"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." -- The late, very great Arthur C. Clarke (author of 2001: A Space Odyssey)

The special effects in this film are magnificent and would stand up today. Even more amazing when you think there is no CGI at all.

It's incredible that this still looks so good.

Along with "Ran" by Kurosawa, this movie impacted me more as a child than anything else. I was fortunate enough to watch it on a big screen. If you are near a theater that has a classic movie series, they will often screen 2001 in full 70mm and it is thrilling. Don't miss it.

I saw this film in 1968 on a curved Cinerama screen. It was publicised as a Cinerama movie but it really was 70 km projected on a wide screen. I was 12 at the time. I loved the music and the beautiful machines. It still is a feast for the senses. You felt something really deep was going on even though you didn't understand it. I left the cinema stunned. Kubrick opened eyes, ears and mind.

My friends and I spent an entire evening arguing about the ending of this movie and what it all meant. Alcohol was involved.

I believe the animals in the Dawn of Man sequence...that Mary thought might be aardvarks...are tapirs.😁👍

You really should check out the sequel "2010: The Year We Make Contact". Its a fantastic movie. It answers some of the questions posed by this movie.

2010: The Year We Make Contact extends the story nicely while being much clearer about what’s happening. Notice how the lights were in the wrong place in the hotel room - the floor instead of the ceiling? The aliens were trying to give Dave a comfortable, familiar environment, but got some things wrong. In the novel, the food they provided him was nutritious but quite blue. At the end, Dave has been transformed into a being that still has Dave’s memories, but is so different from him it can no longer think of itself as ‘Dave’. They lay this out in 2010.

There is a sequel to this movie..... "2010 The Year We Make Contact" .... Not as "Artsy"...... But explains a lot........ Helen Mirren is in it...... Plays a Russian Ship Captain. I would recommend you watch it. Will carry on the story..... Thanks for your reaction......

The screenplay was co-written by Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke, one of the original 3 Grand Masters of Science Fiction (the others being Isaac Asimov and Robert A. Heinlein). It was partially based on Clarke's story "The Sentinel". As the production progressed, Clarke wrote a novelization, which was actually released before the film. In the 1980s, with '2001' a major cultural milestone in cinema, Clarke returned to the story to answer the questions people had been asking for over a decade. He wrote '2010: Odyssey Two' which was also swiftly made into a film written, photographed, and directed by Peter Hyams titled '2010: The Year We Make Contact'. It stars Roy Scheider (Chief Brody from Jaws) as Dr. Heywood Floyd, John Lithgow, Helen Mirren, and Bob Balaban. It also brings back Keir Dullea as Dave Bowman and Douglas Rain as the voice of HAL 9000. Clarke wrote two more Odyssey novels before he passed, '2061: Odyssey Three', and '3001: The Final Odyssey'. Back in the 1960s when the film was released, a lot of people would use all sorts of "substances" before going to see the movie...and they would have wild trips during the end sequence when the Monolith basically becomes a stargate and Dave Bowman goes from astronaut to Star Child.

One of the coolest interpretations I've ever heard about this movie: *the black rectangle represents the movie screen* (the black rectangle presents the apes/humans/people who view it with information, which gives them new knowledge). So in this interpretation, people think the end was Dave travelling from the MOVIE world into the REAL world.

We children of the 60s LIVED to go to a showing of this movie, in Cinerama, and ingest... substances that enhanced the enjoyment of the stargate sequence. FAR OUT MAN!

Hal was programmed to share information. But in order to protect the secrecy of the mission he was reprogrammed to lie to the 2 astronauts who were awake. This drove Hal to have a nervous breakdown. The antenna that failed was how Hal was monitored back on Earth. It was like a psychosomatic illness that made Hal think the link was failing, but actually Hal needed to cut himself off from Earth so no one would realize he was failing. No one could be allowed to see that a Hal 9000 was making mistakes... but it was the humans that caused the problem.

