why does everyone love this movie? it's not all that good. and i know good movies. i go to art school to critique movies. don't judge me or anything with your annoying tirades, i'm merely stating my opinions.
@jelly1245 I guess for the year it was made, it was mind blowing. When I first watched this movie, I didn't like it, but now looking at it again, I have realised what a masterpiece 2001 really is. But at least you can state your opinion on here without any derogatory comments... well for now at least
@Murder0redruM thanks for the info. When i tried to view these there was no such problem. They were all there ! Please check again. I dont know if this sort of thing is localized to a particular country.
10 years ago (2001), just before Patriot Act, you could board a spaceship just by stating your destination, nationality and name.
10 years later (2011) try to take a simple flight from N.Y. to Paris. You will need to get groped, take off your shoes, undergo all sorts of degrading procedures and being basically robbed of your dignity. Oh how times have changed.
Destination, nationality and name only ? Where's the groping err. I mean enhanced pat down ? Where's the part where they make you take off your shoes ? Where's the part where they stick a finger up your ass and make a proctology exam ? Where's the part where they rob you of your dignity and intimidate you ?
I never thought going traveling to space could be easier than a simply airplane flight.
Yes, there are a number of people who think 2001 is boring but if you come from a Star Wars/Star Trek/Aliens mentality obviously you'll find this movie very underwhelming. Stanley Kubrick was a very serious and philosophical person as was Arthur C. Clarke, the writer of 2001. This movie reads like a modern painting. You have to pass beyond the subjective matter in order to understand the profound underlying meaning which is the mystery of life here and beyond. Kubrick and Clarke are brilliant.
@truthseeker010101 It's annoying & flawed in some ways - too much down-time, two-dimensional characters, under-explained plot - but I have to admit I can't think of another sci fi movie that's clearly better. The visions of space exploration, and contact with space aliens who are not even remotely humanoid, who are never seen but are definitely beyond our understanding, set a standard that I don't think another sci fi movie has met. Plus, visual effects are still tops - way better than CGI.
@truthseeker010101 I'd like to think I could also think of better sci fi movies ...but I have to admit that I can't think of one that's CLEARLY better overall. I'm curious: which ones do you think are better?
@truthseeker010101 If these are what you prefer, then I can see that 2001 isn't for you. Most of these, I wouldn't consider as sci fi, since they pay little attention to the science of how the events might be possible. The Andromeda Strain and (maybe) West World are exceptions. I like a lot of these movies too, as action/adventure stories, but sci fi (at least, hard sci fi) is different.
@boriato I am not mad you define sci fi differently, we all define our lives in another context, religion, God, and many other words are ineffable like these, it makes life interesting, what area few of the movies you consider sci fi?
@truthseeker010101 One I seldom hear discussed as sci fi, but I think it definitely is, is The Hunt for Red October. It presents a new, technology, and the implications of it for national defense issues. That's the sort of thing sci fi is supposed to address: how science and technology could change our lives. Besides, some aspects of it were clearly inspired by Jules Verne's 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (the Disney movie of that I'd also count as sci fi). And there's Jurassic Park.
I think some of these models and sets were used on Space 1999. If I remember right the Anderson couple who made the show had the space station blown up.
@clay56 Not quite correct. 2001's look and feel, however, was a very strong influence on S:1999, and more than one scene in the pilot episode (Breakaway) pay homage to the movie. A space station did go all splodey in that episode, but it was built out of Airfix model kits by the S:1999 f/x team, and it wasn't a 2001 prop.
@clay56 Kubrik had ALL of the models and bluprints and tech drawings destroyed just so they COULDN'T be used in b-rated movies and tv shows as stock. That is why major kudos should go to the 2010 art/construction dept. They had to re-create the blueprints and subsequent models from publicity stills and the movie only.
@TheMrBlinx Hey, that's a good question, TheMrBlinx. The characters are already speaking English. Are the captions supplied for the sake of the deaf & hard-of-hearing audiences? That has to be it. The overkill makes no sense, otherwise.
we talked about this during music and none except me knew what my teacher was going to say and stuff i never saw the movie but i knew some of the basics like hal and he ries to kill them and the relic/monolith
it is amazing how 43 years later, this movie is still more amazing to watch. This movies graphics are outstanding! Even Star Wars and AVATAR. (all are great though)
oh--and by the way--i come into youtube to watch the movies and download them if they are good. not to listen or read the stupid social commentaries of weak minded people.
Has anyone ever read Ender's Game? The way they explain gravity on a space station is similar to how they explain it here, with the rotating cylinder thing. Very clever. Still, this movie is...so slowly paced. Not for kids with ADD, that's for sure.
Only $1.70 for a phone call from a space station? I guess they didn't anticipate inflation. :p Also, boy the image of the moon spinning around (from the spinning space station) would sure be distracting when actually making a phone-call, but I guess it makes a nice visual effect for the film.
