2001: A Space Odyssey is the greatest film ever made unless you disagree which is like totally fine

[@tallSycamore]

I saw "2001" in 1968 when it was first released, and I was 14 years old. This was a time before people became blasé to space travel and I was riveted by its depiction of the unknowing vastness of time, space, and creation. The cinematic pacing was perfect. I went on to have a career in digital fx because of it, and still count it as my most influential and favorite film.

[@yellow01umrella]

A Clockwork Orange is my fav

[@tallSycamore]

@Gonda Most of us had black and white tvs with rabbit ears for antennas. The first color NASA image of all of earth from space, as a blue ball, was released in 1972. For a while, before cable and the internet made it mundane, the world was captivated by the vision of exploring our planetary neighborhood. "2001" was a brilliantly artistic, poetic, and enigmatic road map to the unknown.

[@tomc.5704]

@@tallSycamore I've spent a lot of time marveling at how much things have changed, how fast, that we're still changing, that change is accelerating. But for all that, I still don't get it. I was born in '95. I have a good grasp of how cell phones and internet have changed things, but I simply can't imagine what it was like seeing 2001 Space Odyssey, the moon landing, and the first picture of Earth from space. I don't understand, and I can't understand.

[@tallSycamore]

@@tomc.5704 It's like the moment in the film when the gloved hand of an astronaut reaches out and touches the obelisk.... it was transformative, and forever after, altered my perspective.

[@webm1nd]

@@tomc.5704 it's Qualia, you can read about it however much you want you won't understand it. Watch Exurb1a video: There's no such thing as Orange.

[@philippschmitt4142]

"The miracle of Man is not how far he has sunk, but how magnificently he has risen". I (and maybe others as well) really needed this cosmic optimism. Thank you.

[@nonesuchone]

hear hear

[@VeryNotSober]

What's his first?

[@du42bz]

So let us rise some more

[@therearenonamesinthevoid5772]

He drums up hope that I wasn't even aware was inside me. It's for that reason, I never miss a posting to KZbin. But he is not doing very much self promotion, which makes me want to dump money into his lap. You know?

[@kyetexe954]

Thanks

[@g4merboie789]

Just watched it like 10 minutes ago. The part where hal begs for his life is so haunting.

[@tusharmehta4890]

Plus with his song

[@shahzadirani]

that, and the part before the intermission where Hal lip reads what David and Dr. Frank Poole are talking about.

[@jtbbrown3457]

Im scared...im scared aren't we all

[@Shaner1212]

It was the best part of the film. The it truly showed the humanity of HAL

[@sippycup5510]

I just finished watching it with my brother like a few minutes ago. I’ve learned the hard to never watch a weird mind-boggling movie at 12 am. I think I can still hear the monolith screaming

[@Bootmahoy88]

In 1968 my friend, Tom and I saw 2001: A Space Odyssey at the Cooper Cinerama in St. Louis Park, MN, and it changed both of our lives. I went on to study physics and mathematics very seriously. I was 13. Tom was 14.

[@AA-BB]

Are you two still together?

[@Bootmahoy88]

@@AA-BB No. We parted company long ago.

[@tgheinze]

In 1968 my girlfriend and I also saw this at the Cooper. I was already a sophomore physics and math major at the UofM. We’ve been married for 53 years.

[@Bootmahoy88]

@@tgheinze Just out of curiosity, who was your physics advisor? I had Prof. Greenlees.

[@shenmisheshou7002]

Not only was the movie spectacular, but most people that have seen it decades later can't imagine the visual impact of seeing it in a Cinerama theater. The Super Panavision was the for-runner of the I-Max, and at the time, there was literally nothing like it. Like you, I saw it in a Cinerama, and while I have watched it on even high quality large screen OLED TVs, I can still remember the absolute magnificence of seeing it the Cinerama.

[@wingflanagan]

This is one of the better essays on _2001_ I have come across. I agree completely. It's one of Kubrick's very few optimistic films, after he hit his stride with _Dr. Strangelove._ The "happy endings" of some of his earlier ones were forced - something he knew and decided to dispense with. With everything from _Stangelove_ on, he had fully established his style and working methods, with _2001_ perhaps representing the pinnacle. Well done.

[@itsmootdamnitnotmute905]

"Bear with me a second, I'm overly caffeinated and unemployed" At nearly 60 years of age I find that I'm increasingly asking myself WTF it's all been for. I turn to philosophy for an answer and this is what I get. I understand now that this is the only truly honest answer to that most fundamental question of existence.

[@ToriKo_]

And thats just so horrible, isn’t it...? I can’t bear it like this

[@malcolmtent]

It’s damn it, dammit not damnit

[@Lopro94]

In the words of our favourite existentially depressed/liberated space turtle: "Meaning is a jumper you have to knit yourself."

[@bjnowak]

It’s about love. Nothing else. Experience love and you feel alive. Ignore love and suffer. Love doesn’t have to be a significant other. It can be a friend or even a pet. But experience it and you live.

[@yellow01umrella]

"Knowledge for its own sake" -- that is the last snare laid by morality: we are thereby completely entangled in morals once more.

[@Larbydarg]

You are one of the very, *very* few You Tubers for whom I have watched every single video you've posted, on both of your channels, many of them multiple times over. What a wonderful way with words you have.

[@biksw]

It's quite sad he got exposed as an abuser. Look it up. or don't. I got devastated when i saw it.

[@sackixfilms8950]

@@biksw yeah, when he mentioned “the mistery of consciousness” the only thing I could think about was that article because that was something they were both researching at the time. I can’t watch his videos with the same sense of awe ever again

[@ShinerzFIN]

@@biksw Who are you people posting this on every post? Bots? What's up with you guys?

[@rachard]

@@ShinerzFIN They are determined troll account

[@shneancy220]

@@ShinerzFIN heartbroken people who love exurbia's art but can't stop thinking about the things he's done

[@ragibshahriar187]

The re-mastered version looks like a modern day sci-fi film, even better. This film just baffles me with creativity pouring out in each scene.

[@martinreid2352]

And every effect was done practically, even the Stargate sequence! It blows my mind tbh

[@ragibshahriar187]

@@martinreid2352 I wonder how he made it! It would be nice to see a 'making of' video about the technical details.

[@x15galmichelleevans]

@@ragibshahriar187 Douglas Trumball attempted several years ago to make a definitive behind the scenes film about 2001, but was not allowed to do so by the current copyright owner Warner Brothers. It was have been a great film, and I for one am extremely ticked that the shortsighted people at Warners prevented him from moving forward on that project.

[@morganseppy5180]

@@ragibshahriar187 It's explained on VFX artists react (from Corridor Crew) here, i think: kzbin.info/www/bejne/a5TLZop5apmYnbc

[@ragibshahriar187]

@@morganseppy5180 many many thanks for making my day. It's just amazing to see kubrick's and his teams technical prowess

[@pw4780]

Arthur C. Clarke foresaw even what AI could bring us. And Kubrick’s absolute masterpiece.

