RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 137,893
Posts: 5,330,362
Members: 24,555
Currently online: 506
Newest member: berlyn

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Inquisition
By: Michelle on Jul 12

Cubify Star Trek 3DMe Mini Figurines
By: T'Bonz on Jul 11

Latest Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Jul 10

Seven of Nine Bobble Head
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

Pegg The Prankster
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

More Trek Stars Join Unbelievable!!!!!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

Star Trek #35 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

New ThinkGeek Trek Apparel
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Star Trek Movie Prop Auction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Drexler: NX Engineering Room Construction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science Fiction & Fantasy

Science Fiction & Fantasy Farscape, Babylon 5, Star Wars, Firefly, vampires, genre books and film.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 7 2013, 05:49 AM   #46
theenglish
Rear Admiral
 
theenglish's Avatar
 
Location: Suriname
Re: 2001 on the Big Screen

Procutus wrote: View Post
The best science-fiction film ever made, IMO. I haven't seen in for close to a decade now, so your comments are likely to make me pull out my DVD and view it again. I can't tell you the number of times I read Clarke's novelization, probably more times than I've seen the movie.

Yeah, it does have a magic of its own, totally different from sci-fi movies today.


I would add that the novel and the movie each have their own distinct flavors despite how closely they are connected.
theenglish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2013, 10:45 AM   #47
RJDiogenes
Idealistic Cynic and Canon Champion
 
RJDiogenes's Avatar
 
Location: RJDiogenes of Boston
Re: 2001 on the Big Screen

^^ Yeah, they are very different. For one thing, in the book, Discovery heads to Saturn.

Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
Hasn't Tom Hanks wanted to make film versions of 3001 and/or 2061 for awhile now?
That's true, but he's too old to play Poole now. The guy who plays McCoy in nuTrek would be a better choice.

Set Harth wrote: View Post
RJDiogenes wrote: View Post
It's kind of amazing, in the current social climate, to think that there's a big-budget, epic movie like this that can only be best appreciated on the big screen-- and it has absolutely no violence or corruption whatsoever.
Absolutely no violence?
Okay, there's some stylized anthropoid violence at the beginning, set to classical music, and Frank Poole getting run over by a pod, mostly off-screen. Let's say practically no violence. Certainly nothing to satisfy the bloodlust of the contemporary audience.
__________________
Please stop by my Gallery and YouTube Page for a visit. And read Trunkards!
RJDiogenes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2013, 03:35 PM   #48
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: 2001 on the Big Screen

theenglish wrote: View Post
I would add that the novel and the movie each have their own distinct flavors despite how closely they are connected.
That's an understatement. Clarke and Kubrick were a very mismatched pair -- Kubrick explained nothing and left it all mysterious, while Clarke explained everything in great detail. So the book and the film are completely different experiences.

And, yes, there are differences in content as well, like the book's version having the Monolith at Saturn. Originally, the film was going to do the same thing the book did and have Discovery do a gravity assist around Jupiter to accelerate toward its ultimate destination at Saturn (like the Voyager probes did), but the filmmakers decided that would confuse the audience, so they simplified it and put the Monolith at Jupiter. (Saving money was probably a consideration too.)

It's worth noting that the novel of 2010 is actually a sequel to the movie version of 2001 rather than the book version, since it puts the Monolith at Jupiter. Presumably Clarke figured the movie version was better known. Also he was never one for inter-novel continuity. The 2001 sequels were the only sequels he ever did as a solo author, and all four of them were in distinct realities, variant takes on the premise rather than a single 4-book continuity.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2013, 05:22 PM   #49
Asbo Zaprudder
Rear Admiral
 
Asbo Zaprudder's Avatar
 
Location: Magic realism
Re: 2001 on the Big Screen

RJDiogenes wrote: View Post
Set Harth wrote: View Post
RJDiogenes wrote: View Post
It's kind of amazing, in the current social climate, to think that there's a big-budget, epic movie like this that can only be best appreciated on the big screen-- and it has absolutely no violence or corruption whatsoever.
Absolutely no violence?
Okay, there's some stylized anthropoid violence at the beginning, set to classical music, and Frank Poole getting run over by a pod, mostly off-screen. Let's say practically no violence. Certainly nothing to satisfy the bloodlust of the contemporary audience.
... plus the three guys suffocated in cryosleep (Victor Kaminski, Peter Whitehead, and Charles Hunter, IIRC).