@datalal624 i totally get what you mean. it's got almost a moonglow look to it. i believe we're meant to deduce that all that graduated blue haze is the earth atmosphere, as seen from a great distance.
@datalal624 You failed: actually in telecomunications it was great decrease in cost. From space station to call back to earth (send signal) is nothing more than to send something throught satelitte. $1.10 is normal cost per minute nowadays throught satelitte, but if you have in mind that station has a lots of place for powerful antenna, and easy maintenance $1.70 is nearly too much, provided that antenna uses digital encoding.
I like the way gravity isn't just "there"; it is explained by the gyro force of the rotating curved surface. This sort of attentin to detail re. the laws of physics and space science made Clarke the great writer that he was.
@crocfme Ya man this movies physics and lighting especially on the spacecrafts was phenomenal... waaaay ahead of it's time. It's incredible that they were able to do all this in the 60s
@crocfme Yes, as opposed to things like Star Trek. On those shows, no matter how every system they had failed and crashed, their gravity was always there (except one time in one movie). It was easier for them to just ignore that little detail than deal with it according to physics. If they did it right, the Enterprise would have maybe been tubular.
I don't recall it, was it on the space station or one of the spacecraft? - No gravity on the space transport craft.. I recall seeing a pen floating in an apparently 1g environment in "2010"...It must be hard for directors, trying to film zero g scenes in an earthly 1g environment .
I want to know what the Russians said to each other after Floyd leaves. Are they saying, 'What a load of crapski! That bourgeois idiot thinks he fools us? Something's up at Clavius, and it isn't Ed Asner! Bozshe moi!'?
It's a waltz. The ship docking with the station is like a dance. A waltz is a dance. The waltz music is totally relevant and quite nice. Would you prefer whatever pop music garbage is most popular these days? Perhaps some angry and antagonistic metal.
So...10 years ago (2001) we all are christians, all the russian people speak british so I guess UK take over Russia and they charged us for the use of skype.
@shivakrishnarama the music is 100% relevant. It's a waltz between the ship and the station, and later its the stewardess walking in 0-gravity which could be compared to a dance
@TheWasabi123 This movie is good for it's era. Pretty much any good modern Sci-Fi movie makes it look like garbage though. Would way rather watch the Matrix or Inception.
What amazes me the most is how much Kubrick correctly predicted, yet how much he didn't account for. Webcams in the film are ten times the size they would end up being. All the knobs and controls in sci-fi films seemed so futuristic at the time, but seem so primitive in retrospect.
There aren’t going to be any stewardesses aboard an earth to moon shuttle! There aren’t going to be any windows anywhere that is not compartmentalized either. Outside viewing will be on screens with multispectral sensors outboard. The bridge won't be where crewmen look out like a world war two bomber, it will be in the most protected area of the ship.
@linkomega123 I don't know about the chairs, but I'm pretty convinced the color red has some meaning in 2001. HAL's eye, the cockpit of the moon shuttle, certain lights here and there throughout the film, are all red. Perhaps it represents the inherent blood lust of humanity?
@TheBackOfTheBoat I think you're reading too much into this. Red is a very contrasting color to the predominant color of black or white. I don't know about you, but if I were to be in an environment such as a space station or space ship, I'd appreciate as much color as I could see. It's probably nothing more than just to provide contrast is what I'm saying.
@indyracingnut Well for me the most significant use of red is in HAL's CPU. The rest of the Discovery is clean and white but HAL's inner brain is glowing bright red. I think it represent's HAL's humanity and thus his imperfections. It might also be meant to show that our idealistic visions of the future are false and that things like violence and animosity are bound to continue, even in artificial intelligence. But maybe you're right and I am just grasping for straws.
and to think that in 2001 we would actually dress like this. and all this technology. pls we dont even have people, (civilians and buisness men and such) on international space stations. i think were decades away from this breakthrough in human history.
Thanks for uploading all of this movie in such great quality. But I'm afraid the link to The Planets you've put into every part, as well as doing it with subtitles ruins it for me. I wont be watching all of it. Pity you went to so much effort only for it to be ruined by doing these things. But thanks for bringing this amazing movie to an entire new audience.
@maulcs I agree. Why can't people nowadays just enjoy a fucking movie without talking about Justin Beiber or posting a generic comment or some other kind of off topic shit?
They were just talking about something they had to go do in about 2 hours. Talking about when they might leave.
Once Floyd leaves it's hard to make out. Apparently something is very difficult, but I can't hear what. Seems likely it was what they were just talking about.
Cell phones would not work in space (there are no cell phone towers in space) ... and there'd be no way around the communication delay, unless they could find a signal that could go faster then the speed of light (radio waves go the speed of light).