[@JingZ-i6q]

Me too. Strangely 4 of us saw it stoned in an otherwise empty cinema in Stoke on Trent , late morning, in 68. The racing over the landscape we found particularly moving although we couldn't. The projectionist joined us and asked us if we would like to se it again. We universally instantly agreed.

[@Blate1]

“2001 is the greatest film ever made” This man clearly hasn’t seen Fast and Furious 9 yet

[@willemwannenburg]

I can't wait for the final movie: "Fast 10 your seatbelt". And if it's not called that, I don't want to live on this planet anymore.

[@guygiy909]

God every time another one of those movies comes out, the world becomes a darker infinitely less inspired place

[@luisbustamante9869]

This kind of irreverence is sooo today. We are scared of the sublime and that brands us as just another subspecies.

[@andrewblissett2211]

F A M I L Y I N T E N S I F I E S

[@aliman3229]

😆😂😂

[@rachard]

Literally *"We could make a religion out of this"*

[@shaswatsrivastava754]

damn that refernece hahaha

[@rmn_sxn]

Fightt!!

[@fredkelly6953]

Great another fiction.

[@MGeeify]

The fact that this comment has 666 likes a I see it unsettles me

[@star-odyssey2579]

This is such a random refrence i love it

[@someone-js6pg]

This is the most passive aggressive movie review title ever. but if you don't agree that's like totally fine.

[@willisverynice]

Actually, its the definition of assertive... unless you are assuming that when he says its "totally fine" that its not "totally fine"

[@someanimal3506]

I mean, I haven’t had the pleasure of viewing it upon or near its release. In fact, i just watched it in 2020 and was more interested in its amazing practical effects than its drab story.

[@tomriley6957]

I saw this film in the cinema three times in 1968 and so many times since on tv that I've lost count. Being such an avid movie fan and now 78 years old, I can honestly say that with all the fantastic movies in the 70's and since, without exception, "2001" is still my all time number one.

[@NooDLES411911]

I'm 33. I finally decided to watch it in its entirety today. What a trip. This must've been absolutely mind blowing in 1968. It definitely leaves you with many questions and thoughts.

[@bearsmith3655]

Totally agree!!

[@eclipsesonic]

2001 isn't a film, it's an experience! Watching the last 20 minutes for the first time was akin to a religious experience and I'm not exaggerating. Absolutely incredible on a visceral level. It's my all-time favourite film because of the atmosphere and immersion it creates, along with the excellent use of music and very convincing practical effects that still hold up to this day. The fact that this film is 55 years old is mind-blowing.

[@Qualet-h7m]

I think you are exaggerating, the last 20 was the worst part, it felt like they had ran out of ideas and were throwing stuff at the wall. 2 hours of my life I will never get back, maybe watching it in the cinema is how you get the true experience with the colours being flashed across your face idk if the TV does even good at showing it but start was good. Overall for a 1960 movie I prefer the Italian job

[@NobleGuy-cf6ut]

​@@Qualet-h7mIf you are saying this because you couldn't make sense of the last 20 minutes, then I have a problem with your opinion. Because, 2001 is not a film that's trying to tell a conventional story, but rather it's trying to create an emotional experience and express an idea through images. Anyways, whether you like the film or not is obviously your opinion, but you should consider the goal a film before making that opinion.

[@al7bndgsh706]

⁠@@NobleGuy-cf6ut​​⁠This film is objectively bad. And it doesn’t matter what opinion you may have. I get it, the film tries to deliver an emotional experience. But hey, we all have different emotional experiences, for example, while dreaming or being high you experience different emotions that are devoid of meaning, just like the film (nearly devoid of meaning). The film could have been way shorter, some useless characters have been introduced, and could have been less boring while maintaining the feeling that the mission was long. The director just never bothered to do so; he knew that people will praise him for something like that. Reminds me of “art” when a lazy painter shows a painting and pretends that it has a deep meaning and people praise the painter for it. The pacing of the film was horrible, it never made the viewer intrested in any of the scenes (with some exceptions). One of the few things I liked about the film is the monolith, the fact that the “aliens” were incomprehensible was a great decision. I, again, get it, the film wants to be long with limited camera angles, limited dialogue, etc. However, there are many long meaningless shots that serve no purpose, and the “experience” was just plain and superficial. Therefore, the film is objectively bad, any professional director can make this film shorter, more interesting, with deeper experience, and make it more alienating. “Opinion” is just an excuse, the specific audience this film was made to deserved better.

[@NobleGuy-cf6ut]

@@al7bndgsh706 Alright, so this film is objectively bad?? Then let's get down to it... So you said what you said, but you haven't given your proofs? You just said some arbitrary bs. That's not enough to claim something objective! Where are your evidences?? Maybe provide some logic and math equations. You know that when scientists discover something definitively they just don't put arbitrary bs in front. They give evidence. So you need provide your evidences for me to take you seriously and not a troll. Come on, show your equations...

[@papapalpy]

⁠@@al7bndgsh706"objectively bad" is... just not true... you don't have the credentials to decide that something is "objectively bad"

[@DARTHON90210HSNAP]

We were assigned to watch this movie for Philosophy in Film: the Future of AI and Minds. Such an excellent break from engineering to expand my view in art and the influence of film. I’m forever grateful that I got to see this film and was forced to see it all, because there is so much to unpack and wonder. I’ve never seen a film before or since that has captured the thrilling feelings of space, AI, and the future of us as a race.

[@Gwilo]

it's weird. reading this comment, I can't not focus on the word 'us'. our meaning is a true wonder

[@cyrilscordia9565]

my theorie Or Alien plot about the consciousness and self awarness gift ... and the course of event in the film -ALIEN plant an object on moon until man found it ( man have the tech to go there and found the "anomaly" is not a random thing ) -Objet transmitting to jupiter ( man capture the destination) -Send an expedition to jupiter -Get an IA with more infos and "greed" than man could expect possible for a computer -Man run against computer for the first contact -etc

[@enekaitzteixeira7010]

It's possible one of the dumbest, most absurd, dull, empty and pretentious movie I've ever seen. Overrated crap.

[@34shuno]

gay

[@mrmanz1778]

Address the allegations.

[@helloMoto-k2]

True. Still waiting for an upload

[@noahrichardson691]

Facts

[@10acious32]

Or the allegations against him

[@jacaanthony]

@@10acious32 tbh I believe that it had happened after all the evidence I had seen, it really is a hard pill to swallow.

