2001: A Space Odyssey -- should I watch it?

[Mike Blakesley]

We have a private show of 2001 booked next week. Since this movie came out about 7 years before I got into the business I have never seen it. I'm not sure if it ever even played here. The movie is 53 years old. Is it still as amazing as it's purported to be or has it not aged well? Should I watch it?

[Jim Cassedy]

Interesting-- I've got two screenings of "2001" coming up in the next 10 days.
A 35mm print arrived the other day. I would have preferred to get it in 70mm
but apparently there wasn't a 70mm print available on the dates we needed it.

I've run it in both formats many times, and I even owned my own roadshow print
of it at one time. - - I still don't 'get it'. It's like looking at a Picasso painting- -
no everyone sees the same thing, or understands it, but can still appreciate it as
a work of art. I suppose, some day, when I die, it will all finally make sense!

"667" (or 1/3 of 2001)
2002Label.jpg

[Mark Ogden]

How much do movies mean to you in general, apart from being a source of business? Have you seen Citizen Kane, Casablanca, The Godfather, On The Waterfront, The Wizard of Oz, Lawrence of Arabia, The Searches, The Graduate, Gone With The Wind, The African Queen, and so forth? All of those movies have dated aspects to them, yet they are all classics of cinema. 2001 is the same. It's slow moving and complex and the ending is ambiguous, but it is still at the very least an amazing visual experience (although the recent 8K/4K restoration means some of the rougher edges show).

It is not for nothing that the 2018 re-release did huge business, so much so that WB wound up going back to strike more 70mm prints than they originally planned (I think the final total was 16). You may find it boring and ponderous, but it is still one of the greatest movies ever made.

but apparently there wasn't a 70mm print available on the dates we needed it.

That's very interesting. When the Coolidge Corner Cinema in Boston reopened last year, they were told the same thing and wound up with a 35mm print. I can't imagine what happened to all of the 2018 70mm prints. Some theaters have 70mm house prints of this that were struck from the 1999 restoration and sold off by WB some years ago, you can tell them apart because of an alteration that was made in the end credits which has since been removed. The Bell Lightbox has one of these and it is stunning.

[Randy Stankey]

Although it might be a long movie to watch, I don't see any reason not to watch it.

If you have any interest in movie history, at all, I'd even say it's "required reading."

Because movie directors, writers and producers all take inspiration from each other, there are lots of elements of "Space Odyssey" that found their way into other space/Sci-Fi movies.

Everybody knows that "THX-1138" was one of the movies Lucas made before "Star Wars." Even if it's not the most riveting movie Lucas ever made, there are a lot of elements and ideas in Star Wars that came from THX-1138. If you have seen Star Wars then watch THX-1138, you'll, almost certainly, come away saying, "Oh! THAT'S where that idea came from!"

You'll probably see a couple of things in Space Odyssey that'll be just as enlightening.

[Leo Enticknap]

If you're like me, you won't regret having seen it once, to understand what the fuss is all about, but once will likely be enough. I played it regularly during my Egyptian days - that, Baraka, Lawrence of Arabia and West Side Story formed much repeated 70mm weekends, which were always sold out, and by the same people coming back again. I could never understand why. All are perfectly decent films, but not ones I would make a trip to the theater to see two or three times a year.

2001 has some interesting historical commentary, e.g. the idea that Pan Am was going to commercialize space travel, the Cold War-inspired push to colonize space (which now appears to be re-emerging, along with a new Cold War), and the potential dangers of artificial intelligence. But other parts of it are tedious BS, e.g. the reel-long spaceship ride as the Blue Danube Waltz plays, and especially the psycho freakout scene at the end, which seems to me to be little more than an excuse to ingest illicit substances in a movie theater (not that anyone who is inclined to do that would feel the need of an excuse anyways). An official from the British Board of Film Censors wrote, in her report banning Un Chien Andalou, that "...this film is so utterly obtuse that I can confidently conclude that it has absolutely no meaning whatsoever. However, if one were intended, it is doubtless objectionable." I had a similar reaction when the credits started to appear at the end of 2001.