@failtolawl cellular phones in space don't work too well... yah need a stronger communications device that can render all those incoming radio and microwaves from outer space out; we on Earth are more fortunate cause of our atmosphere. Besides that, these transmission are farther in distance... that's why it cost $1.70 something for that phone call the Dr. made; that's expensive for then and even now if you compared the pricing with today's inflated dollar value.
@VexT916 here is the thing, it's the future, and cell phones (in this time period) would be the past, so it would be a good assumption that they would have a more advanced communicating phone, notice how their wasn't a huge lag from when he talked to when his daughter answered? That just shows how advanced this movie takes place.
but it is true, during this time, cell phones (or mobile communication) was a dream not even the biggest dreamers could think of.
Lol the thought that bush babies and all other animals wouldn't be extinct by the time we built a station like that and transport people through space like that is funny.
People seemed to dress nicer in the 60s. Then when the 70s came along everyone went "hey i got a great idea! lets see if we can all look like total slobs for this decade"
Well when you think about it, space stations aren't very efficient. They're small, difficult to assemble, and vulnerable to radiation. A moon base, like an underground one, would be much more reliable. More expensive, but much easier to use.
@shockraid1 Agreed, it would seem though that space stations would be a lot more feasible once orbital elevators are in place (and it's much cheaper to transport materials to and from Earth).
@FailboatSkipper I don't blame them for speculating; some of the speculations such as flat-screen TVs, voice-print identification, chess-playing computers, glass cockpit displays, video phones, etc, were very shrewd because they exist today. Others, such as strong AI, suspended animation, accurate voice-controlled computing, and moon bases, haven't materialized yet, but are going to be a reality soon. We should've been farther in space exploration than we are today. :(
@FORD5000solo2001 I think I should clarify. It's not Kubrick's fault, Kubrick was a visionary and he had consulted with many scientific experts to ensure the accuracy of the science behind this movie. It's disappointing that it's been 38 years since humanity last landed on the Moon; the Moon landings were discontinued because they were supposedly financially unfeasible. Humanity is capable of much more, space exploration should have been more extensive than where it is today.
@sah15ft LOL. Looking back at your comment, when you said "What is wrong with this picture?" Everyone took at as "What is wrong with this film?" Not "What is wrong with our cosmic aspirations?"
If I would have watched this in 1968 I would have died of amazement, this movie its great, and still is one of the best movies ever.
elnicolas123 9 months ago
thatke that CGI!!!!
lamecasuelas2 10 months ago
Also it's strange that Dr. Floyd has a son and not a daughter in 2010.
Jadama0 10 months ago
@Jadama0 He mentions later in the film a daughter. One from this wife here, and the son with second wife in 2010. (It also helps to read the books)
archangel72367 10 months ago
Funny how Dr. Floyd is played by a different actor in 2010.
Jadama0 10 months ago
Dr. Floyd looks like David Lynch as Gordon Cole. Only the hearing aid is missing.
VitoPossilipo 10 months ago
Parts 4 etc. are missing for me, too.
Darn :L
nonaloll 10 months ago
@nonaloll Theres a part 4 uploaded by another person, dunno if it continues right where this one ends but better than none
Coolerdbz69 10 months ago
why does everyone love this movie? it's not all that good. and i know good movies. i go to art school to critique movies. don't judge me or anything with your annoying tirades, i'm merely stating my opinions.
jelly1245 10 months ago
@jelly1245 I guess for the year it was made, it was mind blowing. When I first watched this movie, I didn't like it, but now looking at it again, I have realised what a masterpiece 2001 really is. But at least you can state your opinion on here without any derogatory comments... well for now at least
queenrocks21 10 months ago
Why are so many people pissed about the subtitles? Not everyone can hear.
jonesrebel 10 months ago
Lol. WMG owns a MOVIE! WTF!? It's a music distributor not a production company.
TheDevilguy676 10 months ago
Is this based in 2001? 'cause if it was....then fail. This is 2011 and we are still living like it just turned 2000
TheDevilguy676 10 months ago
@TheDevilguy676 Yer we're supposed to have flying cars and all this jazz according to the movies lol
Coolerdbz69 10 months ago
getting interogated by peewee herman
reisswilliams6 10 months ago
Why is this subtittled?
ErnstJoy 10 months ago
@ErnstJoy i heard that
saysomethinsweet 10 months ago
Mad Men in space!
jgrannell1 10 months ago
I'm in South America (Venezuela), and these parts aren't working here.
EliezerAamesINTL 10 months ago
Parts 4, 5, 8, 11, 12, and 13 have been REMOVED becoz of copyright.
Murder0redruM 11 months ago
@Murder0redruM thanks for the info. When i tried to view these there was no such problem. They were all there ! Please check again. I dont know if this sort of thing is localized to a particular country.
totallyfreeenergy 10 months ago
@totallyfreeenergy
ah yes i didnt think of that, im in AUSTRALIA, typical that they would block it only in MY country, fml..
maybe i can use a proxy to bypass it..