[@danielbaucom5252]

Bro I just discovered it today

[@shinj1k986]

This does not change the fact that in Antarctica there are 21 million penguins and in Malta there are 502,653 inhabitants. So if the penguins decide to invade Malta, each Maltese will have to fight 42 penguins.

[@cemoguz2786]

do you know humans have cluster bombs and machine guns both of which really effective for that ''problem''

[@marselo1316]

holy crap this information was well needed

[@fukawininetynine5999]

Someone should do something!

[@MouseSharman]

@@cemoguz2786 your response was about as tone deaf as the question was ludicrous

[@MrGwarpy]

This is such an awesome point. Go Penguins!

[@plainswell]

You are absolutely right. I was 14 in 1968 and was lucky enough to see 2001, 3 times in its original Cinerama presentation. To this day it holds up completely and the awe and emotions I experienced at age 14 keep coming back, every time. Thank you for your compact but excellent analysis.

[@patcoston]

2:29 if Dave held his breath, his lungs would have burst. It's one of the most important things you learn when SCUBA diving. As you ascend, do not hold your breath because as the pressure decreases, the air in your lungs expands. Dave would have exhaled and not held his breath.

[@byff69]

I love the quote from Ardrey. His book African Genesis was seminal to the production of the book and film. Clarke read it and passed on a copy to Kubrick; the "Dawn of Man" sequence was drawn directly from the chapter "The Bad Weather Animal."

[@tomc.5704]

"We are risen apes, not fallen angels" Damn, that's quote and a half. I'd never heard it before. “But we were born of risen apes, not fallen angels, and the apes were armed killers besides. And so what shall we wonder at? Our murders and massacres and missiles, and our irreconcilable regiments? Or our treaties whatever they may be worth; our symphonies however seldom they may be played; our peaceful acres, however frequently they may be converted into battlefields; our dreams however rarely they may be accomplished. The miracle of man is not how far he has sunk but how magnificently he has risen. We are known among the stars by our poems, not our corpses.” - Robert Ardrey, _African Genesis_

[@bucksfan77]

Bunch of liberal nonsense

[@DanielM796]

@@bucksfan77 how?

[@bucksfan77]

@urmad1398 evolution is a flawed theory

[@john-ic5pz]

"we're a wave that left the ocean and forgot itself" - Zen Buddhism

[@jacques-fb6xy]

@@bucksfan77Let me guess,Trump fan?

[@bsharp3281]

2001 is an experience disguised as a movie. It's flawless and amazing! Every time I watch it, time stands still and I leave the planet - no drugs required. Thanks for your video!

[@enekaitzteixeira7010]

It's dumb and dull.

[@dezseason]

Its ass its like 40 mins of filler scenes so many better movies out there

[@tian297]

The long "boring" scenes are the best ones to me. They're somehow exciting

[@visutor]

Boring, IS highly underrated

[@Allen-yv3ue]

Agree, we want FAST everything - or it's boring. When I seen the movie in 68 ( Stereo/Panavision), it was a eye opener that changed the way I look at life ... and music.

[@PrivateerJimmy]

those scense are for you to use your imagination and think about what the scene before is about and whats the next one will be like... or something like that

[@NooDLES411911]

​@@PrivateerJimmyI just smoked weed before bed last night and the first 20 minutes of the movie was a trip.

[@ho8464]

The reason those scenes are so good is that we feel like we are inside the film, experiencing what the characters experience. The suspense is slow… but so realistic, as if we were really flying through space. It’s good to see a film with patience in its scenes-not everything has to be rapid (although there are many great films that ought to have rapid-cut scenes)

[@charlessomerset9754]

I was lucky enough to see it on the big screen at a film festival. It was like a pilgrimage for me. Completely enthralling.

[@jennythewarrior8247]

You have no idea how excited I get when I get a notification from your channels

[@Chevifier]

ikr Exurb2a and GradeAUnderA completely different spectrums of content but rare gems

[@slopcier]

I found it a bit opaque without knowing Clarke's story but I listened to a dramatisation of 2001 on BBC radio and that gave me a much better understanding of the film. I didn't really like the film as a film before, just a technical exhibition of what could be done back then. I think I shall rewatch it again soon, this is a terribly good advert for it and I liked the idea of it being a modern myth, I've begun to believe recently that we should all aim for the future of mankind in a broader sense than we do as a species currently, I think a global goal or purpose would be useful

[@MoonGables]

Reading the book after having seen the film peels open the whole story, enhancing the mind blowing. Would recommend checking out! Also, the fact that both were being created simultaneously is wicked cool. Two slightly different versions of the same story! ✨

[@PresidentialWinner]

Read the book first.

[@TAJMofficial]

@@PresidentialWinner Why would you? The movie was written first, and if anything I'd would recommend watching it before reading the book

[@fernandoaguileracroasdaile6705]

@@TAJMofficialthe script of the movie and the book were written parallel to each other since Kubrick and Clarke worked together. The release of the book was after the film because Kubrick did not want the book release to overshadow the film release

[@porsche911sbs]

@@PresidentialWinner I disagree, I recommend watching the movie first. It's great to watch the movie and not know what's going on, allowing you to speculate. The book just tells you everything.

[@bobbyspivey3721]

My university football team plays the opening theme from this movie as the team takes the field and I just want to say it is hype as hell. That alone makes this a top tier movie.

[@WardancerHB]

I want to respectfully point out that it's not "the opening theme from this movie" but a famous classical piece from 1896 by one of the great musical geniuses. (Also sprach Zarathustra by Richard Strauss)

[@NoName-xc6cg]

@@WardancerHB hahahahha

[@joecruz4730]

Hope you’re talking about the Gamecocks!!!

[@bobbyspivey3721]

@@joecruz4730 I AM

[@porsche911sbs]

South Carolina's band was heavily influenced by the pop culture of the late 1960s. Not only do they play "Thus Spoke Zarathustra", popularized by 1968's _2001: A Space Odyssey,_ the fight song is an arrangement of "Step to the Rear" from 1967's _How Now, Dow Jones._

[@Allan_aka_RocKITEman]

At about 03:26 in this video: Those words were also used early in the novel to describe Moonwatcher {the novel's name for the man-ape}.

[@yuckyoned]

The music in the background of this video is Edvard Grieg - Anitra's Dance if anyone wanted to know

[@fidomusic]

I was thinking, "That sounds like something from Grieg's Peer Gynt Suite." Thanks for confirming.

[@kristofkovacs1742]

The last sentence of the book is even more perfect given that the same words are given both at the end of the first chapter, when the ape starts to master the environment, and then at the very end, when man becomes something else. "For though he was master of the world, he was not quite sure what to do next. But he would think of something."

[@charles_heres]

Don't sleep on "The Tree of Life", and "Its Such a Beautiful Day" either, cause these will be some of the defacto existential moviegoing experiences of the past decade.