[Steve Guttag]

It remains my #1 movie. There are definitely some things that the past didn't predict correctly but seemed reasonable from era that it was made. You may find yourself wanting to read the book, afterwards, to understand what you just saw. As far as movies go, it is a masterpiece. When compared to its contemporary Sci-Fi pics, it is even more of a masterpiece and it is evident that what followed in Sci-Fi stemmed from it.

So yes, watch it (and listen to it). It is long (10 reels) and parts definitely drag (as they are supposed to...to convey the time) but it is worth experiencing, at least, once.

[Marcel Birgelen]

While I'm definitely not certain you're really going to like it, I think every movie buff should at least watch it once in his/her lifetime.

My late brother was an even bigger fan of science fiction than I am, and it took years for him to like it, but eventually it became his #1 movie.
I've stopped ranking movies in my "top list", it's too hard for me to decide what will be #1, as this will also depend a lot on my mood, but it's definitely up there. While I initially never really liked the story, I always respected it for its technical achievements. It still looks stunning to this very day in detail and execution. But the story has grown on me over the years, especially the parts you're not supposed to clearly understand anyway.

[Rick Raskin]

There have been countless articles written and videos created about the meaning of 2001. YouTube is loaded with such content. It remains one of my all-time favorites with stunning cinematography, sound and symbolism. I've run it in 70mm, and even from the booth it is stunning. It's a must for anyone even remotely interested in cinema. In retrospect, we're not that much different from the apes featured in the Dawn of Man sequence which contains arguably the most famous jump cut in cinema history.

[Ed Gordon]

Unless you can see it in Super Panavision 70 on a huge screen, don't bother. When seen as it was meant to be seen it is an unforgettable experience.

[Jim Cassedy]

As mentioned earlier, I'm got two 35mm screenings of Y2k1 this week. It seems to be booked
into a lot of places. I notice that that the DCP version currently circulating contains two ver
with different sound tracks.
1) A "Digitally Restored" Audio Version,
2) "Original 1968 Audio" Version, For the 2018 restoration, supervised by Christopher Nolan.

- A friend who is running the DCP version of "MMI" next week sez he's been instructed to run the
"1968" audio version

I'm not sure what I've got on the 35mm, (Its a very new print- but I cant find a date code anywhere)
-- - and I still need to find out if they want an intermission.

[Bobby Henderson]

Since this movie came out about 7 years before I got into the business I have never seen it. I'm not sure if it ever even played here. The movie is 53 years old. Is it still as amazing as it's purported to be or has it not aged well? Should I watch it?

2001 represents a very important moment in film history. For the late 1960's it was a ground-breaking achievement in film-making and paved the way for movies like Star Wars to follow a few years later. Just on that point alone it's worth watching.

Dramatically speaking, the movie plays a bit like an art film. It would feel right at home just as much in a museum setting as it would a commercial cinema. Parts of it are very open to interpretation, which I think makes the movie that much more powerful. The movie doesn't bog itself down trying to explain everything. Kubrick had the courage to just let the imagery stand on its own and give audiences the chance to draw their own conclusions. Real art does that. The sequel 2010 (from the early 1980's) was far more literal and conventional. A lot of 2001 is presented in a very cold, almost clinical manner -especially parts of the movie set in space. Doing tasks in space is complicated and takes time. 2001 is one of very few science fiction movies that illustrates that.

Hopefully no one has spoiled all the good parts of the movie for you. I was just a kid the first time I watched it. At least a couple scenes really scared the shit out of me, enough to give me nightmares about it!

[Mike Blakesley]

How much do movies mean to you in general, apart from being a source of business? Have you seen Citizen Kane, Casablanca, The Godfather, On The Waterfront, The Wizard of Oz, Lawrence of Arabia, The Searches, The Graduate, Gone With The Wind, The African Queen, and so forth?

This is a very good question. From that list, the only one I've seen all the way through is The Wizard of Oz. I watched part of Gone With The Wind when we showed it once, but I didn't like it.. Of the rest, it's not that I haven't wanted to see them, it's just that I never have the time or the means to see them. (I refuse to watch any of those on TV.) Most of my movie favorites are from the 70s going forward, and it's not because I don't like older films; it's just that that's when I grew up and I haven't really had the chance to dive back in time all that much. I suppose the oldest movies that would hit my favorites list are The Ten Commandments and Ben-Hur.