Murder0redruM 10 months ago
@Murder0redruM Very interesting ! I was also viewing it from australia just a few minutes back. All parts were viewable !
totallyfreeenergy 10 months ago
@totallyfreeenergy the above-mentioned parts aren't working here in North Carolina
HS225 10 months ago
@totallyfreeenergy not visible for me neither and im from canada /: well thats a waste of 30 minutes
iiTzGUCCImang 10 months ago
10 years ago (2001), just before Patriot Act, you could board a spaceship just by stating your destination, nationality and name.
10 years later (2011) try to take a simple flight from N.Y. to Paris. You will need to get groped, take off your shoes, undergo all sorts of degrading procedures and being basically robbed of your dignity. Oh how times have changed.
Ihateflagging123 11 months ago 5
@Ihateflagging123 you can thank al qaida for that
stiggyh 10 months ago
Destination, nationality and name only ? Where's the groping err. I mean enhanced pat down ? Where's the part where they make you take off your shoes ? Where's the part where they stick a finger up your ass and make a proctology exam ? Where's the part where they rob you of your dignity and intimidate you ?
I never thought going traveling to space could be easier than a simply airplane flight.
Ihateflagging123 11 months ago
The subtitles are FUCKING ANNOYING. It's in english, we don't need subtitles.
Ihateflagging123 11 months ago
@Ihateflagging123 Your watching it for free, therefore you cannot complain.
thecombinearecoming 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This would be a great movie to watch with aliens! It's a great movie i watch it all the time!!! It's better than 2010.
bstep13 11 months ago
Comment removed
truthseeker010101 11 months ago
Comment removed
truthseeker010101 11 months ago
Comment removed
truthseeker010101 11 months ago
Yes, there are a number of people who think 2001 is boring but if you come from a Star Wars/Star Trek/Aliens mentality obviously you'll find this movie very underwhelming. Stanley Kubrick was a very serious and philosophical person as was Arthur C. Clarke, the writer of 2001. This movie reads like a modern painting. You have to pass beyond the subjective matter in order to understand the profound underlying meaning which is the mystery of life here and beyond. Kubrick and Clarke are brilliant.
edwin11373 11 months ago 4
I'm a bit confused. It is audio in english with english subtitles, but when he speaks in russian there are no subtitles o_o
daviddahl83 11 months ago
it's ranked a #1 sci fi ...I dont like it
truthseeker010101 11 months ago
@truthseeker010101 It's annoying & flawed in some ways - too much down-time, two-dimensional characters, under-explained plot - but I have to admit I can't think of another sci fi movie that's clearly better. The visions of space exploration, and contact with space aliens who are not even remotely humanoid, who are never seen but are definitely beyond our understanding, set a standard that I don't think another sci fi movie has met. Plus, visual effects are still tops - way better than CGI.
boriato 11 months ago
@boriato but it's boring, it does have realism,it is kinda cool, but I can think of better sci fi movies
truthseeker010101 11 months ago
@truthseeker010101 I'd like to think I could also think of better sci fi movies ...but I have to admit that I can't think of one that's CLEARLY better overall. I'm curious: which ones do you think are better?
boriato 11 months ago
Comment removed
truthseeker010101 11 months ago
@truthseeker010101 If these are what you prefer, then I can see that 2001 isn't for you. Most of these, I wouldn't consider as sci fi, since they pay little attention to the science of how the events might be possible. The Andromeda Strain and (maybe) West World are exceptions. I like a lot of these movies too, as action/adventure stories, but sci fi (at least, hard sci fi) is different.
boriato 11 months ago
@boriato I am not mad you define sci fi differently, we all define our lives in another context, religion, God, and many other words are ineffable like these, it makes life interesting, what area few of the movies you consider sci fi?
truthseeker010101 11 months ago
@truthseeker010101 One I seldom hear discussed as sci fi, but I think it definitely is, is The Hunt for Red October. It presents a new, technology, and the implications of it for national defense issues. That's the sort of thing sci fi is supposed to address: how science and technology could change our lives. Besides, some aspects of it were clearly inspired by Jules Verne's 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (the Disney movie of that I'd also count as sci fi). And there's Jurassic Park.
boriato 11 months ago
Comment removed
truthseeker010101 11 months ago
Where is part 4?
edwin11373 11 months ago
lol, "please state your christian name." So I guess if you are a Muslim a trap door opens below you and problem solve. Next.
edwin11373 11 months ago
gravitational no matter what position....awesome. love it. this movie is so fantastic and to realize it was made in 1968.