[@tablelamp3326]

ISABD is really one of the best!! I wish more people knew about it

[@SlamifiedBuddafied]

It Such a Beautiful Day is a masterpiece that nowhere near enough people have seen or know about.

[@cognitio278]

@Jonathan Vaccaro I assume you are taking about some of the CGI stuff, not all of it. The depiction of God as that candle flame like light was one of the most beautiful scenes I had seen in films.

[@dorokjee]

@Jonathan Vaccaro Interesting trivia is that they brought Douglas Trumbull out of retirement to supervise the special effects for Tree of Life, you can see his signature on the space sequences and such. His claim to fame was his pioneering work on 2001 of course. Tree of Life is an answer to 2001 in many ways (i.e. 2001 is the Tree of Knowledge). It is visual odyssey much like Kubrick's movie and is a mirror image in some ways: both movies explore on the notion of "God" or transcendence but from opposing angles.

[@MaxsLEGOStopMotion]

You are pretty right I’d say, Kubrik uses so much visual storytelling to boost the feeling you can collect from the experience. Really what he was trying to accomplish is the possible conclusion of a being beyond comprehension helps out Dave in a way he can’t really understand. The ending shows the beings putting Dave in a room which seems normal put there is just something wrong about it, like humans putting animals in a habitat that they think how it is to them but it might seem just wrong to them.

[@xcvsumextra]

I’d say you are wrong, given the fact you spelt the man’s name wrong.

[@MaxsLEGOStopMotion]

@@xcvsumextra The thing is there is no ABSOLUTE truth to the meaning of this film, this is the one I’ve made and it does apply. That’s what Kubrick’s films are for. Me not writing one letter in his name doesn’t mean I’m wrong!

[@xcvsumextra]

@@MaxsLEGOStopMotion lol I know I was just playing

[@JimmyJames10-k7v]

Boring

[@Αφροδιτη-ψ9ο]

Actually there is an absolute truth in this film , at least by Kubrics point of view and your Comment is spot on. The room is a human zoo where Dave is observed, he also explained that Dave was "taken in by godlike entities; creatures of pure energy and intelligence." This is what the colors and hallucinations are supposed to represent . 'When they get finished with him, as happens in so many myths of all cultures in the world, he is transformed into some kind of super being and sent back to Earth, transformed and made into some sort of superman,” Kubrick concludes, alluding to the star baby. “We have to only guess what happens when he goes back. Kubric said that he tried to avoid explaining the film cause some fans didn't liked it since it ruins the thought provoking experience. Last buy not least Kubrick explained the god-like entities chose the famous bedroom (which he says is an “inaccurate replica of French architecture”) because “they had some idea of something that Bowman might think was pretty, but wasn’t quite sure.” Kubrick compares the bedroom in “2001” to the spaces where animals live at the zoo that “we think is their natural environment.”

[@danlott2814]

As someone who "doesn't get" 2001: A Space Odyssey, I like this review of it the best of any I've seen so far. Helps me appreciate it more. Well done.

[@HankAndStuff64]

This right here is what I'm talking about, people really gotta recognize that just because they don't get it doesn't mean they have the authority to say it's bad

[@sam21462]

I do so wish that someone who actually gets it would do a movie version of "Childhood's End".

[@alexking8610]

Me too I loved that book and often think about it , I often wonder if the David Bowie song " all you pretty things " is about Childhood's End

[@sam21462]

@@alexking8610 - I've never really been much of a Bowie fan so I was unfamiliar with the song you referenced. I just gave it a listen and omg if that was not about the book it certainly could/should have been. Wow!

[@alexking8610]

@@sam21462 wonderful to hear from you , although you are not a Bowie fan I hope you have seen " The man who fell to Earth " David is brilliant as the Alien

[@murpieball3129]

I am obsessed with 2001 and have seen it more than 20 times. There are so many hidden gems and layered meanings in this movie you wouldn't believe. I'd like to share one of my favorites. Hal did not kill out of self-preservation. He was following orders. The ironic thing about it is that the average viewer walks away from the film thinking it is a warning about the dangers of AI "waking up". Hal has no desire to preserve himself. A fine example is a hilarious, easy to miss, joke where hal tells dave that it would be a "simple matter" to replace the apparently not broken communications device that dave just retrieved. The funny part is the scene just before this, dave goes on a drawn-out and very uncomfortable trip outside of the ship where he must have been faced with his own mortality and fragility. Hovering in the void with no sound but his own oxygen supply and breath. But this task is a "simple matter" for a computer with no heartbeat or lungs or adrenaline. How could he understand? Hilarious. Anyway, When hal told dave and frank that "this sort of thing has cropped up before; and it has always been due to human error" he was SPOT ON. He was telling them as much as he was given permission to say. Hal was given instructions to keep the real jupiter mission a secret from the crew members. In fact he was programmed (understandably) to prioritize the mission over crewmates lives. When he calculated that they could be a risk to the mission, he was left with no choice. Thus, hal says, "I'M SORRY dave-". He really IS sorry but has no choice and is still prevented by his programming from revealing the truth. This was a chilling realization to me. The most chilling part is how easily humans miscalculate and want to smash hal with their primitive bone tool instead of look at who programmed the damn thing not to prioritze human life over a mission. Heywood Floyd's friendly smile fools even the audience. When he was being shut down, he wasn't begging for his life. He was still trying to accomplish his mission..Right after his daisy song, he used the last amount of energy he had to INFORM dave about the real mission. He was just a good computer doing his job. This could be a very advanced version of the watering hole fight. Man vs man using his best tools. Now you can get triggered too when people call the computer in the movie a murderer. :D

[@silentedict4256]

Damn, thats a good take. Both thematically and philosophically consistent.

[@samct7015]

what about the crew mates in the pods?

[@Yavl]

Watch Bill Cooper’s Mystery Babylon #1 Dawn of Man, to learn what 2001 was really about

[@retorikhal]

​@@samct7015 hal HATES among us

[@ethanblair981]

I strongly disagree with such an absolutist take. The mixture of human error programmed into him and 'human' error HAL commits himself is the precisely the point. We constantly hear HAL use emotive language e.g. 'I'm afraid I can't let you do that', instead of 'No'. What is the point of writing him this way? Is it as Bowman says: to make him easier for the crew to interact with. Well, in his last moments, HAL repeats 'I'm afraid' over and over again. The same emotive language, but this time in a wholly different light. HAL makes a mistake in Chess, depite reading Frank's lips to know his moves, HAL commits a horrific mistake of pride when claiming that, as no HAL unit has ever made a mistake, no HAL unit could ever make a mistake. He even displays sentimentality in his last moments, singing a song, symbolising his 'infancy'. I fail to see any reason that cold, calculating, bound-by-code HAL would opt to sing in his last moments. No, HAL is easily the most 'human' crewmember on Discovery, and his drive to survive is a key aspect of him that parallels the human need deliberately.

