|
Nothing in this page represents any official position or policy with regard to 2001: A Space Odyssey.
You will find more information about most subjects referred to in this page in other areas of the web site -
try a search from the main home page.
| 1 |
When can I see the film full-size again?
|
|
I have no means of monitoring screening schedules in different countries, and only find out about cinema presentations by checking local press or receiving advice from other people. Any information that can usefully be passed on appears in the Events page. Otherwise, your guess is as good as mine. |
|
| 2 |
Who wrote "2001: A Space Odyssey"?
|
|
The central plot for the film came about from discussions between Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke, who was already at the time (mid-1960s) a renowned writer of science- fiction and predicter of future scientific trends (accurately enough, in some cases, to make up for various more fanciful suggestions). Clarke looked out samples of his work and they finally picked on "The Sentinel", a short story he wrote and submitted for a competition in 1948, as giving them the kernel of an idea to work with (the fact that the story failed to win any prizes suggests that having the good fortune to be around when a great director is looking for ideas is a much better financial and career proposition than any number of competition entries). The story tells the tale of the discovery on the moon of an ancient structure (a crystal pyramid), and the realisation that human beings are not alone in the universe.
Over the three or four years during which "2001: A Space Odyssey" was in production, the story was in a constant process of adaptation and development. Arthur C. Clarke tried to pin Stanley Kubrick down at least once to release the work for publication, but in the end the book was not first published until after the film had been released. The agreement was that the book would carry Clarke's name as author, although I believe the canny Kubrick did retain the rights to some of the proceeds. | |
| 3 |
Whereabouts in the script does Dave say, "My God, it's full of stars"?
|
|
There was never a point at which a script was produced for "2001: A Space Odyssey" and then followed nice and neatly scene by scene. Gary Lockwood (Frank Poole), responding to a question about the script at an appearance in 1997, was having none of it. Instead, the film was developed piece by piece (which was evidently very frustrating for Arthur C. Clarke, who was constantly making corrections as Stanley Kubrick's own ideas developed). I have a copy of a "script" myself, however it differs considerably from both the film and the book, and as it was never officially published I will not use it as a reference source (except for the sake of occasional vague interest). "My God, it's full of stars" were Dave's final words in the book, in Chapter 39 - Into the Eye. In the film, Kubrick was perhaps thinking about Bogart in "Casablanca" at the time, as Dave signs off with "Sing it for me", and we all know what that led to. Which left the "full of stars" quote handy when Peter Hyams and the Hollywood spin merchants were casting around for a cute "tag" line for the 1984 production of "2010". They could pretend that Dave really was heard to say it, because it was printed in the book. At least they did not have to make anything up themselves.
A note from correspondent Bernard advises me that novelist Ken MacLeod has taken the "borrowing" a stage further. In "The Cassini Division", the only observer who witnesses Ganymede disintegrating into a zillion rectangular pieces mutters: "My stars, it's full of Gods". Though, since no-one else was around, it seems rather wasted. |
|
| 4 |
In which exact minute of the film are the first words spoken?
|
|
The lady in the elevator greets Heywood Floyd ("Here you are, sir") on his arrival at Space Station reception in the twentieth minute after the opening scene of "The Dawn of Man".
Stanley Kubrick, in this case, is certainly using Heywood Floyd to represent his entire audience. Having taken us from the stone age (in a science- fiction film?) through a mind- numbing rendezvous with a space station, he orients us with the same care he displays in everything else. Banal dialogue? Think about it. No laser cannons, or timewarps, not a firework in sight. Just a simple, unselfconscious "Here you are...". Welcome to the 21st century... | |
| 5 |
The film is so confusing, tell me what it means.
|
|
Join the club (founded in 1968, and still going strong - current membership probably several hundred thousand). My answer has always been, ask not "what does it mean?", but "what does it mean to you?". As I have written elsewhere, "2001: A Space Odyssey" is all about possibilities. This was the very thing which initially stirred my own interest, and many people are still drawn to it by the fact that it has no fixed definition of what it means or does not mean; other people, more comfortable with most other movies which take you by the hand (or other appendage) and lead you through the plot step by laborious step, find it frustrating and lose patience. There is no right and wrong. Some people think "2001: A Space Odyssey" is all about food; others think it is a parable about evolution; others consider the monolith to be a religious icon. They are all right, if that is what it means to them; but they are all wrong, if they expect it to mean the same to everyone else. I believe that most people for whom this film "clicks" are able to find it relevant in some way to their own lives or experience, and "internalise" a meaning even if it is impossible to explain to others (or even themselves). I do not believe that anyone has ever come to admire "2001: A Space Odyssey" because of any explanation given by anyone else.