TheDbworld 11 months ago
why does this movie get soo boring after the apes fight with the bones?
timberlandtim1 11 months ago 2
@timberlandtim1 LOL.
edwin11373 11 months ago
Comment removed
timberlandtim1 11 months ago
uhmm... very "comfy" sits, very "futuristic" and "ergonomic", dr heywood getting up with his feet over his head.
tommyLefroy 11 months ago
9:49 to 10:12 still baffles me to this day
mauricecano 11 months ago
Clarke = book genius
Kubrick = film genius
Clarke + Kubrick = Utter genius work of 2001: A space odyssey
SovietUnity 11 months ago
and to think the fact that this film was produced in the late sixties, wow!
flatwind 11 months ago
This is not a movie...It is a work of art...One of the all time greatest achievements in the history of cinema.....
medesdaddy 11 months ago
I think some of these models and sets were used on Space 1999. If I remember right the Anderson couple who made the show had the space station blown up.
clay56 11 months ago
@clay56 Not quite correct. 2001's look and feel, however, was a very strong influence on S:1999, and more than one scene in the pilot episode (Breakaway) pay homage to the movie. A space station did go all splodey in that episode, but it was built out of Airfix model kits by the S:1999 f/x team, and it wasn't a 2001 prop.
zehnkatzen 11 months ago
@clay56 Kubrik had ALL of the models and bluprints and tech drawings destroyed just so they COULDN'T be used in b-rated movies and tv shows as stock. That is why major kudos should go to the 2010 art/construction dept. They had to re-create the blueprints and subsequent models from publicity stills and the movie only.
archangel72367 10 months ago
Looks like construction of the space station is not yet completed.
alpha8147 11 months ago
Comment removed
alpha8147 11 months ago
why the peaple in the future talk like a britsh
MrWarlisson 11 months ago
@MrWarlisson There just might be British people in the future....
brendandawna 11 months ago
@brendandawna this took place 10 years ago
DBZnerd1 11 months ago
They got a few accurate predictions right: peace with the Russians and video chat
Squiremjr 11 months ago
Why are there English sub-titles for English speech?
TheMrBlinx 11 months ago
@TheMrBlinx Hey, that's a good question, TheMrBlinx. The characters are already speaking English. Are the captions supplied for the sake of the deaf & hard-of-hearing audiences? That has to be it. The overkill makes no sense, otherwise.
1958boomergirl 11 months ago
@1958boomergirl Ah, I bet that's it. A closed caption thing. Cool. Thanks.
TheMrBlinx 11 months ago
4:06 What a rip off.
London667568 1 year ago
Stanley Kubrick got one thing correct about the future. 3:22
London667568 1 year ago
we talked about this during music and none except me knew what my teacher was going to say and stuff i never saw the movie but i knew some of the basics like hal and he ries to kill them and the relic/monolith
SnowSwampert 1 year ago
it is amazing how 43 years later, this movie is still more amazing to watch. This movies graphics are outstanding! Even Star Wars and AVATAR. (all are great though)
Viz731 1 year ago
this movie is almost as boring as enders game. or journey to the center of the earth.
Sony18241 1 year ago
this movie is almost as boring as enders game.
Sony18241 1 year ago
nothing beats classical music!!!!!
MichaelBlue1990 1 year ago
oh--and by the way--i come into youtube to watch the movies and download them if they are good. not to listen or read the stupid social commentaries of weak minded people.
livingdeaddude1 1 year ago
Is his daughter retarded?
TROLLERSDELIGHT 1 year ago
The chairs mystify me. The reddish color draws unnecessary attention to them. Something important should happen with them.
reaper22066 1 year ago
@reaper22066
Kubrik used the color red in a lot of his movies.
Check out the Shining.
MrJohanasBilderberg 1 year ago
The charge for the phone call was under estimated, and inflation is even more than anticipated, scary!!!
n2ecosystems 1 year ago
Ahh! I always wondered what happened to Rigsby.
smuggler1967 1 year ago
spaceskype to earthskype calling cost 1-70...still cheap :))
hevele 1 year ago
Has anyone ever read Ender's Game? The way they explain gravity on a space station is similar to how they explain it here, with the rotating cylinder thing. Very clever. Still, this movie is...so slowly paced. Not for kids with ADD, that's for sure.
tokyopanda13 1 year ago
@tokyopanda13 Enders Game - excellent book!
Shawoddynoddy4000 1 year ago
telephone booths in the future eh? LOL least they got skype right
kudjo24 1 year ago
Only $1.70 for a phone call from a space station? I guess they didn't anticipate inflation. :p Also, boy the image of the moon spinning around (from the spinning space station) would sure be distracting when actually making a phone-call, but I guess it makes a nice visual effect for the film.
datalal624 1 year ago
@datalal624 that's the earth spinning outside that window. the station orbits the earth.
leofilm 1 year ago
@leofilm Right. DUH. That makes more sense. I guess the image for the earth that they used was so damn white I just thought "MOON". :p
datalal624 1 year ago
@datalal624 i totally get what you mean. it's got almost a moonglow look to it. i believe we're meant to deduce that all that graduated blue haze is the earth atmosphere, as seen from a great distance.
