John Landis on 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ส.ค. 2024
- Many a baby boomer’s most treasured recollections of the 1960s include one or more altered-state viewings of Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke’s game-changing science fiction film, which combined extraordinary, state-of-the-art special effects with a metaphysical meditation on life, death and rebirth played out in Super Panavision 70. Douglas Trumbull’s groundbreaking visual effects remain as convincing as any found 45 years later in Alfonso Cuaron’s equally awe-inspiring Gravity. Many sci fi fans approached 2001 with skepticism since it was touted as the pinnacle of the genre, only to become lifelong devotees. It would be interesting to contrast Martin Balsam’s rejected performance as the voice of the computer HAL with that of Douglas Rain, who was hired to be less “emotional” than Balsam.
As always, you can find more commentary, more reviews, more podcasts, and more deep-dives into the films you don't know you love yet over on the Trailers From Hell mothership:
www.trailersfro...
What's that podcast, you ask? Why, it's THE MOVIES THAT MADE ME, where you can join Oscar-nominated screenwriter Josh Olson and TFH Fearless Leader Joe Dante in conversation with filmmakers, comedians, and all-around interesting people about the movies that made them who they are. Check it out now, and please subscribe wherever podcasts can be found.
Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple...
Spotify: spotify.trailer...
Libsyn: podcast.trailer...
Google Play: googleplay.trai...
RSS: goo.gl/3faeG7
Great to hear Landis talk about such an achievement in filmmaking. Every word he says is absolutely right...
This film is a monumental step in Film Making, it is and always will be one of Kubrick's masterpieces. What a legacy he has left.
he's a child murderer
The best and most imaginative movie ever made. I saw it in the American Cultural Center in Kabul in 1979. I was nine years old. You can imagine the impact it had on me. I had seen nothing like it before, or since.
Found this about the American Cultural Center in Kabul, that opened in 1977 and closed in 1980, the year the Soviets invaded...
"The Soviets built this enormous marble cultural palace about a quarter of a kilometer from both of the two universities right on the bus route from the polytechnic and the Kabul University in the town. That place was empty. They built it in ’77 or so. I remember the Soviet cultural counselor at that time invited me out for tea because he saw that our little bungalow was just stuffed with students and ministry people and newspaper people and all the people we really wanted in our so-called “target audience.” They came and saw the programs. They were watching what we were doing. They came to our movies. The whole Chinese embassy one night came to see “The Old Man in the Sea.” It was one of the best things I ever did. That was closer to ’79, of course."
adst.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Afghanistan-1.pdf
I first watched this about 30 years ago when very young and just didn't get it, as was probably expecting some sort of action.
Watched it again recently and couldn't stop thinking about it for weeks afterwards. It's a complete masterpiece.
I saw this movie at the drive-in with my parents, during the summer of 1968, when I was all of nine years old. It completely changed my Universe.
you beat me out by a year.
Same
The experience of this film has never been duplicated. In most space-faring epics, the characters are at each other's throats, as though they have never worked together before, and have absolutely no intention of doing so while in space. This was the first movie to depict astronauts acting as professionals, solving problems, staying calm and cool - like they were trained to do. The other thing that this movie has is a generous sense of the unknown - which permeates the whole film. I can't remember if it was Kubrick or Clarke who said that the idea of the picture was not to highlight how the universe is stranger than we know - but rather, that it is far stranger than we _can_ know. I thought that was rather brilliant. With that explanation, this movie all makes sense to me.
One of the all-time greatest SF films ever made. Among my Top Five favorites.
Unlike virtually every other SF movie made since 2001, Kubrick's masterpiece captured the eerie silence of space, and made it absolutely awesome to behold.
When you're in the right mood and put on Space Odyssey it's a total experience of a film. Still my favorite after many years, glad to see so much love for the big ideas and grand scope of this flick on TH-cam.
The Everyday Challenge Yes, it’s a movie you need to see on a good HD TV, dark room, zero interruptions. Still hoping to watch it that way one day
A true sci-fi masterpiece. This help launched the great space movies from Star Wars to most recently The Martian. Hal is really the star of this picture. I love the Dawn of Man sequence with apes looking at the monolith.
Brilliant shot with the ape throwing up the bone then cutting to the spaceship.
What a great movie.