Despite all that, my own confidence in that as a response was put to the test by the work of Len Wheat, whose book, "Kubrick's 2001: A Triple Allegory" gives precise explanations for every part of 2001. You may not agree with all of his conclusions, but they will certainly put your own interpretations under scrutiny. |
|
| 6 |
Arthur C. Clarke explained everything, so what's the problem?
|
|
Sure, if vague "possibilities" aren't to your taste, read the book and take it all literally. | |
| 7 |
What does HAL stand for?
|
|
"HAL". Something like Highly Advanced Lifeform, right? Well, almost. The answer is given in black and white in Arthur C. Clarke's book of "2001: A Space Odyssey", Chapter 16, which is titled (ahem) "HAL" (note that in this case the book gives a specific answer to a specific question, whereas in situations that are more open to individual interpretation I do not necessarily take solutions out of the book). Clarke writes: "Hal (for Heuristically programmed ALgorithmic computer, no less) was a masterwork of the third computer breakthrough."
Hal is commonly written as HAL, and in the film we only see it as "HAL 9000". This implies that three words are involved, as in IBM (see next question), and it is noticeable that in the book Arthur C. Clarke himself consistently refers to "Hal", not "HAL". So, therefore, do I. |
|
| 8 |
That can't be right, H.A.L. is just I.B.M. shifted one letter to the left.
|
|
Yes, but Arthur C. Clarke won't hear a word of it (and having gone to so much trouble with Heuristic ALgorithmic, why should he?). IBM did indeed provide advice in the early stages of the film and their logo did originally appear in a number of shots; however, legend has it that when they realised that the computer in "2001: A Space Odyssey" was going to go around the Solar System killing people, they withdrew on the grounds that (to coin a turn of phrase or two) the kind of people who would still buy computers after that were not the kind of people they wanted as customers. There were even reports that IBM's chiefs instructed their staff to ignore the movie, though I have not seen any proof of that. The official explanation has always been that HAL cf. IBM was entirely coincidental, although some with a more psychological bent have implied that Stanley Kubrick subconsciously hit on the name because of his feelings towards IBM (though I am not aware that he was recorded as expressing negative feelings about them). In response to my own enquiries a few years ago, when I was actually an IBM employee myself, nobody seemed to know what I was talking about. Their main focus then was on the much- publicised chess match between IBM's Deep Blue computer and world champion Gary Kasparov.
The truth? What you have above is as close as any of us will ever get, so take your pick. My own opinion? A coincidence? You must be kidding... but that does not necessarily mean there was any mischievous intent against IBM. At the time, a snappy three-letter acronym would probably have been considered convincing, and this was a computer, after all, so some similarity to IBM would not have gone amiss. Most other computers in the mid- sixties had distinctly un- snappy names. I mean, Clarke could have called Hal HPAC... but somehow it wouldn't have been quite the same. | |
| 9 |
The first time I saw "2001: A Space Odyssey", I saw several shots that I never saw again. What happened to them?
|
|
These mysterious disappearing shots are reputed to include such scenes as Dave eating some blue food at the end, or lights appearing in the monolith, or Frank's body being crunched up by the spacepod. Some early viewers of the film are adamant that these scenes were included in the original version.
This whole subject was put under the microscope in a paper which you can read at A Taste of Blue Food in Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey, the only definitive investigation into what was actually filmed and shown. There is an open invitation to anyone who has any real evidence of "lost" scenes to make themselves and their evidence known. |
|
| 10 |
What are those Russian scientists on the space station saying to each other after Floyd walks away?
|
|
One version has it that the conversation is fairly banal, as Floyd walks away: "Well, we didn't get much out of him, did we?" Or, more colloquially, "Miserable whatsit, we should stick him in the Baltic." In a more refined version, the female scientist remarks: "Im navernoe ochen' trudno" ("They must have had a very hard time"), to which Margaret Tyzack replies: "Da, ochen' trudno" ("Yes, they must").
Which suggests that the subject of their concern was nothing to do with Floyd at all, rather with the crew of the Russian craft that was denied permission for an emergency landing.
| |
| 11 |
What exactly do Dave and Frank say, in the lipreading scene?
|
|
Despite what some people may like to think, it is, as I understand it, impossible to lip- read from the side, and it would be useless to enlist the aid of a lip- reader to help translate this scene. I refuse to believe that Kubrick would have filmed Dave and Frank discussing football results or other trivia, and Hal's later conversation with Dave (when Dave is trying to re-enter the Discovery) gives us the best idea of the words that might have passed between Dave and Frank. | |
| 12 |
The monolith was shaped to some mathematical formula, what was it?
|
|
This one is down to Arthur C. Clarke again. In the book "2001: A Space Odyssey", chapter 31 "Survival", he writes of the T.M.A.-1 monolith: "One curious, and perhaps quite unimportant, feature of the block had led to endless argument. The monolith was 11 feet high, and 11/4 by 5 feet in cross-section. When its dimensions were checked with great care, they were found to be in the exact ratio 1 to 4 to 9 - the square of the first three integers."