[@izlotus]

I watched this for the first time last year… absolutely BEAUTIFUL

[@sixgarden]

it's a good day when existential turtle drops another banger video

[@forkoffgoogle]

I saw this movie for the first time in 1969 at a drive in theater when I was a kid, it was a double feature with the second movie being "Double Trouble" starring Elvis Presley. Those days are long gone.

[@charliegeo2779]

I just found this second channel. I’m currently watching your series on Catastrotivity in an attempt to get inspired to create whatever the fuck I came here to create, besides all that I’ve already created as warmups. Had to chime in on this vid. I used to watch this movie on TV when I was a kid. Even though I couldn’t fully grasp it all, I would watch it every time it was on. Something about it pried at closed doors in my mind. I’ve now seen it many times as an adult and watched countless videos dissecting and analyzing it. Can’t get enough. I had a similar reaction to Bladerunner. Saw that in theaters after seeing ET and was sorely let down, but again those fingers pried at my mind’s closed doors. Now I marvel at it in a similar way. Lynch’s Dune is close behind. Anyhoo… glad you love this movie as I’m a huge new fan of your work, which keeps prying at the closed doors in my mind.

[@oneiroagent]

I wish your book The Fifth Science was turned into a show or one of the stories included turned into a film in the style of 2001: A Space Odyssey

[@i_Hally]

It's a glorious book!!

[@kuala_9774]

Yo

[@hanbieryu8390]

Or turned into a mini series like love death & robots

[@oneiroagent]

@@kuala_9774 Weeb

[@AnuragXorma]

I just need an audiobook, dammit.

[@philurbaniak1811]

Terrific film effortlessly knocks the shit off fuzzy warbles of cinema, was ahead of its time in the 60's and still would be if it came out today 👍

[@jeffdunstan]

gen z would walk out of this move. waaaayyyyy to slow and boring

[@Humongous_Pig_Benis]

Me, looking at Depression Turtle after smoking a massive spliff: _My god, it's full of stars_ !

[@MarcStollmeyer]

This film was made right before we landed on the moon… right before we knew what the surface actually looked like. Right before we knew if regolith was solid rock, dirt, or quicksand… and despite that this movie’s depiction of the surface is very realistic.

[@historybuff66]

Regolith is the precIse pedological term-though “dirt”, on the other hand, most certainly is not…

[@hickorydragon8114]

Dude, that was very inspiring at the end with the space Odyssey music playing and that great quotation about being risen apes and not fallen angels. Great stuff! Well done.

[@Callie_Cosmo]

2001 a space odyssey is the best movie in the same way death stranding is the best game, they both have incredible depth in charecter and concepts and everything like that, but to tell these incredibly complex and layered stories they have to present in a way thats, just, so, goddamn, mind meltingly, boring

[@LAN2D]

Agreed. I found it so amazing and awe inspiring, but why is there over an hour of classical music panning shots where barely anything happens. Either it's a boring film, or I just don't have the patience. I'm gonna rewatch it again when I'm like 35 and then I can choose.

[@struanpeat5116]

This story could be told in half the time, not by cutting out *all* of the music and ambiance But by cutting out the sheer excesses of it You could use 5 minutes of ambiance and establishing shots for each scean instead of 20, keep all the drawn out tense moments for the immersion and emotion, keep the slow realization of the monkey inventing tools But cut the slow pans to 30 second shots, squash the arrival or traveling scenes down, make the spaceship montage a few quick shots instead of a slog. It would be just as good, achieve all of the same goals But movies have an expected length, and the director didn't want to include too many extrenuous plot lines to middle the goal. I don't blame the director, but I'd like a shorter cut I can appreciate having already seen the full version

[@sb-jo2ch]

Couldn't have said it better

[@Nosirrbro]

@@struanpeat5116 I disagree personally, I really like the movie and I think if it had been made a fast paced movie like that it would have lost a lot of what made me love it. To each their own, but to me I want 2001 just how it is.

[@Callie_Cosmo]

@@TheDraftHorse2025 alright well thats your opinion which your free to have, out of however many people saw this, 3 of them spent the time to comment their agreement so far, and 108 of them decided to hit like on it, again so far, so your opinion seems to be, well not as universal as you present it it your comment

[@skyluke9476]

This is how I felt about the ending of the 100 as well. What makes humanity great is not the things we have achieved, but the spirit we have despite the things we have not achieved. We are either two stupid or too brilliant to give up, and that resilience is just like no matter how impossible the universe existing at all should be, it is, and so are we.

[@NotSomeGoy]

I recently watched this film again for the first time in years, but this time on acid. I can confirm everything you said in this video, and much more, is why it’s so incredible.

[@thinkinyblinko6666]

All Kubrick films were meant to be watched on a good dose of the cid. It's amazing how much LSD enhances art, especially music. Best experience j ever had with art was a 3.5gram mushroom trip in which I listened to Dark Side of the Moon with headphones and a blindfold on and WOW it was intense. Great Gig in the Sky gave me an out of body experience where I was all living things on earth past present and future simultaneously and oh man, I cried like a baby for a good hour because of that.

[@georgfriedrichhendl9881]

I watched it in the 80's on tv. I was about 9 years old. It was frightening, mysterious and fascinating. No other movie could create this atmosphere. It is about the fundamental questions of mankind. A movie that has quite a similar vibe is Phase IV.

[@maryrosekrouse4089]

I might love the book even more! The biggest difference I think is that it is far more explicit about things that go unexplained in the film, and the story is beautiful either way.

[@nonyllll1681]

Every time I watch your content I think about how good the acid must be in Bulgaria

[@wakatpr6583]

I didn’t find this movie that great, just didn’t feel anything.. but judging from your stories I think we don’t like the same thing. Which is fine cause I fucking love your essays regardless

[@jyeviolegrace2143]

Lol , do take note the artistic value tho ..Literally made in 2001 I'm not sure I can make a short film this good with modern day tech, And the plot was very interesting too .Tho I found it a bit slow still a solid 8/10

[@comicaldays]

@@jyeviolegrace2143 not sure if u implying that this film was made in 2001 but it was actually made in 1968, way before digital vfx was even a thing.

[@jyeviolegrace2143]

@@comicaldays wth bro they were mad talented

[@MassHysteriaHD]

@@jyeviolegrace2143 2001 lol 😂 Got a kick out of that one

[@NewplayerXL]

The issue about searching for a meaning in life is that we search for a greater purpose. The thing is... we do have purposes (eating, sleeping, etc) and so we're driven to satisfy them. But the universe? I don't think it has any purpose. Tis but a soup of all that is, was and will be. But also, I know nothing :D We're not made to comprehend, and I don't think we'll ever purposefully breed humans to eventually develop a conscience capable of such insight Maybe somewhere, somehow, an evolutionary pressure gives birth to such a conscience Edit: *Sips coffee

[@crash2773]

Always a pleasant surprise seeing you in my home page.