In the book, I think the star child makes some orbiting nukes explode or some such, but whether anyone dies as a result is not stated.
__________________
"Sans le canard de Vaucanson vous n'auriez rien qui fit ressouvenir de la gloire de la France." -- Voltaire -- Flip flap!
Asbo Zaprudder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2013, 06:08 PM   #50
crookeddy
Fleet Captain
 
Re: 2001 on the Big Screen

I just recently watched a restored edition at the Cineramadome in L.A. The theater was sold out, and the movie looked great. I also have the movie on Blu Ray, and it's one of the best transfers of an older film that I have ever seen.
crookeddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2013, 10:19 PM   #51
Mr. Laser Beam
Fleet Admiral
 
Mr. Laser Beam's Avatar
 
Location: The visitor's bullpen
View Mr. Laser Beam's Twitter Profile
Re: 2001 on the Big Screen

One other thing: In 2010, Heywood Floyd said he never authorized anyone to tell HAL about the monolith, yet at the end of 2001, Floyd's prerecorded message says that HAL did indeed know about it. Two possibilities:

- Floyd was trying to 'save face' and get Chandra to stop whining

- The video message left behind by Floyd was faked by the government. The directive to tell HAL about the monolith was signed by the National Security Council, so this is actually very likely.
__________________
In labor news: Longshoremen walked off the piers today. Rescue operations are continuing.
Mr. Laser Beam is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2013, 11:16 PM   #52
RJDiogenes
Idealistic Cynic and Canon Champion
 
RJDiogenes's Avatar
 
Location: RJDiogenes of Boston
Re: 2001 on the Big Screen

Asbo Zaprudder wrote: View Post
... plus the three guys suffocated in cryosleep (Victor Kaminski, Peter Whitehead, and Charles Hunter, IIRC).
They die peacefully in their sleep, not violently. Again, that's not the sort of thing that would satisfy the audience's violence quota.

In the book, I think the star child makes some orbiting nukes explode or some such, but whether anyone dies as a result is not stated.
I believe it was said that they exploded harmlessly-- he was just eliminating them.
__________________
Please stop by my Gallery and YouTube Page for a visit. And read Trunkards!
RJDiogenes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2013, 11:18 PM   #53
Mr. Laser Beam
Fleet Admiral
 
Mr. Laser Beam's Avatar
 
Location: The visitor's bullpen
View Mr. Laser Beam's Twitter Profile
Re: 2001 on the Big Screen

RJDiogenes wrote: View Post
Asbo Zaprudder wrote: View Post
... plus the three guys suffocated in cryosleep (Victor Kaminski, Peter Whitehead, and Charles Hunter, IIRC).
They die peacefully in their sleep, not violently. Again, that's not the sort of thing that would satisfy the audience's violence quota.
Violence that the audience must imagine (the astronauts dying, probably in agony, while locked in their cubicles) is still violence.
__________________
In labor news: Longshoremen walked off the piers today. Rescue operations are continuing.
Mr. Laser Beam is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2013, 11:24 PM   #54
RJDiogenes
Idealistic Cynic and Canon Champion
 
RJDiogenes's Avatar
 
Location: RJDiogenes of Boston
Re: 2001 on the Big Screen

They were in hibernation. They just died in their sleep. That's not the sort of thing that would provide any satisfaction to a violence-hungry audience.
__________________
Please stop by my Gallery and YouTube Page for a visit. And read Trunkards!
RJDiogenes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2013, 11:39 PM   #55
crookeddy
Fleet Captain
 
Re: 2001 on the Big Screen

RJDiogenes wrote: View Post
They were in hibernation. They just died in their sleep. That's not the sort of thing that would provide any satisfaction to a violence-hungry audience.
I believe the word you are looking for is action, not strictly violence.
crookeddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 8 2013, 12:21 AM   #56
Mr. Laser Beam
Fleet Admiral
 
Mr. Laser Beam's Avatar
 
Location: The visitor's bullpen
View Mr. Laser Beam's Twitter Profile
Re: 2001 on the Big Screen

^ And there can be violence without action. This is just one example of that.
__________________
In labor news: Longshoremen walked off the piers today. Rescue operations are continuing.
Mr. Laser Beam is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 8 2013, 12:49 AM   #57
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: 2001 on the Big Screen