Clarke later wrote that there was nothing mystical about the proportions, he simply thought they sounded nice. However, I might take issue with him over one small point. The "exact ratio 1 to 4 to 9" would make the monolith 111/4 feet high. Perhaps he allowed for a three- inch foundation? | |
| 13 |
I'm a collector, where can I get hold of one of those neat chairs from the space station, ...or an original Star Child poster, ...or a model of the moonbus, ...or one of those space helmets, ...or a Discovery crew patch, ...or blah-de-blah-blah...? | |
|
"Blah-de-blah-blah" is a non- scientific term relating to anything you could ever possibly think of, and much besides, that people have expressed an interest in getting hold of. This includes everything from original pieces from the studio through to modern reproductions. Stanley Kubrick saw to it that almost everything from the sets of "2001: A Space Odyssey" was destroyed, partly to ensure it could not be reused for any subsequent film and its impact thereby diminished - the director went to great lengths and expense to create his vision of 2001 from scratch, and was not about to sit back while someone else came along and took advantage of his years of effort. Very few items escaped his attention, and by all accounts his instructions were carried out just in time, as it has been reported that a directive was sent from MGM requestiing him to submit any remaining effects. In the event, they were probably left wondering what had happened to all that money ($US10.5 million), although the film quickly proved profitable. Still known to be in existence (possibly because they had been taken out of the studio at the time for various reasons) are the red space helmet, a set of overalls from the Discovery, the key used by Dave when he opened the door to Hal's "brain room" and part of the assembly for one of Hal's "fisheye" lenses (though not the lens itself). You can find pictures of all these items elsewhere in this web site. Rumours of other things are no more than rumours. It is true that reproductions have been made of some items, notably for the movie of "2010", and have even turned up in such unlikely settings as rock videos, but I have no knowledge of what may or may not have been reproduced, or whether any of it still exists. On a more encouraging note, if you really want an original chair from the orbiting Hilton you may be surprised to know that they are still being made by the original French company. Not a cheap way of furnishing a home, but if you are going that far you might also invest in a set of cutlery as seen on board the Discovery - also still being manufactured. Again, pictures of the furniture and the cutlery are included in The Underview on 2001. Where to get hold of such things? Well, there is no one place to go that covers everything and I am not inclined to act as an unpaid agent for any one commercial supplier. However, if you are comfortable with bidding in online auctions eBay always has a changing selection of Space Odyssey goodies. One reason why you will not find movie stills or sound clips in The Underview on 2001 is that other people already do a good job of making them available, and my policy is not to duplicate other sources if at all possible (a principle not always followed by subsequent entrants into the 2001-on-the-Internet environment, unfortunately). If you want a good image of Hal's eye, try the "2001 Internet Resource Archive" - a long-standing Web site (it even predates this one, so by Internet standards it is positively ancient) with lots of savable pictures and sound samples, and since it is free I have no problem sending people there.
As a result of The Underview on 2001, I am now in the fortunate position of having people write to me when they discover something unusual, and I always find room on the site somewhere to share the news.
You should also refer to the "Collectibles" section in The Underview on 2001. |
||
| 14 |
Who did that funky version of the 2001 theme music?
|
|
Richard Strauss's "Also Sprach Zarathustra" has been recorded so many times, in so many ways, since Kubrick selected it for 2001, that you could probably build a considerable collection. Andy Summers (ex-pop group Police) was one who recorded a funkified version, which was included on the "2010" soundtrack and also released as a single. Pop artist Deodato recorded another synthesized version. There are many others. But do you really want them? | |
| 15 |
Who owns the rights to the film?
|
|
A favourite question of article writers and others who want to make use of images or other copyrighted material. Warner Bros appear to be the current owners of all, or most, things 2001. I do not have their address offhand, but it should be easy enough to find. It is also worth checking with other people who have been through the copyright process themselves, such as organisers of 2001- based events, to find out how they managed it. | |
| 16 |
Oh - and I need the answer right now!
|
|
Well, now we are on the subject, I need several million spare dollars... and my own tropical island... and my own personal Cinerama complex... | |
| Back to top | Copyright © 1999, 2000, 2001, 2008 | Home page |