leofilm 1 year ago
@leofilm In the movie 2001 "A Space Odyssey," the Earth, as seen from space, is different
from the real photos. That is because, in 1968, when the film was directed by
the great Stanley Kubrick, the only photos of the Earth from space are in gray
scale. Only when the Apollo 11 mission took the first Earth color photos, was
the Earth seen in true color.
archangel72367 10 months ago
@datalal624 You failed: actually in telecomunications it was great decrease in cost. From space station to call back to earth (send signal) is nothing more than to send something throught satelitte. $1.10 is normal cost per minute nowadays throught satelitte, but if you have in mind that station has a lots of place for powerful antenna, and easy maintenance $1.70 is nearly too much, provided that antenna uses digital encoding.
chronius9 1 year ago
@datalal624 Maybe they were using Skype!
joevictor53 1 year ago
@joevictor53 LOL!
datalal624 1 year ago
I like the way gravity isn't just "there"; it is explained by the gyro force of the rotating curved surface. This sort of attentin to detail re. the laws of physics and space science made Clarke the great writer that he was.
crocfme 1 year ago 24
@crocfme Ya man this movies physics and lighting especially on the spacecrafts was phenomenal... waaaay ahead of it's time. It's incredible that they were able to do all this in the 60s
SnIkLeeT 1 year ago
@crocfme Yes, as opposed to things like Star Trek. On those shows, no matter how every system they had failed and crashed, their gravity was always there (except one time in one movie). It was easier for them to just ignore that little detail than deal with it according to physics. If they did it right, the Enterprise would have maybe been tubular.
TheMrBlinx 11 months ago
@TheMrBlinx
Yes. Like Clarke's other great reation - Rama.
crocfme 11 months ago
@crocfme don't forget kubrick.
IlersichProductions 11 months ago
@crocfme then why did the pen float?
thecombinearecoming 11 months ago
@thecombinearecoming
I don't recall it, was it on the space station or one of the spacecraft? - No gravity on the space transport craft.. I recall seeing a pen floating in an apparently 1g environment in "2010"...It must be hard for directors, trying to film zero g scenes in an earthly 1g environment .
crocfme 11 months ago
wasn't this shot in 70mm? super widescreen! lol
Buhzie15 1 year ago
I love how a good chunk of the shots are all really long continous shots. That must have taken time to film I guess.
captainjjb84 1 year ago 2
I want to know what the Russians said to each other after Floyd leaves. Are they saying, 'What a load of crapski! That bourgeois idiot thinks he fools us? Something's up at Clavius, and it isn't Ed Asner! Bozshe moi!'?
Etherdave 1 year ago
@Etherdave
Men said "Probably to him it is very difficult". The answer of the woman isn't legible.
HHHPPP8 1 year ago
It's a waltz. The ship docking with the station is like a dance. A waltz is a dance. The waltz music is totally relevant and quite nice. Would you prefer whatever pop music garbage is most popular these days? Perhaps some angry and antagonistic metal.
Dyrnwyn 1 year ago 34
@Dyrnwyn
I think everyone got that. What isn't necessary is a ten minute waltz.
Grungadin 1 year ago
@Dyrnwyn
I like metal. I like 2001. Both can be very profound. Please lighten up and refrain from stereotyping.
odenskrigare 11 months ago
So...10 years ago (2001) we all are christians, all the russian people speak british so I guess UK take over Russia and they charged us for the use of skype.
Awesome!
KADG81 11 months ago
Comment removed
truthseeker010101 11 months ago
Kubrick needs a slap in the face for all this classical music garbage. I like classical music but its use is totally irrelevant here.
shivakrishnarama 1 year ago
@shivakrishnarama the music is 100% relevant. It's a waltz between the ship and the station, and later its the stewardess walking in 0-gravity which could be compared to a dance
TheWasabi123 1 year ago 2
@TheWasabi123 This movie is good for it's era. Pretty much any good modern Sci-Fi movie makes it look like garbage though. Would way rather watch the Matrix or Inception.
shivakrishnarama 1 year ago
@shivakrishnarama This is my favourite movie.
I respect your opinion, but please don't present it as fact.
And yes, I saw new sci-fi movies including Inception.
IlersichProductions 1 year ago
@shivakrishnarama agreed. it's a shame you didn't consult kubrick on his choice of music. If you had, his movies may have actually been a hit.
ScrewAttackChina 1 year ago
@ScrewAttackChina You're funny, do you get your comedic inspiration by looking in the mirror ?
shivakrishnarama 1 year ago
@shivakrishnarama yes
ScrewAttackChina 1 year ago
The little girl wants a phone, just like kids these days!
IDareToSpeak 1 year ago
@IDareToSpeak Ah! Indeed!
