12/22/09 - 2001: A Space Odyssey

2001: A Space Odyssey (1968, 141 min)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062622/

I got this in Blu-ray a few weeks ago and I really wanted to see it on the big television. I actually saw it earlier this year (back in January, before I started keeping these comments), so I already knew how it unfurled. But 2001: A Space Odyssey can be rewatched again and again and they'll be something new to notice each time.

The movie starts with one of the most iconic music selections of all time. Strauss's "Also sprach Zarathustra" sets up the incredible imagery with an alignment shot of the sun and the moon. We get the first chapter of the movie which shows the dawn of man and the discovery of the monolith and weapons. Then maybe the most famous cut in all of cinema from the tossed bone to the orbiting laser, we are fast forwarded thousands of years in time. Through a setup supplied by Dr. Heywood R. Floyd (William Sylvester), we then move to the Jupiter mission where most of the actual story resides. There we meet the doctors Dave Bowman (Keir Dullea) and Frank Poole (Gary Lockwood) along with the unforgettable HAL 9000 (voiced by Douglas Rain). After this part of the movie, Dr. Dave Bowman arrives at the monolith only to be transported through the infinite in an incredibly bizarre sequence.

The acting in 2001: A Space Odyssey is good, as it always is for a Kubrick film. Dullea probably has the most lines and HAL 9000's role is equally important. These characters set up the man versus machine plot that is really what 2001: A Space Odyssey is all about. William Sylvester also does a fine job as he initiates the whole Jupiter mission. Also, worth mention are all the people that play the prehistoric men at the beginning of the film where they are so very convincing. This entire opening segment is well done and might actually be my favorite part of the movie.

Though 2001: A Space Odyssey is universally regarded as a classic I have a fundamental problem with it. It is - to me - a film that you just let be shown on the screen, not one that you watch. If that makes sense. It's impossible to understand everything of 2001: A Space Odyssey, it's just the way the film is. But it's still possible to just sit back and watch it unfurl on the screen and that, in and of itself, is worth the 141 minutes of admission. However, it's still a downside (to me) that it's impossible to "get" all of the movie. And for me, the plot really just takes a backseat to this watching of the movie.

As for the plot itself, we are treated to the timeless one of man versus machine. While the larger plot elements are understandable, the nuances are baffling and are perhaps what make 2001: A Space Odyssey so unparalleled. But for me it hurts the overall film. The monolith, I guess represents evolution and discovery of weapons, or something. And with this interpretation, it's possible for me to understand most of the movie, but there's still some gaps here and there. I guess there's supposed to be these gaps, but I'm usually not a fan of movies where gaps such as these are supposed to exist. However, the experience of watching 2001: A Space Odyssey is so unforgettable and unique that this is somewhat forgivable.

HAL 9000 is also worth some more mention. HAL 9000 is easily the most memorable character of the movie and also the strangest. An error proof robot, it also serves as the central element in the man versus machine debate. Looking back on the movie, we have to wonder if what HAL 9000 did was right or not. He killed Dr. Poole, but because he was incapable of making a mistake, this was obviously the right thing to do. Sure, a human life was lost, but Dr. Poole was clearly jeopardizing the mission (as was Dr. Bowman, it's just that he was able to survive). While this conflict is incredibly deep, I feel that the overall presentation is somewhat lacking, while paradoxically still being well done. Kubrick sets the stage here and wants us to come to our own conclusion on HAL 9000, is perhaps what is the point, but I also feel that with the amount of openness of the plot, I can't fully come to any real conclusion. But then you have the point that telling too much to the audience makes them incapable of interpreting anything in a way different than the director intended. So all in all, I'm incredibly torn on enjoyment versus interpretation on this issue.

However, one obvious great benefit of this film is the directing of Stanley Kubrick. Kubrick is a master director and because of that we have expert pacing and very well done lingering shots. I don't think many other directors could have pulled off what Kubrick has done here. There is a panoramic score present here just like there is in The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. This allows Kubrick to capture so much in each image which is exactly what is needed for this type of movie. Next, the pacing here is so slow yet so perfect. It needs to be slow. Not much happens, but Kubrick makes what does happen so tense-filled. Finally, there is one other odd touch I feel worthy of commenting on: whiteness. For a movie about space, which one typically thinks of as a black vacuum, there is a plethora of white. Most of the sets are white - from the spaceships as a whole to the chairs in the space station, there is an abundance of this "pure" color. It creates a cool contrast and also adds to the overall visual spectacle of the film.

Overall, I gave this film an 8/10. 2001: A Space Odyssey is an incredibly unique film. But the presentation is so unique and weird that it leaves lots of flaws for me. But I recognize that watching this film is an experience unlike any other and for that it get lots of credit. Whatever it can be described as, it really is a great film.

[Note: Due to a voting update, I have changed the rating of 2001: A Space Odyssey to a 09/10.]