to travel at birth & death / ascend through the dimensions. i see this as a real time event not a trick to bypass a montage, here the visuals are replaced with the real journey, the rising of the species consciousness

  • @marcmitchell I do like your thoughts on the construction of the sequence however I do believe it was to side step the use of montage and members of the production have said more or less the same. People sometimes don't realise that Kubrics art was in part down to his inventive approach to film making. He often used striking ways of bucking the norm that have a tendency to make folks think he's doing more than he is. 2001 is very elegant, but a simpler film than most appreciate

  • @lampyman101 He gets out of the film (cinematic screen) and understands that the reason of the whole mission was based on a lie (propaganda), that's why the lights come over him as his perception is upgraded from a 2D to a 3D world. Bowman=ancient man who uncovers the truth, that the alien discovery on the moon was faked by Heywood Floyd (defy hollywood), the men in hibernation are the camera crew. It is a movie within a movie, the apes in the beginning are us!

  • @lampyman101 nice 1 dude, great info , knowledge & post..

  • @lampyman101 ive never once in my life & hundreds of times watching it have i ever thought of the powers that be as aliens .. its really weird, im a sci fi nut.. but it never ever crossed my mind .. id like to believe that maybe like ingredients that make a synergetic sci fi cake , that together these great minds made something that even transcended there own understanding :) but bow to your knowledge.

  • Aliens, as much as i luv them, im not really comfortable with that explanation here. id say Guardians, our multi dimensional selves.. , laboratory ? , id say more all manifested by dave's own mind as he transcends the 4th dimension, to me these last scenes are him still travelling through the star gate. its widely theorised in physics that above 4 dimensions time is viewable both ways & is not a cage we fall through like we experience here in the 4th..

    

  • @marcmitchell Aliens is what they are supposed to be. Kubrick explicitly asked Carl Sagan how they should look and Sagan apparently persuaded him to not show them at all. However, whatever you wish to call them. Guardians nicely decribeds an interpretation of what they function as in relation to humans so I can go with that. Laboritory, possibly not the right word but it was more to evoke the nature of the place IMO than it was to describe its function

  • Saw this when I was very young and it didn't make sense. Just watched it again in HD and it still didn't make sense. Now that Ive seen this video I get it. Although the filming was great. I couldn't stop myself from fast forwarding. The movie drags like a dead animal. I fell asleep the first time and the second i finally got through it. Thanks for the explanation. But ill never watch that agian

  • I saw it as a kid, and then as now saw the monolith as god, sans flowing beard and attitude. It helped a book I had had the quote "Not only is the universe stranger then we suppose, its stranger then we can suppose.'

  • everyone if u read the book.... TRUST ME! IF U READ THE BOOK U WILL UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING!

  • @poopstain742 Everything? Even advanced astrophysics? Even my girlfriends mood swings? Cool ;0)

  • @lampyman101 it'll even make u understand how to make waffles!

  • @ lampyman101: I enjoyed your assessment very much. Extremely well written, and masterfully narrated. Well done, sir!

    I agree with pretty much your entire opinion.

  • The aspect ratio of the monolith is the same as a movie theatre screen. the blackness during the movie is actually a shot of the monolith on its side. Which is kubrick trying to speak to your subconscious and trigger "evolution" just like the evolution that the apes experience . He spoke of his intent to communicate to his audience in this way. Also HAL and IBM have an interesting correlation

  • the movie is old now

    like Dave

    Like us

    man looking at himself

    and encountering the future and the past in one moment

    birth and death

  • So he dies?

  • Gobbledeegoop gobbledeegoop = aliens trigger next stage of human evolution

  • really cool... still wondering about Hal though... wat was his purpose? was he somehow part of the obelisk's power to bring humans to this wormhole??

  • I posted some of my thoughts on this film on another video but it looks like my comment would have been more appropriate for the kinds of discussion going on here. One of the things I began thinking about the last time I saw it was the onboard AI's systematic killing of the crew in the name of the missions integrity. I think the AI did this because it had to be someone who can survive it all, can keep going without really knowing why or where he is going, just knowing that he HAD to keep at it.