GordonMorrice 1 year ago
Also, apparently everyone in the far-off future of 2001 is a Christian, if they have to give their Christian name.
progrockcoffee 1 year ago
Dizziest plane to land EVER.
progrockcoffee 1 year ago
What amazes me the most is how much Kubrick correctly predicted, yet how much he didn't account for. Webcams in the film are ten times the size they would end up being. All the knobs and controls in sci-fi films seemed so futuristic at the time, but seem so primitive in retrospect.
EyesOfRapture 1 year ago
Are these stewardesses or Spaceballs?
EyesOfRapture 1 year ago
There aren’t going to be any stewardesses aboard an earth to moon shuttle! There aren’t going to be any windows anywhere that is not compartmentalized either. Outside viewing will be on screens with multispectral sensors outboard. The bridge won't be where crewmen look out like a world war two bomber, it will be in the most protected area of the ship.
centurion180ad 1 year ago
Those red chairs look like Ikea chairs
goombabear 1 year ago
it's weird how space and classical music go good together
praisetothesinners 1 year ago
Dr. Floyd, ironic that and the fact Echos ties up perfectly with the ending sequence of the movie.
clintsaunders 1 year ago
this movie is soo overrated. I've watch the ending and the 1st 3 videos of it, id rather watch mars attacks to be honest. What a complete let down
MoOkS187 1 year ago
@MoOkS187 ADHD? That's understandable.
ramirosan145 1 year ago
@MoOkS187 You call it a letdown, and you haven't even seen the whole thing yet. Makes sense.....?
IlersichProductions 1 year ago
8:03 The Russian ladies nod their heads at the same time 0____0 You know what that means... FEMBOTS!!!!
ashtonmadhatter 1 year ago
@ashtonmadhatter
Floyd speaks to them at parting "Ladies". They in the answer it agree nod as a sign of farewell.
HHHPPP8 1 year ago
So no one knows if the red chairs mean something?
linkomega123 1 year ago
@linkomega123 I don't know about the chairs, but I'm pretty convinced the color red has some meaning in 2001. HAL's eye, the cockpit of the moon shuttle, certain lights here and there throughout the film, are all red. Perhaps it represents the inherent blood lust of humanity?
TheBackOfTheBoat 1 year ago
@TheBackOfTheBoat Well they did remind me of red blood cells.
linkomega123 1 year ago
@TheBackOfTheBoat I think you're reading too much into this. Red is a very contrasting color to the predominant color of black or white. I don't know about you, but if I were to be in an environment such as a space station or space ship, I'd appreciate as much color as I could see. It's probably nothing more than just to provide contrast is what I'm saying.
indyracingnut 1 year ago
@indyracingnut Well for me the most significant use of red is in HAL's CPU. The rest of the Discovery is clean and white but HAL's inner brain is glowing bright red. I think it represent's HAL's humanity and thus his imperfections. It might also be meant to show that our idealistic visions of the future are false and that things like violence and animosity are bound to continue, even in artificial intelligence. But maybe you're right and I am just grasping for straws.
TheBackOfTheBoat 1 year ago
@TheBackOfTheBoat
You are not grasping for straws, the film has many hints and the director said every viewer can understand it the way he wants
TelAvivDuDe 1 year ago
@TheBackOfTheBoat Very much like the red jacket in Schindler's List. Red is a very important colour.
bertthebetrayer 1 year ago
and to think that in 2001 we would actually dress like this. and all this technology. pls we dont even have people, (civilians and buisness men and such) on international space stations. i think were decades away from this breakthrough in human history.
MrBeanerSpartan1 1 year ago
Thanks for uploading all of this movie in such great quality. But I'm afraid the link to The Planets you've put into every part, as well as doing it with subtitles ruins it for me. I wont be watching all of it. Pity you went to so much effort only for it to be ruined by doing these things. But thanks for bringing this amazing movie to an entire new audience.
Aussiemarco 1 year ago
1968 .... amazing. Audience must have loved the technology in this film. We get video skype 40 years later!
perfectsky5 1 year ago
These comments truly make me fucking sick.
maulcs 1 year ago
@maulcs I agree. Why can't people nowadays just enjoy a fucking movie without talking about Justin Beiber or posting a generic comment or some other kind of off topic shit?
Childist2 1 year ago
At 2:33 - 4:09 = We know it today as Skype!
siemenstraffic 1 year ago
Comment removed
LivingMindfully1975 1 year ago
@raleighwhisp
Thank you so much!
recldg 1 year ago
@recldg have u seen this film? can u plz tell me what part is the part where the astronaunt being w/o a space suit
7150285 1 year ago
Does anybody here speak russian? I'm curious about what Dr. Smyslov and the other girls are talking about, when they're alone. Thx in advance!
recldg 1 year ago
@recldg
They were just talking about something they had to go do in about 2 hours. Talking about when they might leave.
Once Floyd leaves it's hard to make out. Apparently something is very difficult, but I can't hear what. Seems likely it was what they were just talking about.
