This movie is a sort of line in the sand by which you can determine if someone is a casual or hard core sci-fi fan. If you don’t like it, chances are that you mostly just embrace the “exciting” sci-fi films like Star Wars, some Star Trek, and any number of the popcorn sci-fi flicks pumped out by Hollywood each year. If you like 2001: A Space Odyssey, you are okay with the arty side as well and tend to expect more from your sci-fi than the casual fan.I love this film for a number of reasons, so I am deeply in the hard core sci-fi camp. The blend of science fiction and science fact is dazzling even now. Stanley Kubrick worked with sci-fi legend Arthur C. Clarke to make a realistic yet fantastical tale set in what was then the future. It’s now 2014, we abandoned moon missions long ago, and we don’t have spinning space stations in orbit. But we do have video chat, tablet computers, and dangerously powerful supercomputers.
This brings us to the first part of the beauty of this film- it doesn’t go overboard on imagining the future. Compare 2001’s vision of 33 years into the future with the vision of 2015 in Back to the Future Part II. That film goes for eye candy while 2001’s future looks practical yet advanced enough to look different in several ways. Near-future science fiction is difficult to pull off well, but Kubrick & company nail it.
The themes of the film are also worth noting. At the heart of it all, 2001: A Space Odyssey is about mankind trying to figure out their place in the universe. Mysterious monoliths sending signals from the earth to the moon and from the moon to Jupiter? How can astronauts possibly refrain from investigating where this leads? There is also the struggle between man and technology via the creep-tastic HAL-9000. How close are we getting to that scenario in real life?
Then there are the bold artistic decisions. Dialogue is absent from over half of the film’s runtime. The lengthy ‘Dawn of Man’ sequence at the beginning is sure to cause loss of interest in some viewers and confuse most of the rest. The ending will further frustrate audiences with its seeming randomness and vague resolution.
For me though, it really comes down to execution. From a technical standpoint, 2001: A Space Odyssey is one of the most perfectly made films I have ever seen. I love the use of models in the docking of the spaceship at the space station (metaphor for a courtship dance perhaps?) and the rotating sets are a special effect that blows your mind when you analyze how they were timed to work out the way they did. The details are so fine and so intentional that I find myself in awe of them every time I watch this film.
It looks gorgeous and there is a lot under the hood here. The only reason it doesn’t get my highest rating is that 2001 is somewhat unapproachable for many. Things don’t make much sense until you talk to someone who lives and breathes this movie or if you have read the novelization to understand some of finer points that cannot be handled with in-film exposition (the monolith coaxing the ape to pick up and use the bone). I read the book and it helped me understand the beginning and ending much more. Even I don’t completely understand everything about this film but Kubrick and Clarke intentionally made it hard to digest. I can’t quite tell if that is a negative attribute or sheer genius. For now though, my rating stands as it has for the last 11 years.
Original Rating: 4.5 out of 5
New Rating: 4.5 out of 5
No comments:
Post a Comment