  • @XTheDentist Once again this goes along with the one of the main themes, the mechanics of evolution. This draws parallel's to the impetus to survive no matter what even when it seems theres no point to keep going after all, they lost contact with earth, the entire crew was dead, and he had to kill the AI. Now he's all by himself floating along somewhere in the solar system but he did NOT give up. This I believe is a very important aspect of the film.

  • Oh fuck man my brain hurts.

  • Part 3: and yet he still tries, and tries. It's really the only thing left for him to do. But he is now too old, way too old. And must die, unable to get to it. When we see him from the head of the bed, it seems like he might. But then, the long shot from the foot end of the bed, and it's 100% clear he can't possibly do it. But, he is still trying. He wants to. I understand this now, very well, personally. I want to keep doing science, math, and understand the things I don't. But it is now too

  • Part 2: Now I do understand it. The breaking glass is indeed meaningful: it is Dave realizing his own coming demise, and now he can't possibly put the glass back together. But the real meaning is man endlessly trying to touch the obelisk - the source of all knowledge, evolution, greatness, understanding. That is what motivates the human species. It is really the only thing (and Love) that elevates us above a slime mold. Even in death, the last act, and something he cannot possibly do any more...

  • @Cyclist0623 Certainly an interesting allegory, although the decision to incorporate the breaking of the class into the scene wasn't a metaphorical one. It was motivated by pure practicality. Keir Dullea commented on this, saying that he (not Kubrick) came up with the idea behind this mishap (and Dave's subsequent reaction) to provide a smooth transition for the last stage of his earthly being because they couldn't figure out a satisfactory reason for him to look over to the bed.

  • @Tokeiihto13 This is pretty much as I suspected. Do you know where folks can find this information for themselves (what book/documentary etc is it in?). Thanks

  • @lampyman101 Good question. If I remember correctly Keir Dullea revealed this information during the course of an interview that was conducted for a documentary on the conception, shooting, meaning, legacy et cetera ... of the film. I don't know if this 'Making of' is also elsewhere available, but it's part of the special features included on 2001's (superb) Blu-ray edition.

  • @Tokeiihto13 Thanks. I had thought I may have read it somewhere but couldn't remember for the life of me where it was or if it a primary source. That helps narrow down the search a bit. Many thanks.

  • When I 1st saw 2001, 1968, I was totally overwhelmed with the grandure, accurate creative scenes in space, and the feelings of space. To that point in time, no one had made accurate, realistic, spectacular movie scenes in space. This let us all go there for the 1st time. To say it was spectacular does not do it justice. The end is the meaning of it. And I didn't get it at all. Mystified. Now that I am old, I understand it, very well. To the very end, man wants to touch the obelisk. ....

  • thank god for this video, i was watching the end of this and im just like. "WTF IS HAPPENING??!?!?!?!!"

  • One thing that should be mentioned is that the end piece is "Also sprach Zarathustra", also the name of the work in which Nietzsche discusses the idea of the "Übermensch", or overman, because in his own way, Dave becomes an Übermensch by what he goes through, an overman in the form of the Star Child, in both a physical and mental capacity.

  • why is it that this movie always gives me chills, idk why but it always does it makes me more scared than any other movie

  • What does Incidentally mean, and um... what does Enigmatic, Protagonist, Ambiguous, Facsimile, Simultaneously, Rudimentary, Bludgeon, Sterile, and every other word that sounded sophisticated mean? By the way I had to go back to see how sophisticated was spelled.

  • @knjjhjghhg actually Kubrick encouraged discussion of the film, thats what I'm doing here. as for Dave being alone, maybe I should have mentioned it but I'd have thought it obvious considering people can see that from the footage, but bloody obvious really.I think if you look through some of the previous comments this video has helped at least a few people find some sense in the film.

    I'm not sure why you feel the need to be so rude....D- for manners, must try harder

  • @lampyman101 Don't even respond to people like that. You did an awesome job. It's weird because you basically saying what I was thinking and feeling more on an emotional level while I was watching the film. Looking forward to seeing more reviews.