Pauline Kael's dismissal of 2001 just proves how short sighted some critics can be. They should al be avoided and treated with contempt. I have never been bored by a Stanley Kubrick film until Eyes Wide Shut when one my second viewing I kept nodding off but 2001 mesmerizes me. It is probably Kubrick's most hopeful film. One of the thrills of my life was meeting Keir Dullea when he appeared for a 2001 Q & A at the theater I work at and actually got to speak to him one on one. I rarely gush and was floating about three feet in the air meeting someone who worked with Kubrick and especially on such an iconic film. He looked exactly as he appeared in 2010, very nice, and autographed a 2001 book for me which is a cherished piece of my Kubrick collection. I wish I had written down a few questions instead of babbling like an idiot. I wanted to throw out my theory about the Star Child and the way its hands were (in my observation) in a Hindu gesture of greeting and peace. The novel's ending of it detonating obiting nuclear satelites could be interpreted as a good thing or a bad thing. I prefer the film's ambiguous ending that has no implication of violence. Or my theory how Kubrick literally beats the acting out of the actors so no one outshines the themes he is presenting. His characters can be a bit unreal at times but it is all to serve the film's theme.
GREG FREEMAN Right on. U speak love and truth.
+Christopher Winters true, plus she had a vendetta against Kubrick, she was afraid of coming across as an elitist critic and feared liking Kubrick would turn some people off, hence her obsession with John Carpenter
The only critic I really like is Mark Kermode. He doesn't seem to have an agenda and he's always willing to engage with opinions counter to his own. He's also championed a lot of films so called serious critics have dismissed out of hand. I don't always agree with him but I respect him and his genuine passion for cinema.
@@BradHollowniczky exorcist obsessed curmudgeon mark kermode doesn't have an agenda?
Regarding your "theory" of the Star Child's hands...you are overthinking. The hand position is a direct imitation of the 1965 Life Magazine cover image of an 18 week fetus. Unless you believe a fetus has some knowledge of Hindu gestures.
I cannot believe this movie is from 1968.. the special effects are mind blowing (for the time)
A lot was invented during the production.
It's not just the effects, it's the production style like the font used for the credits that just didn't look typical 1960s. Much more like the 1980s.
I fell in love with this movie after reading the book. Aside from changing a few minor things like Jupiter instead of Saturn and the moon rover (too difficult technically so they made it fly) it's a movie and book that makes you feel different after watching/reading. Kubrick and Clarke have taken you on your own personal odyssey and whether you realize it or not your mind has expanded.
The totally forgotten "Oliver" won the Best Picture Oscar in 1969. The incredibly influential "2001" wasn't even nominated in the category.
Well, wait a sec, to be fair the Academy was still largely populated by older people who didn’t understand a lot of the new breed of filmmakers/actors and still loved musicals. In the case of 2001 the actors kinda took a backseat to the visual effects which did win in their categories, and I believe Kubrick WAS nominated for best director.
Oliver is not forgotten - it still is a delight for many.
I saw this for the first time tonight (and in 70mm!). I nearly fell out of my seat when I heard the line, "See you next Wednesday."
I love when Landis unabashedly praises something😁
I can just imagine Alex North picking up his phone and HAL saying 'This film is too important to allow your score to jeopardize it'.
One like for this? What's wrong with people?
@@jamesfrench7299 I'd forgotten all about my comment. 7 years - goodness.
I saw it for first time on TNT network in 1990! I was just ten. Even off TV, it was an unforgettable experience, like nothing I've encountered.
Im of the same age. TNT played a lot of really good movies when I was growing up. Turned me on to all kinds of different and unique films..
Unimaginative, huh? Ah, a no on that. This movie could be released in 2022 , and it would be fine. Timeless and perfect.
Masters and Doctoral thesis have been written on this film. Nuff said Ms. Kael!
One of my favourite films
Someone should do a video blog on "Movie Critics from Hell" with all the stupid things that movie critics have said over the years about movies that turned out to be classics.
Or the opposite, film critics who proclaim a film to be an epic when it's actually boring (the recent sci-fi film Arrival springs to mind).
Although I think the director may have redeemed himself with the new Blade Runner movie (going by initial reviews). In fairness I thought Sicario (with Emily Blunt) was a good film.
I caught both at the pictures. Arrival just doesn't do it for me but I did think BR 2049 was an excellent sequel.