This movie was released on April 2, 1968. On my birthday, June 2, in a small rural East Texas town, it was held over in a rare 70mm theater and my birthday party was to go see that movie. It was glorious. As to the short video phone call to his daughter, that was to indicate that, by 2001, space travel would be so common that calling home would be quite a normal thing to do for a traveler. Hence all the other "casual" additions like "how about a cup of coffee." The vision was that by then such travel would be so routine that yeah, the amenities would be little different from any other sort of travel. Sadly, that never happened. The movie was inspired by a short story written by Arthur C. Clark, "The Sentinel." It inspired Kubrick and he worked with Clark on the screenplay. They envisioned AI run amok, and how such a mission would be a media event, as most of the space travel was in the mid 60's. I honestly think it's extremely unfair to view either the story, or the astonishing craft involved in making the movie, without that context. All effects were practical effects, whether with miniatures or full size. And the miniature work was VERY carefully crafted to accurately map movement in space. So give it due respect. It's a seminal SciFi movie that heightened the genre enormously. With perhaps only one or two prior exceptions, Forbidden Planets and The Day The Earth Stood Still, Sci Fi had been basically fantastical kid stuff or sex stuff. Kubrick and Clark elevated the genre to previously unattained heights.

I really hope you enjoy this one. It’s one of Kubrick’s best, but it’s definitely not for everybody.

Genuinely stoked to hear that you’re watching ‘From the Earth to the Moon’! I’m not sure if you’re reacting to it on KZfaq or not (really hope you will be), but just glad that another person is discovering that amazing series. One of my favorite ministries of all time.

That neoclassical interior with the lit up floor is one of the most strikingly beautiful set designs ever.

I can attest that as a kid who was enthusiastically watching every American space launch, seeing this in a theatre in 1968 as a 14-year old was an overwhelming experience, at the same time totally exciting and totally confusing. Like no other experience.

Another good SciFi Space movie: "Forbidden Planet". Loosely based on Shakespeare's "The Tempest" Also, "The Right Stuff" for a good historically-based movie

"I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that." still gives me chills decades after I first saw this film.

Great reaction i love this movie it really changed science fiction movies forever. Ground breaking in its scale, its storytelling, its ambition, and its technical innovations, the film cemented Stanley Kubrick’s status as a filmmaking genius and made an impact still felt in Hollywood today. This movie broke ground in numerous ways, not least of which was in its inversion of established storytelling tropes. This is a masterpiece of cinema. Keep up the good work Mary.

The letters in the name HAL are one letter away from IBM. I think Kubrick was a little suspicious of the coming computer revolution & A.I.

My father adores this movie. He was 25 when it came out. The critics were heavy on both sides re: the story, but everyone agreed the f/x were top notch.

Please schedule 2010, it is the finale to this movie.

i always want to remind our reactor friends that all these movies they're watching were made to be seen on the big screen. this movie for example was stunning and even awe inspiring on the big screen, while from here i could see how watching on a small screen it must seem slow and overblown. interesting how different generations are going to experience media in the future. i'm glad i saw so many modern classics in the theater, rather than on tv at home. anyway, keep on rockin

A fantastic film! That made us think about our origins. For this Marvel/DC generation it might seem too slow and gimmicky. But in 1968 it was a powerful experience. This 'monolith sound' is a contemporary orchestral composition: Requiem by György Ligeti.

I remember going to watch it with my parents as a little kid in early 70's, because I was a fan of anything "space". We all left confused. Then I read the book by Arthur C. Clarke and then I got it. Great reaction, Mary, this movie is not for everyone, I'm glad you watched it. There's a "sequel" to this movie: 2010: the year we made contact, that provides a lot of background on this artsy movie.

Great reaction! The monolith represented extraterrestrial intelligence without using a goofy alien costume. It appeared as a lab experiment by aliens to jar humans into a higher intelligence. They put a monolith on the moon so it could detect that the humans have gotten to the point of space travel. Then they were drawn to Jupiter and Dave was warped to a Zoo. The scenes where Dave was in a house was created for him as a habitat to be studied in. There was a side story regarding HAL and failed AI. The sequel is more of a standard movie that explains a lot and is worth watching.

The little girl who played Dr. Floyd's daughter, in his videophone call to Earth from Space Station V, was portrayed by Stanley Kubrick's daughter Vivian.