  • Comment removed

  • @knjjhjghhg Get over yourself. You're a tool.

  • i think you do an overall decent job of creating a non-superficial explanation of a piece of art that the creator, Kubrick, clearly never wanted anyone to do. like a Monet, Kubrick expected the audience to enter into his work and somehow wrestle out his or her OWN meaning to these enigamatic final 10 minutes...your blunt explanation of YOUR interpretation really does nothing to help "explain" to others what this stuff was supposed to mean.

  • Kabbala and alchemy references abound in the film. I liked your analysis as well and I agree with a previous comment that you sound like HAL.

  • I read somewhere that the glass breaking symbolizes death, where the body is broken but the contents (the soul) remain intact. The fact that this happens right before the death bed scene supports this

  • @Toddity76 I've heard that several times but I don't see it myself. I don't get how the contents are 'intact' given that they are splattered across the floor at best. I'd have thought that there would have been a coloured liquid (red wine?) in the glass to make the liquid more visually significant or simply more visible. I think the shot is so brief and even so distracting that it serves another purpose, one that's probably less laden with implied detail as many seem to think.

  • I can just about accept a death or more so a fallibility of man metaphore at a push but I'm also inclined towards a more mechanical approach to the moment where the sudden and sharp intrusion of the noise aids the movement from the dinner scene to the death bed scene. I don't think Kubrick was ever massively sentimental and the idea that he may use a cinematic device personally doesn't question his genius as far as I'm concerned. It's an interesting and very readable moment isn't it

  • THE POST Wasington AND NEW YORK TIMES, ARE VERY CLEAR IN YOUR COUNTRY FOR THE AGGRESSION AND AFTER THE PROTEST criminalization AUTHORITIES WITH gringo outraged CLEAR ON THAT ALSO HAVE THE DEATH PENALTY APPLIED BEYOND! AND IN THE MIDDLE EAST ON THOUSANDS massacred by BLITZ ON LATEST TECHNOLOGY OF INNOCENT CIVILIANS, SAY NOTHING ON THIS, THERE IS NOT NO SIP HRC EUROPEAN UNION, THERE IS INTEREST cover their GREAT!

  • Years back I read a article about the bone being thrown up in the air by apes and the ships orbiting the Earth were mankind's violent nature. The orbiting ships were to be nuclear devices and at the end of the film when the "star child" is orbiting the Earth, he activates the devices destroying the planet. But Kubrick decided against this since several films had already done the "end of the world" idea with "Dr. Strangelove" and "Planet of the Apes".

  • A excellent analysis overall, and useful to those who have trouble with 2001's ending. 

    I would note, however, that you missed the opportunity for commentary during the sequence when Bowman accidentally breaks the wine glass.

    Remember, Kubrick does nothing without careful reason. For further analysis of this portion of the sequence, and as an outstanding overall reference to this film, I highly recommend Jerome Agel's "The Making of 2001", an indispensable companion to this film.

    Good job.

  • This should be bonus future on dvd-bluray... thanks for good video;)

  • Way too many words... How about the bone and the spaceship are one and the same - the first exploratory tools... the monolith is the magnetic pull of the most dense matter we pass through in order to emerge on the other side... and all summed up best in Steve Jobs 2 words X 3: oh wow, Oh Wow... OH WOW!

  • The seamless transitions of Dave getting older is Kubrik illustrating the breaking free from a linear time frame (Monochronic) and evolving back to a Polychronic timeframe. This linear timeframe derives from Saturn/Set/Satan/Sargon. In the book of 2001, Dave travels to Saturn not Jupitor. The Monolith(monochronic) is a representation of the black moon of Saturn- Iapetus.

    - Also nice video, but felt a bit too scripted. It felt like it was narrated by HAL ;)

  • @BlueBloodTasty Maybe the uploader IS actually HAL 9000?

    Panic

  • @GigawingsVideo Damn it....my secret is out......

  • yea yea ,.... you are there buddy,... just change the g into a capital letter "G" like. Thanks ! we will see each other there ,..hope I am right too,... for our sake !

  • Very interesting. Have you done any other videos regarding Kubrick's films?