@@degsbabe That's Lean's fault for being so sensitive to criticism. He even threw his toys out of his pram when Spielberg gave him some well-meaning, but gentle, criticism during the editing stage of A Passage To India.
Arrival was magical. Blade Runner 2049 was disappointing. Sicario was a directorial masterpiece.
Another great TFH for a great movie, and a serious and pensive one from Landis.
Ever since I heard the line 'See you next Wednesday' pop up in a few of his movies i've wondered if it was a real movie since he has it as a fake movie title within a movie, and it turns out that it's a reference to 2001.
A lot of people like to talk about how hippies would go see this and take LSD so they could ooh and ahh at the visuals of Jupiter and Beyond. But the truth is, with or without psychedelics, when approached with the right frame of mind, this film can have profound spiritual meaning.
The best part, Kubrick didn’t get a single child or actor killed while filming his movie. Unlike some people...
Hm, I wonder if Kael said _2001: A Space Odyssey_ is "unimaginative" because it has plenty of perfectly good Science in it.
she was doing her contrarian shock value routine (or just projecting her own lack of imagination, depending on how you look at it).
Why did people pay attention to Pauline Kael? The woman didn't know about movies.
Can't be said enough that these Landis contributions are essential
Pauline Kael was subconsciously projecting and actually describing herself.
As soon as first heard of "Dark Side of The Moon" LP in 1973, I immediately thought of some dialog early-on in this film, "Moon, American, Floyd..." spoken by Heywood Floyd (William Sylvester).
I love this movie. That said, these days, I think of it as "The Prologue".
"2010" is the MAIN STORY! (No subtitle. It offends me that people have taken the "poster tag line" and think it's part of the movie's title. On countless websites. The full title is just, "2010".)
Remind me why people speak so highly of Pauline Kael?
Fear. Critics back then held immense clout, they were like the Catholic church. What she had against this film, I have no idea. Maybe sour grapes or a too radical shift from the old way of making movies.
Just an opinion.
Works for me, now if only her fanboys would shut the hell up.
She did write a rave review of Last Tango In Paris when others were condeming it as porn. She missed the boat on 2001 totally. I never heard if she re-evaluated the film later on though or if she stuck to her initial review. Critics are idiots for the most part. Thankfully their power and influence is diminishing.
GREG FREEMAN I doubt she did, I've heard she never watched the same movie twice.
+GREG FREEMAN I doubt she ever revisited 2001 - she had a disdain for Kubrick's films post-Dr. Strangelove.
Alex North sountrack? Would love to hear it. But really - the opening space sequence without Also Sprach Zarathustra?
There's a tribute recording of it from the late 1990s, conducted by Jerry Goldsmith. It's interesting in that it hits many of the same beats as the Strauss selections-- not quite 'soundalike' territory, but close. Also, North repurposed much of it in his score for DRAGONSLAYER in 1981.
Alex North was hired at the INSISTENCE of the studio. According to the liner notes, North was set up in a hotel to work on his score, got 1/3rd of the way thru, and Kubrick told him that was enough, that he planned to use sound effects for the rest of the film. He went to the premiere, and was SHOCKED. He had NO IDEA that none of his score was used in the film. Kubrick had hired him to get the studion off his back... and NEVER had ANY INTENTION of using anything North scored.
If this is true... than the story John Landis tells is false. Stories like this are ALWAYS being re-written after-the-fact these days. And I tend to trust the FIRST stories I hear... often decades before the "altered" versions.
The Alex North score IS available on CD. You just gotta go find it.
It was and still is a helluva game changer.
Landis for president.
yep
why?!
Not necessarily promoting certain chemical help because that would be irresponsible but after watching this movie for years it did take some for me to finally and completely “get it” recently, in what I felt like was it’s proper scope, the history and future of mankind
The Sam Goody story about the music is just goshing on Landis's part. The music for 2001 is quite a story in itself but it premiered in New York with exactly what one sees today. Not sure why Landis wanted to pull our legs about this, even if this is a thing he does.
Yeah, I can't for the life of me figure that out, seeing as Kubrick gave North most of what ended up being the score as temp music to work from, and is documented asking North to make the score more like the classical he had selected. The idea that he'd walk across the street and randomly come across both Strauss's, Katchaturian and Ligeti of all people is nonsense.