I will say, though, as much as I like movies, I think I like the movie business more than the movies themselves, although I guess I'm not sure if I've always felt that way. But I've definitely found more fascination over the years in the business and tech sides of it.

That said, I think 2001 is a movie I would really like, because I do like atmospheric thoughtful movies. I tried out the 2001 DCP last night (converted from a blu-ray) and hearing that sound of the opening music in the theater is just outstanding. So I'll set aside some time and watch it one of these days.

Unless you can see it in Super Panavision 70 on a huge screen, don't bother.

Well if I use that criteria, I'll never get a chance to see it. I have no idea where the nearest 70mm theater is to me, but there's definitely not one within 500 miles in any direction.

[Leo Enticknap]

There is one aspect of 2001 that makes me uneasy about the film, though admittedly only classical music geeks are likely to share that unease. Most of the orchestral recordings used in the film (in fact all of them, apart from the Ligeti and Khachaturian pieces) were conducted either by Karl Böhm or Herbert von Karajan. Both were musicians whose careers were established and who rose to prominence under the Nazi regime, and both took the jobs of Jewish conductors who fled Germany. Von Karajan was actually a member of the NSDAP, and Böhm repeatedly expressed support for Hitler throughout the 1930s and well into the war (though there is no evidence that he was aware of the Holocaust or any other actual Nazi war crimes when he did so). Both were formally cleared of any war crimes culpability and allowed to resume their careers in the late 1940s, but neither, as far as I'm aware, ever expressed any public regret, and both of them continued to be celebrated and promoted by cultural establishments worldwide throughout the rest of their lives, hence the use of their recordings of the Richard and Johann II Strauss pieces (no relation) in 2001. As with Wernher von Braun's rehabilitation, it seems that it didn't matter if you were once a pretty nasty Nazi: if you had something that the west wanted afterwards, the great and the good were prepared to look the other way.

[Bobby Henderson]

I don't mind watching 2001: A Space Odyssey via Blu-ray on my home HDTV screen. I would be willing to drive some distance to see it projected in 70mm at a good theater on an appropriately big screen. There isn't exactly many of those which are 70mm capable (and with competent operators) within acceptable driving distance to me.

I felt pretty lucky seeing Lawrence of Arabia for the first time in 1989 when the restored Director's Cut played at the Ziegfeld in NYC.

This is a very good question. From that list, the only one I've seen all the way through is The Wizard of Oz. I watched part of Gone With The Wind when we showed it once, but I didn't like it.. Of the rest, it's not that I haven't wanted to see them, it's just that I never have the time or the means to see them. (I refuse to watch any of those on TV.) Most of my movie favorites are from the 70s going forward, and it's not because I don't like older films; it's just that that's when I grew up and I haven't really had the chance to dive back in time all that much. I suppose the oldest movies that would hit my favorites list are The Ten Commandments and Ben-Hur.

You haven't seen Casablanca? Really? The movie might be really old and in black and white, but I think the filmmakers really caught lightning in a bottle with that one. I don't think they set out to make one of the greatest movies of all time, but everything just came together perfectly with it. The performances are iconic and the sharp dialog has inspired countless parodies. The movie is genuinely entertaining and moves quickly.

The Graduate is a great comedy. My parents had the vinyl LP of the soundtrack and played it all the time when I was really little. Hearing that music and other spaghetti western stuff from Ennio Morricone rank among some of my earliest childhood memories. I didn't actually see The Graduate until I was in high school.

I have a Blu-ray disc of The Searchers. It's one of John Ford's best movies (and maybe his best looking movie, having been filmed in VistaVision), but the movie is dark and controversial going in multiple directions. Comanche natives aren't portrayed well. But actions of white characters are at times very unflattering, particularly those of the lead character Ethan Edwards (played by John Wayne). The character gets consumed by his hatred. One of the biggest things that annoys me about The Searchers is its very revisionist geography. A bunch of it was filmed in picturesque Monument Valley. But the storyline actually takes place closer to where I live. Lots of Comanches live here.

[Leo Enticknap]

Comanche natives aren't portrayed well.

They're portrayed with positive sensitivity compared to in The Iron Horse and Stagecoach!