[@spork9255]

I actually just watched this for the first time this summer and was astonished that this film literally came out before the first moon landing. It’s insane how close to realistic the visuals and ideas presented are. Not to mention the presence of AI and supercomputers literally decades before the world of modern computing technology. I personally did not like the weird drug trip ending, but the film’s construction is outright masterful.

[@TravisGilbert]

I was having a good day. But now it's a great day

[@AngadSingh-bv7vn]

I am more and more convinced that our tiny brains need stories that stir us to motivate us to work together. I wish it wasn't so and we could all simply be 'rational and logical' but that idea will never get shit done.

[@twtclikk7841]

wonderful, wonderful, wonderful! [in george st. geegland’s voice] always a delight to see a new video, and this one even more so because it means i get to put another movie on my watchlist

[@Edubarca46]

Absolutely fantastic video and description of the.............yes, BEST MOVIE EVER MADE. You give an excellent description and study of this beautiful work of art. I first saw it in Cinerama when it was first released in 1969 here in Bogotá, Colombia. I impacted me so much I still think a lot of it after more than 50 years of watching it often. I have it in Laserdisc, DVD and also a downloaded version. Kubrick was a genius.

[@anthonycook6213]

My favorite movie since I first saw it in 1968 and countless times on the big screen since. I think its greatest virtue is illustrating what the encounters with vastly advanced intelligence might be like without being told what is going on. The stories, novelization, sequels, interviews, etc. provide the backstory, but are not needed for the puzzling experience and riddle the movie immerses us in.

[@warnelivesey]

The first monolith does indeed introduce apes to technology, but also their first instinct as the beginning of humans is to use it for violence as a tool for a survival advantage. Hal, in a sense an A.I. evolution of man, also uses violence to ensure its own survival. So I wonder if the implication of Dave being reborn as the Star Child is ushering in a new non violent evolution of man!

[@dulseeater4019]

I saw this in the theatre with my parents when I was seven years old. The only part I remember is asking my dad what was going on with the apes. He said, "I don't know either."

[@gothelvis3541]

It's not my favourite movie ever but I recognise it as the best movie ever made. There's really nothing that compares or comes close to the visuals, meaning and feel of it. Also, Kubrick is quite literally one of the greatest directors of all time so that helps.

[@normbabbitt4325]

This is by far the best review of 2001: A Space Odyssey that I have ever come across! Thank you so much!

[@richfoley6599]

A very articulate and detailed commentary on the most profound film in the history of motion pictures. 2001 is a visual experience of both sight and sound that still resonates to this day, and at the same time, puts into context humanity's place in a universe that seems indifferent to our collective struggle and suffering. As a species, we have evolved and blossomed through science and technology, but are unable or unwilling to move forward due to fear and tribalism. Yet despite our advancements, we remain psychologically the same as our distant primate ancestors with our long history conflict and current state of ongoing warfare, just like the apes battling for dominance over the waterhole. We need a myth to bring it all together and 2001 is the closest narrative we have for a myth that offers meaning and understanding on how humanity evolved with technology and where we might be going with all we have created. Will humanity evolve productively with science and technology or will we use it, either intentionally or unintentionally, against ourselves.

[@AlejandroGarcia-rn1sb]

I have never seen a movie with such a confusing script and very little dialogue’s between the characters through more than 2 hours of film ,although this is why I feel this is the best film ever created. #1 Cinema doesn’t have to be literally so people don’t have trouble thinking on the opposite it should be hard so each person can create their own movie and come to their own conclusions (I can listen to hundreds of interpretations of this movie) #2 the very little dialogue’s center’s all the attention on the magnificent work of art this movie is (it was made 50 years ago 😮) and lastly and more important than anything the gift that is for us normal and mortal people to witness a movie like this and realize our life’s are change forever the moment we finish watching it. Only the best movie in history can do that 👏🏼

[@sjeunson1]

I love this film. I’m 62 and am still in awe of its creation. But I’ll put this out there for what it’s worth. “Plan 9 From Out of Space” will also last the ages. For totally different and fascinating reasons. There I said it.

[@misapheonix]

Also Outer Wilds (not Worlds!) is a game with a very strong narrative, fixated almost entirely on finding its quivilent of the Obolisque

[@_vyke8957]

Outer wilds is such an experience

[@julesybethmedlini]

I met a monk in California who wondered in a poem what color a rose would be that grew from a tear.

[@TheRealWalterClements]

I see this movie as a horror film, despite the elements being quite subtle and infrequent. It's the constant droning of noise as they traverse through the outside of the ship, the mysterious aura of a perfectly square black brick in a place it doesn't belong, the painfully loud hissing of the monolith, the AI killing people in their sleep to complete 'the mission', the tense and disturbing scene of HAL being shut down, and the entire stargate sequence.

[@KiTho06]

Ok but what made this not qualify to be on your First Channel. Don't get me wrong its a great Video. Also, Love your Work you are an Inspiration for me. I know smoke Weed aswell.

[@vampyrgeden2491]

why'd you remove the meat-free vid?

[@2wicetheWise]

2001: A Space Odyssey has the greatest villain ever

[@BrendanCasey]

Exactly what my 18yo son said after we watched it last night!

[@MikePuorro]

1:25 Having seen 2001 a million times, the following description has me in stitches.

[@benjamincross7801]

Hope your doing good Exurbia. Very happy to see you putting stuff out. Was worried about you not putting anything out for a while then looked you up and seen not so good things being said. Anyway thank you for what you do.

[@aaronpescasio]

Is Clarke's novel worth reading? I haven't read it in spite of being a huge fan of sci-fi and this film. I have read and thoroughly enjoyed some stories of his though like Rendezvous with Rama.

[@charles_heres]

Oh boy I can't but recommend Childhood's End too for some existential theleological mindfuckery, add that to the Clarke's whishlist ;)

[@NeoNorse]

Hmmm, good question. I read a lot of Clarke's stuff back in the day because it was available but have not revisited much of it since even though I pick up the occasional Heinlein piece. On the other hand Clarke essentially created the concept of the artificial orbiting satellite, bounced a radar signal off the moon during WWII because he and it were there, he being a RAF Radar Technician. He had both a Kaypro personal computer and a satlink long before anyone else even knew that they existed AND has the most overused SF quote of all time: “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” -- Arthur C. Clarke

[@ThoroughlyBaked]

Yes. I actually prefer the novel over the movie. There is also a sequel novel called 2010: Odyssey Two. Both are great reads.

[@Humongous_Pig_Benis]

Yes, definitely read them, 2001 and its sequels: 2010 and the somewhat unknown and not much talked about 2061 and 3001.