The late Roger Ebert, famous US film critic, attended the film's premier at the Pantages Theater in Los Angeles in 1968. He wrote that famous film star of the 1950s and 1960s, Rock Hudson, who had also been at the premier "stalked down the aisle, complaining, 'Will someone tell me what the hell this is about?''"

Just a note. I believe the quote about magic was actually made by Arthur C Clarke. The author of this screenplay/novel. "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"

6:35 LOL People didn't know what to make of this movie in 1968. We would call this a peaceful first contact with aliens. In 1968, almost every (but not all) on screen of aliens except for Star Trek and Doctor Who was "aliens are evil. We must kill them before they kill us." With so little dialog or music, our brains search for visual realism. This was a realistic depiction of what 1968 thought the future would be with spacestation, rotating habitats, space hotels and commercial flight (Pan Am was a real international airline prior to bankruptcy in the '70s.)

You will get endless interpretations of what 2001 is about. I suggest you watch the sequel " 2010: The Year We Make Contact" as it provides some answers to what happened in 2001. It is a different style of movie but very enjoyable. There are two other great 1960's sci fi movies that you will find amazing for the story and production quality. They are "The Andromeda Strain" and "Fantastic Voyage".

You really need to read the book to understand what is going on in this movie. For example in the first part the ape men are slowly going extinct. The monolith alters their minds and DNA to make them more aggressive so they learn to hunt and acquire new food sources. The problem is that this aggression will eventually distroy them once they have advanced technology. This is hinted at in the scene where the ape man throws the bone up and it becomes a space station. The book reveals that the station is filled with nuclear bombs targeted at the surface, as part of an intense cold war between the USA and USSR. The monolith on the Moon was buried there to prevent that distruction, by leading mankind to the monolith around Jupiter. This is so that a specimen of humanity can be obtained and altered to a more advanced form.

I watched this movie while high yesterday. Such a good movie. The shots are so often long and still and it almost makes it feel like a motion comic. Very good.

Still an amazing movie even today. if you show this to someone now without telling them it was released on April 2, 1968, they'll probably think it was done just a few years ago.

I highly recommend the sequel 2010. It's a much more conventional movie, but I think it's really enjoyable, and the callbacks to this movie are really excellent (especially seeing it at the time it came out, some 20 years after the original). There are also several book sequels that further explore these ideas.

My name is David, so of course "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that" has been a personal meme for a long time. Also, Cheech and Chong's "Dave's not here".

All the years i thought the little kid on the phone wanted another baby to play with, but from africa, Then I saw "Serengeti darf nicht sterben" and bush baby is the nickname for a family of little primates officially called Galagos. They fit in your hand and are like half body and half tail.

It should be noted that this remains probably the most realistic depiction of what being in space is like. Also should be noted that Arthur C. Clarke, who worked on this, was the person who supposedly came up with the idea of geosynchronous orbit satellites, which make up our whole global communication system. So he knew space.

I love the Hal segment (I mean, it’s the most iconic part of the film) because it’s genuinely unsettling despite it literally being a conscious being acting in self-defense if you remove all ambiguities.

To fully appreciate this movie I recommend reading the book version too. It explains why H.A.L. malfunctioned and what was the trippy light show was about. To summarize the H.A.L. story line, they told him that the mission is too important to fail and to keep secrets from the crew, but help the crew at the same time. He felt these goals were counter to each other and it caused him to glitch. So the solution he came up with was to kill the crew to get his programs back in line. To summarize the light show, aliens caused humans to evolve into intelligence. And in order to communicate with us they lured out there and had one of us evolve into a high life form that could then go back to earth and start the next evolution of humanity. At least that is what I remember. Been a while. Fun fact! Kubrik and Clarke wrote out the outline for the story. Kubrik then went and made the movie and Clarke wrote the book at the same time. So they are close but exactly the same.

This was part of an era in filmmaking where the conversation had no conclusion. It was about the discussion over coffee and wine and cheese … an exploration of thinking. This why so many boomers are upset about current media. I had this in theaters as a child. Big Hug and Kiss to you and hubby… love that baby to pieces.