RJDiogenes wrote: View Post
They die peacefully in their sleep, not violently. Again, that's not the sort of thing that would satisfy the audience's violence quota.
RJDiogenes wrote: View Post
They were in hibernation. They just died in their sleep. That's not the sort of thing that would provide any satisfaction to a violence-hungry audience.
First off, that's an incorrectly narrow definition of violence. Legally, any act of murder or any infliction of grievous bodily harm constitutes a violent crime under the laws of most countries, regardless of the method by which death or harm is inflicted. The World Health Organization's definition of violence includes any intentional use of power against another person that results or has a high likelihood of resulting in their death, harm, or deprivation. So if they'd died in their sleep of natural causes, that wouldn't be violent, but since HAL deliberately killed them, intentionally using his power to shut off their life support with the knowledge that it would result in their deaths, that makes it a violent act both legally and morally.

And second, that's a straw-man characterization of modern audiences, and is just as false as your definition of violence. You're falling prey to the nostalgia illusion, the common psychological fallacy that the present is worse than the past. In fact, audiences in the past were no less fond of violence than they are today. The blood and gore today are more graphic, but gunplay, swordfights, and bloodshed of all sorts have been a staple of movies and TV going back to the beginning (and before that on radio), and in earlier generations there was plenty of real violence used as entertainment, such as cockfighting or bear-baiting or just plain blood sports. On the whole, societies today are less violent than they were in the past; the probability of the average individual becoming involved in an act of violence is lower now than it was generations or centuries back (though of course that is an average, and there are certainly regions and times that are exceptions). As for fictional violence, if anything, it seems to me that modern TV shows are more likely to acknowledge the consequences and cost of violence, while shows from the '60s or '70s tended to treat it far more casually.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 8 2013, 02:08 AM   #58
theenglish
Rear Admiral
 
theenglish's Avatar
 
Location: Suriname
Re: 2001 on the Big Screen

Christopher wrote: View Post
theenglish wrote: View Post
I would add that the novel and the movie each have their own distinct flavors despite how closely they are connected.
That's an understatement. Clarke and Kubrick were a very mismatched pair -- Kubrick explained nothing and left it all mysterious, while Clarke explained everything in great detail. So the book and the film are completely different experiences.

And, yes, there are differences in content as well, like the book's version having the Monolith at Saturn. Originally, the film was going to do the same thing the book did and have Discovery do a gravity assist around Jupiter to accelerate toward its ultimate destination at Saturn (like the Voyager probes did), but the filmmakers decided that would confuse the audience, so they simplified it and put the Monolith at Jupiter. (Saving money was probably a consideration too.)

It's worth noting that the novel of 2010 is actually a sequel to the movie version of 2001 rather than the book version, since it puts the Monolith at Jupiter. Presumably Clarke figured the movie version was better known. Also he was never one for inter-novel continuity. The 2001 sequels were the only sequels he ever did as a solo author, and all four of them were in distinct realities, variant takes on the premise rather than a single 4-book continuity.
I think, but I may be wrong, that Clarke was inspired by the increased knowledge of Jupiter's moons at the time.
theenglish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 8 2013, 05:48 AM   #59
Klaus
Rear Admiral
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Location: Beach condo, Bay of Eldamar
View Klaus's Twitter Profile
Re: 2001 on the Big Screen

And I think that the idea of Jupiter as a failed protostar had developed as well... Saturn wouldn't have worked as well for that.
__________________
"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it." - Mark Twain
t-shirts!
deviantArt
Klaus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 8 2013, 02:32 PM   #60
iguana_tonante
Admiral
 
iguana_tonante's Avatar
 
Location: Italy, EU
Re: 2001 on the Big Screen

Christopher wrote: View Post
RJDiogenes wrote: View Post
satisfy the audience's violence quota.
RJDiogenes wrote: View Post
satisfaction to a violence-hungry audience.
And second, that's a straw-man characterization of modern audiences, and is just as false as your definition of violence. You're falling prey to the nostalgia illusion, the common psychological fallacy that the present is worse than the past.
You don't say.
__________________
Scientist. Gentleman. Teacher. Fighter. Lover. Father.
iguana_tonante is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:39 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.