  • Nice job. Thanks.

  • "...did not know what to do, but he would think of something." Last line from the novel, describing the Star Child's new existence. It is implied that he put an end to the missiles that were hurling toward him, and beginning the end of warfare. Thank you for posting this.

  • Thanks very much for sharing this, one of my all time favourite films, and I found your commentary to be both accessible and substantive, not a common combination nowadays!

  • I was blown away when I first saw this movie. One of my fav sci-fi movies dealing with the universe. I was fascinated by the use of special effects and I didn't realize it came out in 1968, it was so advanced for its time. your analysis is very good and detailed :)

  • I would love to have a floor like that but I bet changing a light bulb is a bitch.

    When I first saw this, I spoke with the projectionist about it, trying to find some meaning to it. He said he's seen it 48 times and he still doesn't understand it.

  • He might have also been pointing to consistancies across the evolution of a human intellect; maybe even his own. In this film, beast, man, and machine all experience fear because of knowledge and awareness.

  • Az összetört pohár minden jelenlevőt arra emlékeztet, hogy a világ tele van tökéletlenséggel, és parancs mindenkinek, hogy vegyen részt a világ megjavításában. A pohártörésnek babonás gyökerei is vannak. A Közel-Keleten a pohár- vagy tányértörés megszokott viselkedés volt, melynek mágikus erőt tulajdonítottak, és a démoni erők, valamint a rossz kívánságok szétzúzását szimbolizálta.

  • Nice one! It's a visual representation of language.You say tools but it's more about the mark/ function/purpose. Philosopher J.L. Austin suggested utensil. I expect this is why the falling bone cuts like it does to the spaceship: the significant feature was reaching earth.The monolith represents this unity of survivng function in remnants, retrospect, transcendence. Static bedridden semantics. I liked the title on the screen about glass, which fell whilst he was (still) eating at the table.

  • Comment removed

  • it reminds me of this comedian whose great line was, f--- you its magic, (( and he is of course implying,, i am smarter than you)) lol

  • you are god

  • I have not watched anything about this movie in years..I was 16 when I went with a friend to watch it in a theater..I was very confused by the images, but the acting and soundtract was amazing...thank you for this..you really helped me to learn more about the meaning of the movie.

  • Sehr interessant, über diesen Film kann man echt sehr viel diskutieren und interpretieren. mann sollte aber auf jeden Fall das Buch dazu lesen.

  • brilliant analysis

    

  • You should be president

  • Still don't get it!

  • The whole movie is about Mormanism. Mitt Romney is the Star Child.

  • In fear it sounds strange I watched the film a while ago because my father kind of forced me too. But i really liked it =) nice and interesting video ... as always

    

  • well done @lampyman101 fuck all these haters

  • just one small point, kubrick initially wanted to have a narrator specifically point out the spaceship you see after the match cut was in fact carrying WMD's, as if to say we still hadn't outgrown the most basic tendencies in fact instilled into us by our alien overlords (or whatever) those millions of years ago.

  • Also thought your talking was very good (not sure why people are unhappy about it)

  • Thanks for that lampyman101, I loved the film, especially the walking to moon monolith scene, but could never put my finger on what the ending meant! I certainly think your commentary was excellently written and produced. Thanks again

  • @Lukemuse no problem and thanks

  • even u describing it sounded fagety as shit, thanks for helpin me avoid that gay ass slow movie

  • Don't mention that you can't understand it... little bitches can't take any criticism without getting their panties all knotted up.

  • @grecon001 Actually I am working to rectify that. I am currently rewriting the script and someone has offered to subtitle the video for me. I honestly don't mind criticism, I really don't, as uncomfortable as it can be. I have a problem with people being needlessly rude without even considering the fact that I am not a professional voice actor or presenter and I am working with some basic equipment which doesn't help. I work hard on this stuff and being trolled isn't pleasant.

  • @lampyman101 Well thanks for that but don't be so sensitive, just cause someone wants to understand your opinion. I was not trolling you, I just had wished I could understand. If you have something to say, I want to know what it is.