2001 is definitely a thought provoking film. It's meant to be analyzed and mulled over. Part of why it's a masterpiece is that it is truly art. It invites the audience to find meaning in its imagery and themes and symbology. By the same token it is sometimes criticized for being vague or ambiguous, though I personally think that's mostly an excuse to avoid having to actually participate. There's a lot to unpack in 2001, much of which isn't immediately obvious. For instance, the famous shot of the bone being tossed in the air which match cuts to that orbiting satellite: One can easily make the connection that this is a transition between man's earliest form of technology to his most advanced, and that is perfectly true. However, what the movie doesn't make instantly clear is that the satellite is, in fact, an orbiting nuclear missile platform, which alters the meaning somewhat, as we are cutting from man's first weapon to his most advanced weapon. The Monoliths seem to be markers that initiate the next stage in our evolution as a sentient species. Our first encounter with a monolith sparks the dawn of our technological ascendancy as we discover and learn to utilize tools. When our mastery of that technology allows us to leave the cradle of Earth, we discover the next monolith on the moon, which starts our journey into the stars. The signal from that monolith points us towards the monolith orbiting Jupiter. When we reach this monolith, we enter the stargate that begins the next stage of human evolution. What that is the movie doesn't say specifically. Considering how we see Dave moving through his own timeline at the end, transitioning through the phases of his life until we see him on his death bed before starting over reborn (what some refer to as the "starchild") perhaps the next phase of evolution is man transcending time and mortality, but there are many possible interpretations. It's a movie that grows with each viewing, and the more you think about it, the more there is to consider and ponder. What more could you ask for from a piece of art?

Mark 6:32. When I was very young and naive about the very existence of "Stoner/Drug Culture" it would confuse me whenever members of it would talk about this movie, "Walt Disney's Fantasia" and others, as being "trippy movies" as is, yet they would add the extra element of then wanting to be high as they watched such movies! I've seen reviews from people who say that producers have been able to make movies based on "fever dreams" and "acid trips"! To me, that means that thanks to them, the rest of us need not need to ever get intoxicated to see such visions because we've seen them in movies. Ergo, we can develop our own imaginations without the personal risk. When I was in 7th Grade, my English teacher had us talk about our impressions of the movie. I was convinced that the airplane known as the "Vomit Comet" was used or that it was made on "Skylab"! Then he told us how old the movie was and so "Skylab" was out of the question! Creationists, didn't like the movie, as you can imagine! Even before the first "Star Wars" movie came along, there were some non-intellectuals that thought it was too slow and didn't have any action. While some were impressed enough to wish that they could grasp it better! None of my classmates then started a physical fight about it either, as to who was right and who was wrong! 😊

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Arthur C. Clarke, author of 2001: A Space Odyssey

Kubrick always respected the visual medium to which he dedicated his life's work. Nobody brought better visuals and camerawork to their films than Kubrick did, a master...even today, his ability to frame and pace is incredibly advanced.

First movie: oh no too many questions Second movie: oh no too many answers

This movie has been confusing people for over fifty years but it really isn’t as hard to understand as you might think. The monolith is simply a physical device that can be used to do virtually anything so its shape and appearance are unimportant. The Aliens use it to give the apes a little “push” on the evolutionary road. The moon monolith is a sort of alarm to let the aliens know when man has progressed to the point of discovering it. After the incident with Hal, Dave is drawn through a Stargate or wormhole to another part of the universe where he’s kept in an artificial environment patterned after memories of places he may have stayed while travelling as an astronaut. The final scenes are a clever way of representing the passage of time as he ages and is transformed into the “Starchild”. What the starchild is and what it means is the thing that’s most open to speculation and interpretation. There are plenty of possible subtle meanings and interpretations throughout the film but those are the main points.

Matte paintings instead of CGI. When the flight attendant went upsidedown, the entire set rotated to create the illusion. The Monolith on the Moon was buried the same time that the smaller one of Earth opened the proto humans minds to the concept of using tools. Did you notice the subtle set design in the space station? The far end of the set curved up. The ceiling noticeably curved up. A lot of the mystery concerning HAL is resolved in the sequel, 2010, which is also worth watching! Trivia about the novel: it & this movie's screenplay were being written at the same time. Dave's journey through the Monolith, & what happened in that "hotel room," are considerably less confusing in the novel! It's worth a read.