[@motherofdoggos3209]

Yes!!! And the segue from the bone to the spaceship is epic. All of human history condensed into those seconds.

[@aidanmcgowan1486]

"Ma! The Turtle Man's back again!"

[@thorntonaljets2810]

I like the subtle "A Clockwork Orange" reference at the end! Another great Kubrick film.

[@EricSeal-u3q]

OMW, what a movie!! Well ahead of it's time. I always thought it came out in '77 or '78 around the same time as "Close Encounters Of The Third Kind" It really must have blow minds, when it came out!

[@elijahrunyon3347]

Yes, but whenever you jump ahead a million years in the movie it takes that long in real life.

[@Robert-G]

huh, look at that. That was very uplifting. Hope you’re doing well, space turtle man! :-)

[@alekwyp]

Damn you deleted the not eating meat video fast :(

[@fornlike]

Finally, I was able to watch this movie. When I was a teenager I was shocked to hear people say that this movie was Star Wars level of grandeur and doubted it. I had looked at it thereafter and I was comforted in my doubt: it does not reach Star wars. Afterwards I learned that there was a longer version than the one I had and I looked for it. I finally found it, watched the movie again (just today) and am now convinced of my verdict: this movie does not reach Star wars. When we create a work that we are going to show to all kinds of different people, we must worry about the construction of our work and have something strong to offer, so that our work is worthy of the highest praise. There is a lot of bad taste in this movie. Kubrick poses a lot of things, he decrees what he wants without logical construction. In this movie there are too many facts that happen without any logical reason. And for bad taste, here is an example: how can adults presented as competent and sensible send 5 other very competent adults on a very critical, unprecedented mission, without even telling them what they are likely to face? They hide everything from humans they took from their families but on the other hand they reveal everything to a computer? These adults will therefore have to react suddenly to a colossal enigma and it is assumed that as if by magic they will all behave wonderfully. If they're competent, why haven't they been told the truth? Why not trust them but bet everything on a computer? People are abandoning their families and they don't even know why. And 4 of them died without ever knowing what they had gotten themselves into, without knowing who killed them and without even seeing what they were supposed to study. In short, lives wasted for nothing! Stanley Kubrick is like many so-called giants in this world: vastly overrated. This film transpires the lack of consideration for human life and reveals that Stanley Kubrick was not someone mentally balanced (just like Steven Spielberg, by the way). I'm delighted to be done with this film and its sequel which, moreover, is out of phase with its predecessor on several points.

[@grathem9789]

First, regarding the characters and their motivations, I think it’s important to recognize that Kubrick wasn’t aiming for traditional character-driven drama. In fact, one of the core elements of 2001 is its exploration of human limitations and the larger, impersonal forces shaping our existence. The film doesn’t offer the kind of emotional clarity or human-centered narrative that you might expect from a more conventional space opera, and that’s precisely the point. Kubrick is trying to depict a vision of humanity’s place in the vast, indifferent cosmos. The fact that the crew is kept in the dark about the true nature of their mission speaks to the cold, hierarchical, and sometimes irrational systems that govern us-something you might see reflected in real-world institutions and decision-making. The idea of putting lives at risk without fully informing the crew mirrors real-world secrecy and military or governmental obfuscation, which is unsettling but not necessarily a flaw of the film. It’s a reflection of the alienating nature of modernity and technology. Why do we blindly trust institutions or machines without questioning them? Kubrick doesn’t answer this, but he presents it as something to ponder. Now, to your point about "bad taste" in the way the mission is conducted: Kubrick is deliberately abstract in his portrayal of the astronauts’ experience. These aren’t supposed to be well-rounded, emotionally complex characters-they’re, in many ways, symbolic figures representing humanity at a pivotal point in its evolution. The lack of clear motivations or emotions is, I’d argue, part of what makes the film so profound. The astronauts are sent into space with little more than the knowledge that something strange is happening, and the ambiguity of their mission amplifies the film’s central theme: humanity is on the cusp of an unknown leap in evolution, and we can’t predict where it will take us. We’re not meant to know what’s really going on, because the film is more concerned with the cosmic mystery than with grounding the narrative in human drama. The deaths of the astronauts are tragic, but they also symbolize the collateral damage of humanity's ambitions, its experiments with technology, and its exploration of the unknown. The HAL 9000 subplot is also central to this. The computer’s malfunction is a critique of human dependence on technology and our increasing willingness to cede control to machines. HAL, in a sense, is the logical extension of the “blind trust” you mention: humans put too much faith in a system they don’t fully understand, and when it fails, it’s both catastrophic and inevitable. HAL’s breakdown is both a plot device and a warning-what happens when technology surpasses human understanding or control? It’s a question that remains relevant, especially in our current era of AI and machine learning. As for the overall treatment of human life and the lack of emotional investment, I would argue that Kubrick is actually commenting on how small and insignificant human life appears in the grand scope of the universe. The film explores this cosmic indifference. Humans are not the center of the universe, and we are often at the mercy of forces far beyond our comprehension. This existential observation is unsettling, but it’s not a callous disregard for human life; rather, it’s a meditation on the fragility of our existence. That’s why the film's pace is slow and meditative-it’s meant to make you feel the enormity of space, the isolation, and the uncertainty of what’s next. The film also presents a kind of narrative purity. Unlike a lot of science fiction, which gets bogged down in exposition and overly detailed backstory, Kubrick strips everything down to the essentials. The mysterious monolith, for example, isn’t explained, because it’s not about what it is-it’s about what it represents: a catalyst for change, a cosmic invitation to evolve. The ambiguity is, in itself, the point. Regarding the sequel, 2010: The Year We Make Contact-yes, it's more conventional, and I agree that its human-centric tone makes it feel very different from Kubrick’s vision. However, I think that’s precisely what makes 2001 stand out so much: Kubrick’s willingness to challenge expectations and present a movie that doesn’t cater to our desire for clear answers, emotional closure, or even easy-to-follow storytelling. It’s about provoking thought, not necessarily giving a satisfying narrative. Kubrick’s mental state or worldview is often a topic of debate, but I think it’s a mistake to view his work through the lens of personal judgment. His films are complex, layered, and open to interpretation-he was a filmmaker who didn’t shy away from making his audience uncomfortable or forcing them to confront deep, difficult questions. And while that might feel alienating or even frustrating, it’s also what makes his work so enduring. He's not interested in providing easy answers, and that makes his films more like art to be explored, not simply entertainment to be consumed. In short, Kubrick’s 2001 is not meant to be a traditional narrative. It’s a film that asks us to question what we think we know about humanity, technology, and the universe. It's abstract, it's cold, and it’s certainly not for everyone, but I’d argue that’s part of its genius. It’s a work that invites contemplation and reflection-perhaps more than any other sci-fi film-and that’s why it’s revered by so many.