  • @grecon001 I have now added subtitles. I hope you can enjoy the video now, even if you disagree with it

  • @lampyman101 Now that I have watched and understand you analyses, I can say that it was very well thought out and I appreciated the fact that you left out all the conspiracy garbage typically associated with movie analyses. Well done, and thank you. - TheNykademos

  • @grecon001 I don't hold with the illuminati kind of stuff or the overly flowery explainations...it doesn't figure in how the movie works IMO. Appology accepted, I have unblocked your other channel. I don't block often (rarely in fact,no more than 20 in three years) but I've been having a hard time with people being unusually aggressive with me so if I seemed oversensitive then thats the reason. I respond to politeness more readily.

  • @grecon001 conspiracies... What?!?

  • @lampyman101 I gave you a thumbs up even though you banned me for bitching too much. LOL no hard feelings, I was in a bad mood that day.

  • If this guy is talking too fast for you to follow then I'm sorry but you are probably mentally handicapped. I'm sure you'll be able to have a full and healthy life.

  • @Surells are you to illiterate to read the number one comment sarcastically asking to please speak faster. So the majority is mentally handicapped? Actually I can't disagree with that.

  • @grecon001 oh, and please don't base your reply on the term 'if ever I've seen one'. It's idiomatic.

  • Great video, i never really understood the ending though.... so he goes through a wormhole and watches his whole life before his eyes? Is that what all the colours and stuff were before this scene: the wormhole?

  • You write extremely well, any idea on the painting above him while he's eating 4:00 ?

  • Comment removed

  • ohh my effin mind

  • Space Odyssey, The time machine, Planet of the apes

    The holy trio of sci-fi

  • Hal's defects, like those of the scheming servants in Downton Abbey, or the villian in Mervyn Peake's Gormanghast are indicative of man's (despite having leaped beyond the level of beasts to technological sophistication capable of space travel, and the creation of artificial intelligence) roots in the emotional expressions of the limbic system or of the reptilian hind brain in the quest for power or the promptings of envy.

  • Thanks very much for this. I am hard of hearing and had some trouble with the accent and cadence but I wouldn't change it a jot, nor subtitile it. Man's gotten so good with artificial intelligence that Hal can beat any of the crew members at chess. While technologically quite sophisticated Hal cannot transcend the defects of his creators, man, and has a personality disorder that results in a psychotic episode born of megalomania and paranoia. He resents serving his inferiors as a mere minion.

  • Great! Thanks for the post.

  • @lampyman101 well that would be awesome if you have time for it.. I think a lot of people would like that :-D

  • @blinkfbi absolutely no problem. I have the scripts for most of the stuff. I'll see if I still have that one and let you know when and where you can find it. If I don't I'll see what I can do.

  • Uggh, talks in monotone and too fast with a crap accent and wont add subs..... If you don't care that we can't understand what your saying, why bother making a video in the first place? I'd love to know your analysis but i just cant follow what the hell you are saying.

  • @TheNykademos Thanks. I put a lot of hard work into these videos and I'm so happy that you enjoyed it.

  • @lampyman101 Blow me

  • @TheNykademos Is that a request? You sure I wouldn't be too fast and you wouldn't be able to keep (it) up?

  • @lampyman101 I think you put a lot of effort in your film reviews.

  • @TheNykademos crap accent? automatic ignorant fucktard award goes to you.

  • @Surells It's the effeminate s sound that makes it difficult to understand. Glad you are familiar with that persuasion.

  • @grecon001 is that supposed to be a gay/effeminate insult? What if I was gay, is that supposed to be a bad thing where you come from?

  • @TheNykademos So the world revolves around you, then? Is that ultimately your point? And the accent isn't even that thick - which means it must be you that's thick. Yes your pathetic, whiny little comment just pissed me right the fuck off.

  • Oh BOLLOCKS!! it's a bunch of images to get stoned and die in a wall of images to.

  • could you please add subtitles? i have trouble understanding your accent because i'm not british.

  • @blinkfbi I love to but I simply don't have enough time to do that. It's a fairly time consuming process and I can only just manage what I'm doing with my workload. very sorry

  • @lampyman101 That's odd. I'm Welsh, my accent's fairly thick and I've never had anyone ask me to do that before.