Last 2 paragraphs of the book 2001. Bowman felt himself drifting off. He began to enter a realm where no man had gone before. His memory of the hotel suite flickered before him, then the Star Gate, and Discovery. His memory was being drained from his brain, but stored elsewhere. David Bowman was being reborn, but this time, immortal. Arrays of light and shape appeared before him and he saw that he would no longer need the Star Gate to travel through space. Incredible, new knowledge was coming before him. He felt like he was being watched over and protected, and knew that he would never be alone. Before him, Bowman saw Earth, "a glittering toy no Star-Child could resist." Down there, alarms would be ringing and, the history man had known, would be coming to an end. A payload of destruction had been released and was slowly making its way across the sky. This was no match for Bowman's strength and he detonated the megatons while still in the air. He reflected on his powers as master of the world, and that he would have to decide what to do next.

Half a century has passed and we are closer than ever to hear "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that". If this movie was spooky in '60s I don't know how to call it nowadays.

I first saw this in 1968 with my buddies. One of them was a stoner (think "Shaggy" of Scooby Do). We sat down right down in the front row, and when the wormhole sequence began, he started shouting at the top of his lungs, "It's blowing my mind! It's blowing my mind!" Fun fact: Velcro was invented in 1954, but it wasn't well known to the public until NASA started using it in the 60s. So, it was still a rare thing to the movie audience in 1968. Some of the other product placement was also rather a new movie concept, such as Bell Telephone, Hilton, and Howard Johnson's on the space station, as well as the Pan Am orbital shuttle. All those were important corporations in 1968. The US put a man on the moon the next year. It had take less than a decade to get from a 50% rocket launch success rate to having a man on the moon. As a teenager, I truly believed, no doubt in my mind, that certainly in another 30 years, by 2001, we really would have a permanent moon base, a torus space station, and Pan Am business flights into space. I had high hopes that I'd be able to make the trip. But instead...we have no moonbase, we have no torus space station...we don't even have Pan Am anymore. Bummer. "Open the pod bay doors, HAL," is a popular meme when a computer seems to be defying your intentions.

Kubrick wants each person to think and talk and ask questions about his work. Dam now he has me thinking about what to say.

Stanley Kubrick began his career as a Photographer, for LOOK magazine. He is a Master of the Visual craft of Film, and often compared it to Music. The child on the Video call (Floyd) was Kubrick’s daughter 2001 pushed Physical Special Effects of late 1960s to their Zenith … and challenged directors and creative film artists to improve their craft. - George Lucas and Steven Spielberg were inspired … and film in mid-1970s and 1980s began response to challenge. - Many of technologies shown (tablet/iPad, etc.) were achieved in last 10 years.

The Monoliths were the technology of an advanced civilization, which took an interest in cultivating sentient life on Earth. They transcended 3-dimensional space-time. They helped proto-humans think at higher levels. They transported Dave Bowman to another dimension, where he lived out his life and was transformed into a higher being (The Star Child). Kubrick's direction adds wonderful imagery and poetry to the story. The musical score is magnificent. The Blue Danube Waltz scene is timeless.

There’s a small theater in my area that plays classic films once a week and they had a Kubrick month a long time ago. Seeing this film on a large screen is amazing. I had to walk out twice because I was so overwhelmed but Kubrick definitely had a way of bringing life to film

I was a kid when I saw this on TV for the first time and I remember feeling really disturbed by the themes. I even had a recurring nightmare about sentient monolithic stones, surrounding the house, silently watching me. My takeaway impressions were; robots are bad, AI is scary and space is terrifying. However, one of the most uplifting and inspirational films I've ever watched on TV is a 2007 documentary called In the Shadow of the Moon. Whenever I feel down I like to watch the surviving members of the Apollo program tell their personal stories of going to the moon. Listening to old-timers such as Mike Collins, Buzz Aldrin, Charlie Duke, Jim Lovell and Gene Cernan always makes me feel better and restores my faith in humanity.