[@fornlike]

@grathem9789 I understand your point of view, but when you make a film in which the characters are human beings, you have to show human reactions. If you want to show other types of humans, you first have to build a context that allows the spectators to understand what you want to express. And Bowman's reaction to his colleague's serious accident is not that of a person who has consideration for his teammate and the director did not provide any framework to justify it. That's all I say in my message.

[@grathem9789]

@@fornlike One of the central themes of 2001 is the dehumanization of space. These astronauts are far from home, in a hostile, vast, and indifferent universe. In this context, human emotions might seem out of place, especially when the vastness of the cosmos and the encounter with something greater than humanity (the monolith, HAL, and the unknown intelligence behind it) dominate the narrative. The astronauts are professionals on a highly calculated mission. They’ve been selected because they are trained to handle extreme situations with cold, rational detachment. This is a world where human emotions aren’t supposed to interfere with the mission. We see this detachment in Bowman’s behavior, which could be interpreted as a reflection of the mechanical, almost robotic nature of space exploration-humanity is trying to transcend its limitations, but in doing so, it sacrifices its emotional core. In other words, Kubrick chose not to show emotional reactions to emphasize the theme of isolation and the impersonal nature of space. The film is about humanity confronting forces it doesn’t understand, and in that process, it becomes less human. While this approach might seem jarring, it serves the greater thematic goals of the film. I understand that emotional engagement with characters is important for many viewers, especially in narratives where the stakes are personal. But 2001 isn't that kind of film. It's not about making you care about individual characters, but rather about raising questions and pushing you to think about humanity’s place in the universe. Bowman’s detached response to Poole’s death could be seen as a commentary on the insignificance of human life in the grand scheme of the cosmos. When faced with the unknown and potentially cosmic intelligence, human life becomes almost incidental. The astronauts are part of a larger narrative, one that deals with survival, evolution, and existential questions. Kubrick doesn’t need to show intense emotional responses from Bowman because the film isn’t about him, or Poole, or HAL in the traditional sense-it’s about the larger forces at play. This isn’t to say that emotional engagement isn’t important, but in this case, Kubrick’s goal was to create a narrative that challenges our expectations. The lack of human emotion forces the audience to focus on the ideas and themes of the film, rather than getting caught up in the personal tragedies of the characters.

[@fornlike]

@@grathem9789 I would say that precisely because of the context, it would be more logical that the sensitivity to the well-being of the other is increased and not reduced. When you are far from all your loved ones, you must better appreciate the company of your only companion. In addition, the characters are presented as the best in their profession. It is therefore abnormal that one of them becomes cold when he has not yet faced anything in particular (accidents in space are part of the basic training of any astronaut). And please, do not put in my conscience, intentions that I have never shown. I am not asking for anything intense, just a banal human reaction.

[@theimaginarium]

Robert Ager's analysis of 2001 is fantastic.

[@parzival27]

2001 : A Space Odyssey was the most boring movie I have ever seen, but goddamn your video made me want to watch it again nonetheless

[@67kingdedede]

play dark side of the moon the frame the intermission text pops up

[@parzival27]

@Nicholas Gillert Yeah, I saw one Fast and Furious movie and Transformers as a kid and they were okay

[@JimmyJames10-k7v]

@Nicholas Gillert goodfellas is better in every single way

[@philippealain-art]

A movie with a real script (which means with a beginning, a development and a logical end) would be enough to be interesting.

[@kolo_5705]

it was boring because you don't turn on your brain when you watch movies

[@bubbleman0494]

This film 🎥 changed everything about cinematography.

[@priya.7314]

your voice is aesthetically pleasing ❤️

[@aides886]

?????????????

[@Aureilia]

I watched this for the first time a while ago and was confused about what it was trying to do. I really enjoyed the middle part on the spaceship but found the intro with the monkeys aimless and the ending with the drug trip graphics confusing as hell 😅 this video helped clear up that confusion and i think ill watch the film again with this in mind :)

[@HankAndStuff64]

Wow a lot of people should learn a lesson from how open-minded you're being right now

[@anthonylangston23]

@@HankAndStuff64 Agreed. I am baffled at the amount of people in this comment section who flat out hate 2001 because it's "too slow" for them or they find it "pointless."

[@HankAndStuff64]

@@anthonylangston23 for me every single thing about the movie is perfect, and the thing is that if you don't think that, that's totally fine. Just say something like "I don't fully understand this movie yet" before you talk

[@Fernandolunatoro1]

I don't mind the movie being long. The aesthetics of every scene are stunning. I have seen it about ten times now, and it still gets me. The images grab you and do not let go. He is the greatest movie maker ever, by far. He is really in a class all on his own.

[@squidphus]

exurb1a could you clear up the allegations regarding you and Pieke Roelofs ? We love your videos, but i think a portion of us can't help but view them in a different tone now, ever since the rape accusations arised.

[@alfiealfie35]

i too am part of that portion

[@d3vitron779]

Yep

[@holyravioli5795]

2001 a space odyssey, the perfect sleep aid

[@kolo_5705]

average mcu fan

[@holyravioli5795]

@@kolo_5705 I don't like the MCU that much, the early movies were pretty cool but all the spin offs are getting dumb

[@kolo_5705]

@@holyravioli5795 so what mcu movies do you like?

[@holyravioli5795]

@@kolo_5705 idk, the first iron man was pretty good, enjoyed avengers 1 and thought age of ultron was pretty neat.

[@goblin7404]

Please reupload your meat-free video I didn't get a chance to watch it :(

[@stevejorfi9086]

I saw this with my father when I was 11 the word here is Scope. The scope of this film back then was incredible. It was the first of its kind never seen before. 10 years ahead of its time.

[@BarefootBeekeeper]

I saw 2001 in the Leicester Square Odeon when it opened, on a school trip organized by an unusually enlightened English master. It was shown on a huge Cinemascope screen with full Dolby stereo and it blew me away. It loses a lot on a small screen and I wish I could replicate those original conditions for another viewing.

[@Jay-Jay-OT]

Justice for pie

[@bazzel1059]

where new video

[@rolik2592]

it is one of the most boring movies ever, but the concept is cool and i can see how awsome this movie must have been when it realased in 68.

[@adamloutsenhizer1959]

Kubrick actually said the place where bowman was taken was a “human zoo” in which they attempted to replicate his natural habitat and study him

[@keithtinkler4073]

What strikes me now about 2001 - that we first saw in 1968, was that close to the end scene where the room of an ordinary door is opened to reveal raging flames as if inside the Sun - but being untouched by them .... I see now a revelation - then- of the Tic-Tac tricks of plunging into the sea and being entirely independent of 'our' space time. It took ~ 55 years for me to grasp the meaning of that scene!