2001 and 2010

[ChrisIII]

2001: A Space Odyssey was one of the most revolutionary sci-fi films of it's time, with great special FX that still look pretty good today. However, it remains a controversial film, mostly for it's somewhat slow pace and confusing ending.





2010 was the sequel made in 1984. A more mainstream and less artsy film, it dealt partially with cold war politics as Americans joins a Russian crew to find out what happened in 2001 as war is about to break out on Earth. Roy Scheider took over the role of Heywood Floyd from William Sylvestor. The film is perhaps most notable for it's realistic depiction of Jupiter and it's moons.




Two more "Odyssey" novels were made by Arthur C. Clarke. 2061 which wrapped up the Heywood Floyd story, and 3001 which had Frank Poole ressurected. There were apparentally plans to adapt them into films at some point, possibly with Tom Hanks in the role of either Floyd or Poole. However, no word on any further films.

[Joe Rice]

2001: A Space Odyssey was one of the most revolutionary sci-fi films of it's time, with great special FX that still look pretty good today. However, it remains a controversial film, mostly for it's somewhat slow pace and confusing ending.





2010 was the sequel made in 1984. A more mainstream and less artsy film, it dealt partially with cold war politics as Americans joins a Russian crew to find out what happened in 2001 as war is about to break out on Earth. Roy Scheider took over the role of Heywood Floyd from William Sylvestor. The film is perhaps most notable for it's realistic depiction of Jupiter and it's moons.




Two more "Odyssey" novels were made by Arthur C. Clarke. 2061 which wrapped up the Heywood Floyd story, and 3001 which had Frank Poole ressurected. There were apparentally plans to adapt them into films at some point, possibly with Tom Hanks in the role of either Floyd or Poole. However, no word on any further films.


Uhh . . .oh. Thanks?

[The Zapper]

Thanks for the info?

[Thorlief]

you forgot to copypaste the point of this

:D

And 2001's ending was never confusing to me. It's really easy to understand

[Jared]

And 2001's ending was never confusing to me. It's really easy to understand

Were you on acid at the time? :)

[Toku King]

you forgot to copypaste the point of this

:D

And 2001's ending was never confusing to me. It's really easy to understand

Explain the stone with the monkeys to me, then.

[BoosterBronze]

The Monolith takes you to the next step of evolution. The monkeys became tool users, and the dude sees all sorts of stuff and becomes a space baby.

[choptop]

The Monolith takes you to the next step of evolution. The monkeys became tool users, and the dude sees all sorts of stuff and becomes a space baby.
its calld the Star Child.:)

[BoosterBronze]

its calld the Star Child.:)

You're thinking of the guy from KISS. I assure you, the scientific name is 'space baby.' :)

[Thorlief]

Were you on acid at the time? :)

no, surprisingly not. When the glass broke I figured everything out. I still think it's pretty easy to understand if you read between the lines



Explain the stone with the monkeys to me, then.

the monolith is a tool a superior alien race uses to bring knowledge to the humanity and make it evolve. The "monkeys" quickly understand that they could use a bone as a weapon; the human evolution begins

the humans keep evolving until the monolith is found on the Moon, what does it mean? It means the humans are ready for another big step in their evolution..even though we still remain the same curious beasts, and still we need tools and gears to survive

one year later: Dave, Frank and the AI mainframe HAL are traveling on their spaceship Discovery. Only HAL knows the true mission behind what it could be considered just a boring exploration schedule

HAL is the most advanced tool ever created by man. It has feelings, it controls the ship, it can engage a 100% believable conversation. HAL is the pinnacle of technological evolution..

..and it starts malfunctioning. HAL has never made a mistake, and this is enough to drive it crazy. Remember, HAL is perhaps more human than its human creators. Instead of admitting it in front of Frank and Dave, HAL kills everyone on the ship so noone would remember its small but embarassing mistake. Dave manages to dismantle HAL's internal memory...after perhaps onme of the most suspenseful scenes of all times, HAL dies

here we go again: THE MAN DEMONSTRATED HE'S MORE INTELLIGENT AND CAPABLE THAN THE TOOLS HE CREATES.

THIS is what the alien race was trying to achieve, and this is what Dave has just done. The man is ready for the final leap in his evolution.
Dave listens to a message in which the true mission is explained: to reach Jupiter and to be human's first envoy to the Unknown: beyond the Monolith, which is standing there

The ship reaches Jupiter, and the Monolith is standing silent once again

Dave approaches it, and starts travelling through time and space. He reaches a point in the Universe where no man can ever hope to discover and suddenly he finds himself into..

a hotel room. Why? Because the aliens created a environment a human could feel comfortable and familiar. Dave stands there a indefinite amount of time until..he breaks a glass.

Now, breaking a glass in Jewish culture means a big change is going to occur. In this case its totally true. The glass also means Dave's human body has become useless because the Human race is ready for the final leap, the ultimate change in which a human form is not necessary anymore

and this is what it happens. Dave has become a Star Child, the mankind's final evolution, he has become like the aliens.

Is this the end for the human evolution? It is, but it is not.
Remember, he's a child. After him the humanity is ready to start again from the beginning

that's what I understood about 2001. There could be other explanations but this is my favourite, and the one that makes the most sense to me

[Nikita]

I'd enjoy seeing another film based on the series. I really liked 2001 and 2010.

[CBikle]

You're thinking of the guy from KISS. I assure you, the scientific name is 'space baby.' :)

Star Child has a late 60's vibe to it.

If 2001 had been made in the 80's, it would have been called the "Space Baby".

[Ugoff]

ChrisIII, nice post. I really enjoyed 2010 and wonder why SCI FI doesnt show movies like this instead of giant creature b-movies or disaster earth movies(super volcanos, asteriods, super storms). But I'm kinda not mad at SCI FI anymore since there bringing Farscape back. lol

[Jared]

Though it was an interesting twist, I wondered why the aliens wanted to turn Jupiter into a star in 2010. It doesn't seem to me like that would be all that helpful.

[Enigmanaut]

What gets me with these two movies is how Keir Dullea didn't actually appear to age in the period between them.

[rick]

2001 is of course a classic, but I think that 2010 really deserves more attetion then it gets.

Yes it isn't nearly as "cosmic" as the first film, but it was still an extremly well done "Hard" science fiction film and is certainly one of my very favorite films of the 1980's.

[The Batman]

I'd enjoy seeing another film based on the series. I really liked 2001 and 2010.

Well Clarke also wrote a 2061 and a 3001 so it's not like another film would be impossible. Unlikely, but not impossible. It's been a long time since I've read either 2061 or 3001 so I'm kind of shakey on the details of those books or even if they were all that good. Still, even if 2061 and 3001, as sequels to 2001 and 2010 are off the table, there's plenty of stuff by Clarke that could make for some interesting sci-fi films. The Rama series comes to mind, as does Hammer of the Gods.

As for 2010, it's a film I really enjoyed and I think in many ways feels more like an Arthur C. Clarke story than even 2001 does. 2010, the movie, is a little more of its time - it ends on a plea for understanding and co-operation rather than Cold War and the potential for thermonuclear armageddon - and I think that it maybe suffers for being a little too straightforward and not trippy enough.

Still, it's too bad that it's sort of been lost in the shadow of its predecessor