EPT
2001: Space Odyssey!?
| Blogs > Paraclete |
|
Paraclete
United States100 Posts
| ||
|
jacen
Austria3644 Posts
On September 20 2011 05:06 Paraclete wrote: I have no clue whatsoever of what the ending is supposed to mean! This is intentional. If you want to get presented one of the more popular interpretations, watch 2010. Even though it's quite different, it expands on some of the concepts of the later stages of 2001. | ||
|
Hakker
United States1360 Posts
| ||
|
Weemoed
Netherlands741 Posts
In the end, Bowmen raises a finger toward the monolith, a gesture that alludes to the Michelangelo painting of The Creation of Adam, with the monolith representing God or the passsage towards evolution. In the end, the 'Star Child' represents the birth of the super humans; a concept much bigger than earth and its entire population. This can be seen in a different way in the movie as well; the first proto-humans conquer their local environment and reach a stable population, the humans begin their first primitive steps into (local) space as earth is conquered and finally embark on the great journey towards Jupiter only to gain knowlegde to evolve to the super humans that is much more connected to space (and immortal?). Similar to the concept that if humanity managed to create fast space travel and establish colonies we, as a species, become immortal. | ||
|
Sotamursu
Finland612 Posts
| ||
|
ReturnStroke
United States801 Posts
| ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
| ||
|
Paraclete
United States100 Posts
 | ||
|
Paraclete
United States100 Posts
On September 20 2011 05:27 ShoCkeyy wrote: Watch it tripping out and you will understand a whole new meaning to that movie. HAaha I was thinking that when the 10 minute long random color scene was going on at the end | ||
|
TheAmazombie
United States3714 Posts
There is a lot more explained also in the book. I am not trying to say one is better or not, but just more explained and of course, not visually or metaphorically. | ||
|
Weemoed
Netherlands741 Posts
On September 20 2011 05:29 Paraclete wrote: Thanks for the responses you guys! I might end up watching the sequel then. btw I had a feeling it had something to do with the evolution of mankind Don't watch the sequel or anything else. It just ruins the image you get from the original movie. Just like you should only watch the Twin Peaks series and not the movie. | ||
|
Paraclete
United States100 Posts
On September 20 2011 06:14 Weemoed wrote: Don't watch the sequel or anything else. It just ruins the image you get from the original movie. Just like you should only watch the Twin Peaks series and not the movie. Alright I'll take your word for it. | ||
|
Fatze
Germany1342 Posts
On September 20 2011 05:15 Hakker wrote: I had no idea either, so I watched the sequel, which pretty much ruined the philospohical/alegorical/mystical aspects of it but atleast gave an explanation. Totally agree. It was a pain in the ass :X -.- | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
On September 20 2011 05:30 Paraclete wrote: HAaha I was thinking that when the 10 minute long random color scene was going on at the end That 10 minute scene lasted forever, pretty intense stuff. | ||
|
Osmoses
Sweden5302 Posts
| ||
|
Paraclete
United States100 Posts
| ||
|
Trumpet
United States1935 Posts
On September 20 2011 06:48 Paraclete wrote: I enjoyed the part where Hal took over but it was way too short 100% agreed. I had to rewatch the movie 4-5 times because I kept falling asleep. I don't understand the hype. On the upside, the next mindless action movie you watch will be a 10x better experience. | ||
|
sob3k
United States7572 Posts
| ||
|
Paraclete
United States100 Posts
| ||
|
bN`
Slovenia504 Posts
I disagree with Paraclete since apart from some visuals star wars and star trek have little to do plotwise with 2001 and star wars in particular has a lot more in common with older westerns. Overall I took from the movie the idea that human evolution has been helped by a misterious outside source in certain parts of history, can't say I agree with that completely but it made me think. The music of the film is amazing and made me get more into classical music in general. The long shots from a single angle is something I really enjoy but that's just a personal preference, I tend to like "slower" movies more. "I can't let you do that Dave." | ||
|
theBOOCH
United States832 Posts
| ||
|
Paraclete
United States100 Posts
On September 30 2011 18:10 theBOOCH wrote: Just watched it through for the first time (I tried before but couldn't stay awake), and I must say, this is the greatest art film I've ever seen. Afaik, the end isn't really meant to be super symbolic, nor is the whole movie in general. Kubrick was interested in the idea of, and the possibility of extra-terrestrial life, and wanted to create, specifically, a piece of audio-visual art that represented the sublimity, beauty, uncertainty, and sometimes fear associated with the possibility. The plot and symbolism of the film are intentionally thin- it's meant to make you feel more than think. However, it opens a huge door to philosophical inquiry that you can fill however you want. I like your view on it | ||
|
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
| ||
| ||