  • @LeMarquisDivin I'm sympathetic to the fact that I have a fairly large audience whose first language isn't English. I really wish I could do subtitles but the time involved is significant enough to be a problem for me. I may start uploading the scripts to my blog page again and link to it to help those who struggle following me though.

  • I have NOT even watched your video yet. Infact, your video is still loading. I just want to say thank you BEFORE I watch this. I have for months been wanting to see other peoples takes on the last 10 minutes of this moviie. :) So, thanks!

  • The apartment where Dave arrives could also be looked at as a hospital, because the stress of having the secrets of the univese revealed and having his brain altered by accelerated evolution has shocked him as can be seen in that first scene. After many years he has healed enough to go on to the next step, re-birth.

  • The last 10 mins of 2001 are all code for 33rd degree Masons...Only they will understand WTF is going on.

  • Monolith does to Dave exactly what Dave did to HAL : Deconstruct him.

  • Very good, I liked this video.

  • Just a few things that might be interesting that I learnt from the DVD extras: It was Kier Dullea's idea to have those transitions between life stages (Kubrick couldn't find a way to elegantly show the passage of time). Someone else (Arthur C. Clarke, I think) said that the décor was the aliens' slightly poor attempt to make him feel at home, rather like the mock ice in a polar bear enclosure. The design was extracted from his memories of Earth.

  • umm i was just wondering, with the monilith-evolution link. what was the signifigance of the monolith being on the moon? is this an exception?

    

  • @someone6878 The monolith was buried on the moon waiting for mankind to discover it when man's technology made it possible, with the moon being Earth's nearest sattelite. Once the monolith had been uncovered and sunlight hit it, it sent a signal to the giant Monolith orbiting Jupiter, which acted as a Stargate that was waiting for someone from Earth to come to it. That someone was David Bowman, whom the aliens chose to become the Starchild.

  • @44excalibur thanks!! i had a feeling it was something along those lines, atleast with the part with the technological abilitiy to reach it and what not

  • @someone6878 I always thought it was to do with man being capable of reaching the second monolith. When humans are sophisticated to get there then they're about ready to move on. A simple explanation but it works

  • @someone6878 in The Sentinel" which is a short story by Arthur C. Clarke, which was expanded and modified into the novel and movie 2001, the monolith is waiting for an intelligent specie to be able to travel the moon and send a signal (big sound in the movie)when the human make contact if i remember corectly the monomith is an alien btw

  • @someone6878 The Tycho monolith is being excavated from beneath the surface of the moon. When the rays of sunshine hit its surface for the first time, it sends a signal to Jupiter. A second monolith (of three) is discovered orbiting Jupiter(film)/Saturn(book) and the Discovery One is sent there to investigate.

    The concern being that the Tycho monolith was put there as a beacon (or trap) to indicate when mankind had reached a certain level of technology.

  • Comment removed

  • One of the greatest films ever made.

  • What Kubrick meant is anyone's guess. Clarke, ever the realist, in the books gives a coherent, plot. In 3001, the astronaut killed by HAL, is found and brought back to life. As I recall, in 2001, China, to get cash, has been selling nuclear weapons systems, and the world is ringed with them. The new Starchild explodes them all in a silent explosion. It then doesn't know what to do with earth, but it will think of something. I think that's how it ends. The movie's a visual trip, that's all, imho.

  • @keepaopenmind Hah, it wasn't China's nukes that the Bowman/Starchild destroyed, it was the U.S.A.'s and the Soviet Union's. Remember when the novel and the movie came out. It was the 1960's, at a time when no one could have predicted that the cold war would come to an end just 20 years later in 1989. Clarke later had the monoliths turn Jupiter into a new sun in 2010 as a gesture of peace to both the U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R., but in real life the cold war never even made it past the 80's.

  • @44excalibur You may be right. I remember when it came out. But it's been over 40 years since I read the book. I think it said China was selling nuclear systems for quick cash. But it was probably mainly US and USSR nukes that the Starchild exploded. The aliens turned Jupiter into a sun not a gesture of peace, but to help life continue on Europa. The message at the end was "All these worlds are your, save Europa. Attempt no landing there." Something like that. Thanks for replying.