There is this and everything else:
"See you next Wednesday, John!"
“Will you stop, Dave?”
I completely forgot Reginald Perrin was in this.
That's not Perrin, that's Rigsby 😜
@@antonytye3484
I didn't get where I am today without recognising Reggie Perrin!
I'd love to see the deleted scenes Kubrick removed after a test screening. I wouldn't want it restored back into the film as some sort of "director's cut" but as a bonus feature for some future release of the film. But I seriously doubt that will ever happen. I imagine the footage is stored away in the same area as the deleted ending of The Shining. We'll never see it.
Kubrick was in a habit of destroying unused materials so they could not be used in such a manner. He also destroyed the models and props from the movie.
Pauline Kael's was monumentally off the mark. Some of her taste in films is weird, she praised "Last Tango In Paris" which bored me to tears when I saw it. Kael had some bias about Kubrick.
I FINALLY GET IT!
How do you kill a vampire? - John Landis
Uhm... Stake to the heart, holy cross, garlic. - Max Landis
NO! You can kill a vampire however you want because they don't exist. - John Landis
I loved you in The Tenth Victim, Marcello.
This is totally wrong. The editor actually used classical music as a guiding track. When Kubrick went into the edit he fell in love and dismissed any other music.
You are correct, MrKylePopovich. I read somewhere that when Stanley and the crew watched parts of the edited, (rough) cuts, there was no music until the editor inserted The Blue Danube in certain scenes. That got Stanley interested and therefore he dropped Alex North's original soundtrack and replaced it with his own choice. The story goes, as you can imagine, Alex was not a happy man.
Poor Alex :( I heard report that he didn't EVEN KNOW they changed it, and found out THE NIGHT of the screening while he was sitting in the audience. Low blow Kubrick.
Stanley had a habit of "pulling the wool over your eyes" at a sudden moment or in time. It seems to me it was either doing it his way or leave the set.
This is the story I know too.
Alex did get paid.
hello ...im federico fellini and i love this movie
If you ever have a chance to see this film played with live music, *go*.
I first saw 2001 in Cinerama.
Hi i'm macielo mashtroianni
Luca Sebastiani why does he say that? Is it a joke?
Every word John landis says on TFH is pure gold
shit isn't gold.
Pauline Kael is against modernism or what?,her dislking of Orson Welles and now this.. We still love her though..
Reginald Perrin in outer space.
Rigsby in a Rocket
Saw this in IMAX last summer. The only way to see and understand what they were going for.
The original Cinerama showing can't be beat. That's the way I saw it when it first came out.
amazing film dont get the acid trip ending but the effects stand up well
If not the flight crew's outfits!
Why does Mr. Landis say he's Marcello Mastroiani?
a spacecraft capable of traveling to an outer planet constructed from scratch in a matter of days or at most months? what process of engineering is able to move a populated, earth environment-laden ship to Jupiter in just a few weeks? That's nearly 300 million to 600 million miles depending on orbit position. What did it use for fuel? Aladdin's magic lamp? Unimaginative? YBYSA!
The much better trailer that I think has a significantly more powerful effect is the "B" trailer that was released by National Screen Service at the end of 1969. While the version here is from the Cinerama simulation BluRay, it was released in standard letterboxed for flat (non-anamorphic) trailer packs, without that Cinerama curve. The reason I like it so much more than any of the "talkie" versions is because like the film itself, this trailer is pure visual with no hokie voiceover which is frivolous anyway -- I mean, how can a trailer hope to explain 2001 in a a few minutes worth of hype dialogue? Here the spectacular imagery with just the Strause music under does more to make an audience want to see the film than any ad copy ever could. Here -- see if you don't agree -- this is the better 2001 trailer: th-cam.com/video/zWURhn5xQFk/w-d-xo.html
BTW, I know for sure that this trailer was released for the first run engagements of the film at the end of 1969 in the 35mm format; I can't say for sure that it also was made available in 70mm -- I know for absolute certainty about the 35mm release because I ran the trailer in 35mm the first time I booked the film in our theatre (still have the trailer print).
Monumentally unimaginative? WTF Pauline!?!?!
Landis was probably one of the critics who hated on this when it came out, then changed his opinion like a sycophant
You might be onto something. Just the way he was speaking was like he was just parroting the praisers because it's now widely regarded as a great film. It sounded kind of shallow.