Hope that helps.
raleighwhisp 1 year ago
Cell phones would not work in space (there are no cell phone towers in space) ... and there'd be no way around the communication delay, unless they could find a signal that could go faster then the speed of light (radio waves go the speed of light).
errickrb 1 year ago
@errickrb Nothing can go faster than the speed of light >.>.
errickrb 1 year ago
Skype on space at $1.70....lmao.....
pran93 1 year ago
Calling Earth from outer space: $1.70
Calling another country(now): at least $10
1819sylvia 1 year ago
@1819sylvia well this takes place in the future...oh wait a minute
kraken589 1 year ago
@1819sylvia Try another long distance company. Sounds like yours is ripping you off. You can call to most countries for just a few cents!
boriato 1 year ago
@1819sylvia Inflation (also called quantitative easing). Printing more and more money and weakening the buying power of the currency.
Silver, gold can't be made out of thin air, though, that's why they still have the same buying power over centuries.
comexland 1 year ago
Reginald Perrin in orbit. You have to love this.
boriato 1 year ago
If Werner Von Braun had been able to convince Hitler that there were Jews on the moon, all this would be ours now.
Etherdave 1 year ago
lol they don't have cell phones, seems this isn't so futuristic
failtolawl 1 year ago
@failtolawl cellular phones in space don't work too well... yah need a stronger communications device that can render all those incoming radio and microwaves from outer space out; we on Earth are more fortunate cause of our atmosphere. Besides that, these transmission are farther in distance... that's why it cost $1.70 something for that phone call the Dr. made; that's expensive for then and even now if you compared the pricing with today's inflated dollar value.
VexT916 1 year ago
@VexT916 here is the thing, it's the future, and cell phones (in this time period) would be the past, so it would be a good assumption that they would have a more advanced communicating phone, notice how their wasn't a huge lag from when he talked to when his daughter answered? That just shows how advanced this movie takes place.
but it is true, during this time, cell phones (or mobile communication) was a dream not even the biggest dreamers could think of.
failtolawl 1 year ago
this is so slow im about to shoot my self in the foot!!!!!!!!!!
Camohat100 1 year ago
HOWARD JOHNSON'S-IN SPACE!
arbuviknb 1 year ago
That one ugly baby
dragonfighter4171 1 year ago
Lol the thought that bush babies and all other animals wouldn't be extinct by the time we built a station like that and transport people through space like that is funny.
SirOttoVBismark 1 year ago
Comment removed
SirOttoVBismark 1 year ago
0:28 - William Sylvester! Star of Gorgo, Devil Doll and Riding with Death!
amcint01 1 year ago
People seemed to dress nicer in the 60s. Then when the 70s came along everyone went "hey i got a great idea! lets see if we can all look like total slobs for this decade"
dwilmer7 1 year ago
I heard this movie has allot of symbolism in it. So i was wondering if the red chairs from 1:55 mean something? I mean they really stand out.
linkomega123 1 year ago
@linkomega123 Got no idea!
hueeeeey 1 year ago
It's 2010 and we're probably not going to have space stations like that for an additional 40 to 50 years. What is wrong with this picture...
sah15ft 1 year ago
@sah15ft
Well when you think about it, space stations aren't very efficient. They're small, difficult to assemble, and vulnerable to radiation. A moon base, like an underground one, would be much more reliable. More expensive, but much easier to use.
shockraid1 1 year ago
@shockraid1 Agreed, it would seem though that space stations would be a lot more feasible once orbital elevators are in place (and it's much cheaper to transport materials to and from Earth).
sah15ft 1 year ago
@sah15ft How would they have known that 43 years ago? You can't blame them for speculating.
FailboatSkipper 1 year ago
@FailboatSkipper I don't blame them for speculating; some of the speculations such as flat-screen TVs, voice-print identification, chess-playing computers, glass cockpit displays, video phones, etc, were very shrewd because they exist today. Others, such as strong AI, suspended animation, accurate voice-controlled computing, and moon bases, haven't materialized yet, but are going to be a reality soon. We should've been farther in space exploration than we are today. :(
sah15ft 1 year ago
Comment removed
archerpope 1 year ago
@sah15ft And who's fault is that? :D
FORD5000solo2001 1 year ago
@FORD5000solo2001 I think I should clarify. It's not Kubrick's fault, Kubrick was a visionary and he had consulted with many scientific experts to ensure the accuracy of the science behind this movie. It's disappointing that it's been 38 years since humanity last landed on the Moon; the Moon landings were discontinued because they were supposedly financially unfeasible. Humanity is capable of much more, space exploration should have been more extensive than where it is today.
sah15ft 1 year ago
@sah15ft LOL. Looking back at your comment, when you said "What is wrong with this picture?" Everyone took at as "What is wrong with this film?" Not "What is wrong with our cosmic aspirations?"
Communication Breakdown FTW!
FORD5000solo2001 1 year ago