― walter kranz (walterkranz), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 20:02 (eighteen years ago) link
― Keith C (lync0), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 20:09 (eighteen years ago) link
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v369/colinohara/kubrick-2001.jpg
― jed_ (jed), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 20:16 (eighteen years ago) link
― kingfish hobo juckie (kingfish 2.0), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 20:19 (eighteen years ago) link
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 20:21 (eighteen years ago) link
once saw a back-to-back screening of 2001/2010. i am probably one of the rare few who thought 2010 wasn't so bad... hell, i even read that damn 2061 book. is clarke still alive?
― Rob Bolton (Rob Bolton), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 20:26 (eighteen years ago) link
― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 20:28 (eighteen years ago) link
john landis really ran with that...
― Rob Bolton (Rob Bolton), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 20:32 (eighteen years ago) link
2010 wasn't hideous, but it inevitably literalized everything. Tragic mundanity.
I didn't recall Clarke's status, but he just got honored in Sri Lanka (his adopted land).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_C._Clarke
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 20:37 (eighteen years ago) link
is clarke still alive?
very much so! and living in shri lanka.
i love 2001.
― latebloomer: The Corridor (Yes, The Corridor) (latebloomer), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 20:38 (eighteen years ago) link
I wonder if she ever got her bush baby.
― walter kranz (walterkranz), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 20:43 (eighteen years ago) link
― andy --, Wednesday, 30 November 2005 20:51 (eighteen years ago) link
http://imdb.com/name/nm0001158/
xpost
And "The Dawn of Man" birthday ... which covers both the man-apes and the moon excavation.
HAL was originally voiced by Bronx-accented Psycho detective Martin Balsam. I do a decent impression of HAL's rendition of "Daisy."
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 20:54 (eighteen years ago) link
― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 20:59 (eighteen years ago) link
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 21:05 (eighteen years ago) link
Full Metal JacketDr. StrangeloveSpartacusPaths of Glory
I like all of these! I really do! And except for FMJ I liked all of them BEFORE I ever had any intention of joining the cast of MASH so there!
BTW Joshua could whup HAL's ass.
― TOMBOT, Wednesday, 30 November 2005 21:16 (eighteen years ago) link
did you like Barry Lyndon, TOMBOT? it's got war in it.
― Rob Bolton (Rob Bolton), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 21:21 (eighteen years ago) link
Man, Spartacus is fine as Decadent Hollywood Rome spectacles go, but i can't take that slaves-frolic-with-the-lambs shit.
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 21:26 (eighteen years ago) link
And haven't seen La Jetée at all. But que sera, et al.
― Eric H. (Eric H.), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 21:33 (eighteen years ago) link
Isn't it the case that Sarah Cracknell was screentested for the Starchild? (Her dad was 1st AD.) Stanley decided to go with a fake.
― Michael Jones (MichaelJ), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 22:02 (eighteen years ago) link
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 22:06 (eighteen years ago) link
― TOMBOT, Wednesday, 30 November 2005 22:51 (eighteen years ago) link
Not the only thing that he ran into the ground...
― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 22:57 (eighteen years ago) link
― General Doinel (Charles McCain), Wednesday, 30 November 2005 23:06 (eighteen years ago) link
― andy --, Wednesday, 30 November 2005 23:58 (eighteen years ago) link
hence2001 = WAR KUBRICK
Joshua??? Haha, is that the WarGames computer? You'd put a killer of astronauts up against something programmed by Matthew Broderick?!?
(Reagan-era kiddie nuke adventures: The Manhattan Project > WarGames)
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 1 December 2005 14:28 (eighteen years ago) link
― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Thursday, 1 December 2005 14:33 (eighteen years ago) link
The WOPR had the entire nuclear arsenal of the world at its disposal. It almost wiped out the human race. They couldn't shut it down, they had to teach it futility. That's a much, much more interesting character arc than HAL, and better armament to boot.
When I get my own digital projector and an apartment to fit it in, I'll be sure and netflix 2001 again and let you know how I feel afterwards. I am not optimistic.
(I also think Henry is right, AGAIN. Enrique didn't we used to get in fites on film threads? what went wrong?)
― TOMBOT, Thursday, 1 December 2005 14:39 (eighteen years ago) link
― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Thursday, 1 December 2005 14:40 (eighteen years ago) link
So is the ending of 2001 Kubrick's most optimistic? Is it, as John Simon dissed, "a shaggy God story"? Or is tracking human evolution as a series of steps engineered from Beyond the Infinite depressingly deterministic? And why do aliens like 18th-century French decor?
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 1 December 2005 14:53 (eighteen years ago) link
but i'm unsure abt evolution as a theory.
ok lol
― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Thursday, 1 December 2005 14:54 (eighteen years ago) link
i was a riot at college
― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Thursday, 1 December 2005 14:55 (eighteen years ago) link
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 1 December 2005 14:58 (eighteen years ago) link
― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Thursday, 1 December 2005 14:58 (eighteen years ago) link
That's a shame! I always find it interesting to see where different people draw the line beyond which everything becomes "pretentious" or "masturbatory".
― sleep (sleep), Thursday, 1 December 2005 15:26 (eighteen years ago) link
Apparently the 2001 makeup people weren't considered for an Oscar because the pajama-clad Academy types didn't realize the apes were actors.
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 1 December 2005 15:31 (eighteen years ago) link
― sleep (sleep), Thursday, 1 December 2005 15:41 (eighteen years ago) link
― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Thursday, 1 December 2005 15:49 (eighteen years ago) link
although he did use a real chimp baby...