@@jamesfrench7299 landis is more than a little shallow.
The evidence for that is?
British film too
Red astronaut be like : shhhh there's Impostors among us
Well not really no space stations just buses put together no shuttles there gone
Landis felt this film needed a helicopter decapitation or 3....
rigsby............
hi marcello
my least fave of the reviewers...
A genuine cinematic masterpiece that looks positively stunning in 4K! Supposedly this is the film that made Tom Hanks want to be an actor.
While I don't care for Tom Hanks and his ilk's pinko political beliefs, I like his work and how his roles have evolved into very serious stuff from his Bosom Buddies days.
I have more respect for him if that's true regarding 2001.
"Unimaginative"? LOL! Kael was a great writer and when she didn't go low, a great critic. But when she got it wrong, she got it really WRONG!
Just a total Mindfuck
too bad it was never released as I-MAX
I only understand parts of this film due to Rob Ager
a gigantic door the size of the whole installation that opens up like a sliced pie to let in a craft with 4 people??? Ever hear of energy and air conservation?
no.
All due respect to all concerned, I don't like this trailer - for maybe the most ridiculously anal reason ever - that logo - No! Adding depth stinks of hyperbole and is unacceptable. Flat text is all that is required. Like, simply '2OOI: A SPACE ODYSSEY', stark and unforgiving as an epitaph, you know, 'Take it or leave it. I'm not going anywhere', it would seem to say. 'You'll be back. They always come back'
What's with this guy. I've listened to quite a few of his reviews. Either he goes into some depth or he just says stupid things.
Ku'prick' was an arsehole. A genius, yes; a gentleman, no. He didn't have the courtesy to inform Alex North, who composed an original score, that his music had been replaced by classical music.
It is far too slowly paced. Like many Kubrick films.
I haven't seen the entire movie, simply because it's so damn boring and put me to sleep. One of the most overrated movies of all time that seems to get a pass because of its visuals and because Kubrick is trying to show off some grand "themes" and "ideas" that are woefully executed in my opinion.
Honestly, as much as I love the bulk of Kubrick's films, I'm inclined to agree; even noting it's influence, even admiring it on a technical level, it's boring as shit. I'm almost convinced that people who overtly praise this movie were either stoned out of their minds when they saw it, or are pretentious film-school shitheads that have NEVER seen it, but put their own spins on positive reviews that they're read on it, so as not to look like a complete fucking idiot when questioned about it. But hey, to each his own.
I guess you tried to watch it on TV... Won't work. This movie has been tailored for the big ... no... the huge screen. It's all about the experience.
I saw this at a Cinerama theater which was unbelievable when it came out. TV kills it to a point!
ewaf88
Yes, clearly one cannot have a differing opinion about something. Hurrrrrr.
. And I may find 90% of Phantom Menace pretty terrible, but I'll take that over 2001 any day.
ewaf88 That's what I get for trying to debate with a fucking rugby player. I DON'T LIKE THE FUCKING MOVIE, OK GUY? It's fucking Transformers for film snobs; a bunch of pretty colors and NOTHING ELSE! When you take away all the pretentious "profundities" and you strip it down to the bare essentials, what do you have left? A touching, heart-warming story of a sentient, mass murdering computer and his battle of wits with two blocks of wood played by Kier Dullea and Gary Lockwood. That's three fucking hours long. You can jizz your pants over this overblown piece of tripe all you want. I WON'T. Just that simple. By the way, if Kubrick were still alive, you wouldn't be writing him letters. Because he wouldn't give a shit about you. Kinda like me right now. Or this movie. In fact, I'll do you one BETTER: 2010? By Peter Hyams? FAR SUPERIOR TO THIS! There. If THAT won't make you take your own life, NOTHING will.
it IS monumentally unimaginative. the core story is the old hat theme of a computer taking over people. that concept was outdated when they used it for the 1957 flick The Invisible Boy. Outside the makeup for the primitives and the Pam Am flight, this was dull, absurd in concept, and at the end completely goofy. And these days, outdated...no more soviet union, no colony on the moon (for dirt and rocks research?), no commercial flights into space (a multi-million flight for, what? a total capacity of 40 people???), and no Pan Am!
@APM AM explain your remark, Stitch.
who cares?
Pauline Kael is the most overrated film critic of all time.