Who ever thought of the iPad in the 60's had quite the imagination. A flat square display when most people had black and white tvs.

Pilots not just Astronauts share the same qualities, of keeping calm under pressure and "working the problem"

2:03 "I love it when you see different species, living together in harmony." 2:10 [Species 1 pushes off species 2. Species 3 attacks species 1] "Well ... that's nature too!"

The actor playing POOLE is Gary Lockwood who played Gary Mitchell 2 years earlier in an episode of the Star Trek TOS called "Where NO Man Has Gone Before.

Mark 3:04. That scene is meant to represent the transition from Early Man's first weapon, a bone used as a club, to Modern Man's orbital nuclear weapons platforms! Debate continues as to whether or not that vaguely bone-shaped spacecraft is a (crewless) satellite (crewed) space station or a (crewed) spaceship! 😎

I recommend 2010 as a sequel to the characters. It’s important to see how Floyd is affected by his decision to send the mission. I also can’t believe that 2061 hasn’t been made. There’s so much good stuff in it: pot holing on Halley’s Comet, a hostage situation on Europa and a race to the rescue.

I think you did a terrific job of following the storyline. A lot of people get to the end of this film and are annoyed, but you were intrigued. That's what Kubrick wanted you to feel.

When you are looking at a black screen, you are gazing into the monolith. Prepare to have your mind expanded.

I read the book when I was 12, saw the movie so many times, but 50 years later I still don’t quite comprehend the ending. It seems like a meditation on time and the mystery of existence. In any case, the images are unforgettable. A movie ahead of its time.

There is a reference to HAL in "Independence Day" were the startup screen on Jeff Goldblum's laptop is a picture of HAL's optic sensor and says "Hello, Dave"

What blows my mind is how we carry around magnitudes more computing power in our phones than NASA had for the moon landing. Their core memory works out to 32,768 bits of RAM or 72KB (equal to 589,824 bits) of ROM. 🤯 *EDIT:* IMO the sequel made in the 80's is quite enjoyable. It is called _2010: The Year We Make Contact._

2001 was the 1st movie to use stationary models with moving cameras controlled by computers. It is the grandfather of modern spacecraft special effects, Star Wars was the next movie to use this technology and that is why it is considered the father of all modern spacecraft special effects, until the advent of 100% CGI spacecraft became good enough to replace physical models.

The sequel, 2010, is both worth seeing on its own and answers some questions from this.

I've been told that the ending is fully explained in the book it's based on and in the movie sequel. From what I can remember he is transported to the alien world and is imparted with new knowledge, reborn and sent back to help mankind to continue on its evolution. Part of the "charm" of not being explained is it leaves more to the viewer's imagination and is mysterious. Although I must admit the first time I saw it I was frustrated and confused which is common reaction. One thing I like in particular aliens are not trying to invade and take over the world which seems to always the case in every sci-fi movie or book I've read.

Every office worker who had trouble with a computer used to say, “Open the pod bay doors, HAL.”

Mark 1:07. Mary, hi there! 👋 Before I continue with viewing the video, I wanted to share something with you. Ahem. I've read "The Sentinel" short story and I've read the novels and "Marvel Comics"! I've seen the movies of course! So I appreciate a certain scene in a certain "Chocolate Factory" movie as well as the prologue of "Barbie" more than those that never have seen this movie! Whenever I detect that "Also sprach Zarathustra" is about to play, I anticipate a homage or parody of this movie! When it is just used for dance music, that's a change of pace for me! Somewhere out there, someone made a funny love scene set to the theme, because the couple were trying to "dock" in zero gravity! 😄 Since the special effects team that made this movie also made the Bruce Dern movie "Silent Running" some consider it a "spiritual successor" to this movie! They weren't expecting the actual sequel! Bruce, is Laura Dern's father, by the way. That movie always makes her cry. This movie also inspired "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" and since I love this movie I love that movie too! 🖖 Beginning in the late 1980s and ending in 2003 or 2004, I was able to attend conventions in Oklahoma City and Tulsa. I got to meet with Gary often enough that he recognized me on sight and we would have long enough conversations that he would feel the need to remind me that I have so many autographs of his, and that I might give the others a chance to sign for me. Or someone would remind him that there were others waiting to see him! When he and Frank Gorshin sat at the same table, it was always a funny experience! 😁 I eventually got to meet Kier, because Gary had convinced him how much fun "Trek Expo" was! As a team they promoted the anniversary of this movie. Separately, Gary signed "Star Trek" stuff and Kier signed "The Starlost" stuff. Well, I hope now that I'm about to enjoy your video! I needed to write all of that before I risked getting biased afterwards or during. 😊