  • @keepaopenmind Well yeah, there was the Europa thing too, which Arthur C. Clarke went into greater detail with in 2061: Odyssey Three. But the point was also to further the advancement of the human race as a whole, with the Europans being the next phase of the experiment. You're welcome. Take care!

  • i wonder if(call me crazy) death is an accelerating of this evolution into cosmic energy no longer in need of a physical form...that fits the description of a soul....god just like astronomy, his really has my brain pumping thoughts now lol

  • @MetalMonarchy god does not fit into evolution and there is certainly no need of him/her/it .. souls do not exist either , only in peoples imagination .. why? because humans are scared of the unknown, they always were, are and will be therefore they create something that comforts them .. things such as souls, an afterlife and rebirth or heaven/hell based on your religious interpretation ..

  • i love the end credits after this because my favorite classical song plays. but i cant find that. ersion on here. anyone got any videos or links for me? and like this guy said, i was indeed"running around in circles" trying to understand the ending. thanks for clearing it up. rly helped

  • Fantastic.

  • awesome! thanks!

  • maybe, this guy broke the holds of gravity and everything was happening so fast, he could see it and while experiencing it at the same time. I think, this scene was meant to give us an idea of how GOD can look at things beyond the constraints of space and time.

    that's just my theory.

  • @92680BOYD it's symbolic, not literal as the baby returns to earth .. i don't think you understood the movie .. it showed how something(aliens) created certain things to evolve mankind as if it were an experiment , the monolith is something as a computer that helped evolution and that when humans were technologically capable enough they were given the opportunity to evolve again and then the child was returned to earth .. no need for imaginary friends(god) ..

  • @rhn94, it's just a theory is all and i think everyone has their own way of looking at this film.

    I didn't see anything about Aliens in the film, just Humans. but, whatever, that's what i thought and i'm sticking to it.

  • @92680BOYD Arthur C.Clarke was pretty specific in the novel that the monoliths were created by an ancient alien race who had evolved into beings of limitless power and intelligence, to the point where they existed as creatures of radiation roaming the cosmos, no longer needing physical bodies. 

  • @44excalibur, hey, are you going to see "Red Tails"...?.

  • @92680BOYD Umm, sorry, what is "Red Tails"? Is it Sci Fi?

  • @44excalibur It's a film about the Tuskegee Airmen - not Sci Fi in the slightest, but an often overlooked story and a potentially good film. Personally I'm skeptical of anything with George Lucas' name attached to it.

  • @Squeejee09 Thanks, I'll check it out.

  • @rhn94 Funny that you should say that, because Arthur C. Clarke references God in the novel, when David Bowman hypothesises that evolution might result in a species that no longer needed an organic body and that used one that was mechanically-based. Afterwards, the mind would free itself from matter all together, and that the robot body, like the organic one, would be a stepping stone toward what men once called "the spirit." "And if there was anything beyond THAT, its name could only be God."

  • @44excalibur yes he does but does he mean the conventional god or he is using it as a metaphor for something else .. say for example when someone says "he is a god among men" does that mean that person mean an actual god or is he simply alluding or using a simple figure of speech such a reference to authority

  • @rhn94 I think he's referring to the idea that the concept of God could actually be just an advanced and highly superior force in the universe that existed long before man, and whose presence could be interpreted as "god-like." Remember, Arthur C. Clarke once said that "any advanced technology would be indestinguishable from magic." The universe is over 13 billion years old and that's long enough for who-knows-what to be out there. How do we know God doesn't exist, just not as we imagined?

  • @44excalibur you bring up an interesting point here ... good discussion sir .. changed my point of view slightly

  • pleasespeakfaster

  • @djmoose28 well that's a new one on me LOL

    10 out of 10 for originality at least

  • The monolith, one of the most hyped to the Jupiter orbit red herrings to ever exist in cinema, even Kubie didn't even know what the hell it was supposed to mean, but it looked cool so they used it