― Rob Bolton (Rob Bolton), Thursday, 1 December 2005 15:53 (eighteen years ago) link
http://blogs.citypages.com/pscholtes/images/11111111%20Jack%20Kirby.jpg
I loved the movie so early and unconditionally that reading Pauline Kael's pan as an adolescent was an event. But she was so wrong...
― Pete Scholtes, Thursday, 1 December 2005 16:12 (eighteen years ago) link
The 2001 apes were in Shepperton Studios -- the landscapes were rear projections.
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 1 December 2005 16:19 (eighteen years ago) link
I have. It looks great, but it doesn't change everything else I find wrong with it. This is my issue with Kubrick almost en totale. Everything looks great (except most of the Shining but I'm not sure who to blame really for why the Shining is so awful, mainly I blame Nicholson), but that's...it...which there is something to be said for that but there is also something to be said for not making films like Eyes Wide Shut.
― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Thursday, 1 December 2005 16:39 (eighteen years ago) link
― Vicky (Vicky), Thursday, 1 December 2005 16:45 (eighteen years ago) link
And yeah the space baby thing was crap, I gotta be honest, that is totally awkward cinema IMO.
― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Thursday, 1 December 2005 16:50 (eighteen years ago) link
― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 1 December 2005 16:54 (eighteen years ago) link
― ledge (ledge), Thursday, 1 December 2005 17:02 (eighteen years ago) link
I can understand the Starbaby not working for you, but "awkward"? If the finale shows the post-human evolutionary leap, how else would you show it? All the other options seem too mundane.
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 1 December 2005 17:04 (eighteen years ago) link
― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Thursday, 1 December 2005 17:08 (eighteen years ago) link
― TOMBOT, Thursday, 1 December 2005 17:18 (eighteen years ago) link
― TOMBOT, Thursday, 1 December 2005 17:19 (eighteen years ago) link
and this one:
https://ro.nu/2001/c1.png
― ledge, Friday, 25 November 2022 11:31 (one year ago) link
Oh, I'm sure I've seen something or read about these, let me look through my books.
I seem to recall that they were recycled (Barry L possibly) but I could be wrong.
― MaresNest, Friday, 25 November 2022 11:51 (one year ago) link
As always with Kubrick, nothing is straightforward.
https://idyllopuspress.com/idyllopus/film/2001_boucher.htm
https://www.reddit.com/r/StanleyKubrick/comments/igrfi5/can_someone_identify_this_painting_from_2001_its/
― MaresNest, Friday, 25 November 2022 12:00 (one year ago) link
yes that's definitely the same one in 'the man who knew too much', not that that makes it easier to identify! the fact that two of the paintings have been identified suggests that, even if they were painted for the studio, they were copies of genuine works rather than complete pastiches.
― ledge, Friday, 25 November 2022 12:09 (one year ago) link
feel like he missed a trick here: itt: paintings that are plot-points in movies and TV that are terrible paintings (or excellent ones if there are any)
― mark s, Friday, 25 November 2022 12:11 (one year ago) link
https://live.staticflickr.com/4480/24097904808_9ab1284082_b.jpg
― mark s, Friday, 25 November 2022 12:13 (one year ago) link
Assumed the revive was for 2001 winning the Sight and Sound poll.
― Dan Worsley, Friday, 25 November 2022 13:22 (one year ago) link
Tangentially related — Idyllopus Press’s cluster of analyses around the painting in Lolita are, as usual for that site, an absolute tour de force. (I read the middle one recently)
― "Mick Wall at Kerrang!" (morrisp), Friday, 25 November 2022 16:32 (one year ago) link
My first thought on hearing that one painting is in both 2001 and The Man Who Knew Too Much isn't to theorize on shared themes or elaborate callbacks. I think it means they used the same prop house.
― Hideous Lump, Friday, 25 November 2022 20:08 (one year ago) link
ah but clearly Kubrick chose to work with this film studio so as to gain access to that prop house and therefore...
― Piven After Midnight (The Yellow Kid), Friday, 25 November 2022 20:28 (one year ago) link
To me the beauty of these deep, intertextual analyses isn’t to get hung up on what % of the stuff is actually “intentional”; but to enjoy the connections being made and themes/observations being drawn out.
― "Mick Wall at Kerrang!" (morrisp), Friday, 25 November 2022 20:37 (one year ago) link
(When I read the Idyllopus write-up on EWS, I thought maybe 70% of her observations were brilliant/mind-blowing, and 30% a wild stretch… for The Shining, I would maybe reverse those numbers, but still really enjoyed reading it.)
― "Mick Wall at Kerrang!" (morrisp), Friday, 25 November 2022 20:47 (one year ago) link
Wow, first I've heard of those series. They out to put them in print.
― عباس کیارستمی (Eric H.), Friday, 25 November 2022 21:36 (one year ago) link
She gets pretty "out there" – but the degree of cultural knowledge that she brings into play is incredible. I've also never seen anyone analyze a film so closely... and there's obviously a lot of grist for the mill there (as a basic example, I had never realized that Kubrick moves props around and stuff).
― "Mick Wall at Kerrang!" (morrisp), Friday, 25 November 2022 22:30 (one year ago) link
(I would also highlight this piece called The Problems with Discussing Stanley Kubrick's Lolita... it's somewhat of a departure from her usual format, in that it's a lengthy, somewhat personal rumination/essay on "problematic" art & artists – obv. a very familiar subject these days, but she goes places that were new to me, and I thought it was really good and thoughtful.)
― "Mick Wall at Kerrang!" (morrisp), Friday, 25 November 2022 22:37 (one year ago) link
Another good "Supplemental" piece (sorry, my last post) is The Real Horror of The Shining: The Misogyny of the Audience for Wendy Torrance.
― "Mick Wall at Kerrang!" (morrisp), Friday, 25 November 2022 22:42 (one year ago) link