Aw, the first cinematic exploration of A.I. and it's possible pit falls. You should react to the sequel 2010. Not as good but answers many questions.

Hard to believe you could do this movie justice in 24 minutes.

Folks saw this movie OVER and OVER again trying to grasp the full meaning of this film. Many of my college buddies saw it on LSD. This movie is still causing confusion and deep discussions all these decades later.

The thing that helped me to understand this a bit more was that I had read a lot of Arthur C Clarke's books. Then you get an understanding of the meaning of the ending. I love this move bit I understand that it is hard to take in.

Yep! 2001 always holds a spot in many top "10 films of all time" polls. It's slow paced for today's audiences, but intentionally. I think it's supposed to be meditative in that way. But wow is it beautiful to behold! Especially when seen projected in an awesome theatre. I was fortunate enough to see Christoper Nolan's 70mm film restoration at IMAX for the anniversary a few years back. It was honestly emotional. Much like Orson Welles did with "Citizen Kane", Kubrick more or less designed and executed the entire thing from the ground up and he was only a young man. No computers. Just intellect, will power and boundless imagination.

Mary, if you want to see a good "movie" about the first Moon Landing, I recommend 2019's "Apollo 11", which includes a LOT of original footage of the event from 1969. I was 2 1/2 years old when the moon landing happened, and it is my oldest memory. I vaguely remember it happening, and my family kept telling me just HOW historical the event was, which is why it stuck out in my memory. "Apollo 11" has a ton of restored footage from the first time mankind set foot on the moon, and I highly recommend it.

As others have suggested, definitely watch the sequel "2010: The Year We Make Contact" (1984), also written by Arthur C. Clarke who does a couple of cameos, along with Stanley Kubrick doing one. 🖖👽

This movie was released April 3, 1968. The first moon landing was July 16, 1969. It was all very much part of the Space Age, an expression coined in the late 1950s soon after the Soviet Union launched the first artificial satellite on October 4, 1957. (It was known as Sputnik [traveling companion].) This movie caught the feeling that was "in the air" in the United States regarding putting people into outer space. The International Geophysical Year (there's a song with that title) which ran from the middle of 1957 to the end of 1958, contributed to the feeling as well. It was an international open forum on the sciences, and Soviet scientists were allowed to participate. From there, science fiction writers started to base their scenarios on technology that the IGY had shown could be developed.

Mark 22:48. Oops! Monkeys have tails, not Apes! "Early Man" in this movie are Apes! By the way! I was relieved to learn 😌 that they were played by people! That meant that they didn't allow a leopard or jaguar to kill an Ape just for the movie's sake! The movie was made before animal welfare monitoring became routine in making movies and television series. Predator-Prey documentaries had some people used to the idea that animal death as entertainment was okay with everyone! 😢

Mark 6:27. That scene with the stewardess doing what she did that impressed you has been homaged in "Guardians of the Galaxy: Vol. 3" but in that movie, the girl in white was a test subject being tested as if she were a hamster! 🐹

I was blown away by this movie...NOTHING came close for special effects until Star Wars. And even then, this remains the most realistic depiction of space travel. That is partly due to the participation of Arthur C. Clarke...a classic science fiction writer who also participated in developing geosynchronous orbit satellites, which is the basis of our entire communication network.

The "Thus Spake Zarathustra" music all by itself introduces Nietzsche's ape/man/superman thing into the conversation. Blew my mind in the theater at age 12.

Actually, your initial comment towards the ending was close to spot on. Kubrick usually didn't comment on his films because he wanted the audience to have their own interpretation. But for this film, he made an exception and gave one interview. Apparently, Dave was taken by god-like entities (represented by the shape-shifting lights) and placed him in their version of a zoo cage (the room that was supposed to be french decorated). Time had no meaning where they exist, so Dave saw his entire existence in that cage until his end when he sees the monolith on his death bed. The monolith was supposed to indicate a key point in human evolution (like when the monolith first appeared, and early man was provided the discovery of tools/weapons). From that point, he was returned to earth after he was transformed into the next evolutionary stage (the shot of him as a fetus) which having advanced, god-like powers. Some observers thought this movie was in fact, about the search for God. I watched that ending several times and couldn't figure it out (the monolith, i got) until i read about kubrick's interview.

My quick take. The monolith is either an alien transmitter of knowledge or the alien itself. Evolving man on earth, from apes to space travel, where they would eventually find the moon monolith. From there, the monolith sent man to Jupiter and through a wormhole. To be studied and sent back to Earth as the next level of evolution.

If your still in a space themed mood, but real life stories then i'd recommend October Sky set in late 1950's and Hidden Figures set in the early 60's, both great biographical dramas.

I think Kubrick's genius approach to this film is that YOU should not be able to understand the ending. As the early hominids couldn't have understood what the monolith did to them to raise them up to a higher sentience, the monolith at Jupiter sent Dave through a warp space and raised his consciousness up to the next level - which WE should not be able to understand. The book is fairly clear on what happened, and that Dave as a higher consciousness returns to earth and will make changes there - but Kubrick's ending is reflective of what the current unaltered humans can only vaguely understand. A great book, and a fabulous movie.

To appreciate and understand this more, then I feel reading the book might help. I've read them all and they're fantastic. What's written in print is easier to visualise and understand especially when you can imagine the images from this masterpiece.

Great video! I believe he's evolved/reborn into a higher being at the end. I think they portray this is in an allegorical way, like it's not just Dave's evolution but mankind's. It's as if all of humanity is the protagonist of the film.

Every time that the monolith appears, humanity takes a big step forward in evolution. First, we go from simple ape like creatures to a more technologically advanced being. Later, after the second monolith appears, Dave changes from a human form to a pure energy being. You'll need someone to give a better explanation of this, but basically, if you're pure energy, you can be everywhere and everything at once. Hence, he's an old man, a baby, normal age, etc. The book is great! I would also suggest watching the follow up moving. It's more conventional movie, but still really good

I like the fact he got video calling and flat screen Tablets right in the film And HAL take it one letter forward in the alphabet and HAL = IBM

Arthur C. Clarke wrote this. He also wrote: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." The little girl is Stanley Kubrick's daughter. Bush Baby (Galago) : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galago

Those animals are tapirs, and how a tropical, rainforest dwelling, semi aquatic tapir got to the African Veldt I have no idea. A bushbaby is a squirrel-size, insectivorous primate found in Africa. They certainly knew how to do psychedelic effects and depict altered altered states back in the '60s.

As with The Shining, don't expect to get 2001: A Space Odyssey completely 100 %. Stanley Kubrick did not work like that. The Shining was a horror movie, and he delivered exactly that. 2001 was a space movie, and for sure, he delivered precisely that. Kubrick delivered highly exquisite tastes, not exact explanations, that he left to you, the viewer. He was one of the greatest film creators ever lived.

The original release in 1968 drew mixed reviews from critics for many of the reasons you describe. Many didn't know what to make of it. But its original release was in 70mm Cinemascope meaning it took up an extremely wide field of view giving the viewers the feeling they were actually traveling through the Star Gate. Soon hippies started showing up and taking LSD timed to kick in when the Star Gate sequence started and the movie became a hit. MGM began marketing it as "The Ultimate Trip" and the rest is history.

'"Open the pod bay doors Hal" became a catch phrase in America throughout the 70s. The opening "dawn of man" sequence has been parodied in many films, most notably in Mel Brook's History of the World Part 1.