#123movies #fmovies #putlocker #gomovies #solarmovie #soap2day Watch Full Movie Online Free – “2001” is a story of evolution. Sometime in the distant past, someone or something nudged evolution by placing a monolith on Earth (presumably elsewhere throughout the universe as well). Evolution then enabled humankind to reach the moon’s surface, where yet another monolith is found, one that signals the monolith placers that humankind has evolved that far. Now a race begins between computers (HAL) and human (Bowman) to reach the monolith placers. The winner will achieve the next step in evolution, whatever that may be.
Plot: Humanity finds a mysterious object buried beneath the lunar surface and sets off to find its origins with the help of HAL 9000, the world’s most advanced super computer.
Smart Tags: #monolith #star_child #human_versus_computer #number_in_title #computer #year_2001 #famous_line #spacecraft #ambiguous_ending #no_opening_credits #orchestral_music_score #space #message_from_outer_space #future_shock #voyage_of_discovery #surrealism #super_computer #man_versus_machine #asphyxiation_in_space #space_travel #science_runs_amok
|8.3/10 Votes: 607,841|
|8.1 Votes: 8235 Popularity: 35.544|
I believe that we should call it a modernism show, albeit exhibited in the form of a movie. While it might feel “boring”, it forces you to rethink what philosophical level that a two-hour film can achieve. The focus on questions about life, intelligence, and time, is worth more attention than the sci-fi part (though the special effect of this movie is already way ahead of its time).
I got this movie recently when it came out on Ultra HD Blu-ray simply because it was missing in my collection and, being a Sci-Fi fan, missing 2001 in my collection simply would not do. It is a movie that was made to rely almost entirely on the visuals. It could be said that it is a visual symphony if that makes sense. Thus it was filmed on 70 mm film and in 6 channel stereo which, at the time was a huge thing. Thanks to this it actually made some sense to transfer this movie to Ultra HD Blu-ray since the originals were really good enough even though the movie was made in 1968.
I remember watching this movie as a kid and was profoundly disappointed. I thought come on, where’s the adventure, not to mention any form of action? Today I can more appreciate it for what it is. A visually stunning movie. I also can more appreciate the fact that the movie is trying to be scientifically accurate instead of going all out on the fiction part. The parts where gravity, or rather the lack thereof, was portrayed, that was really high tech movie making at the time. I also noticed now, when re-watching it, that all the screens are actually flat which also was really far in the future at the time. Actually it was still pretty much in the future back in 2001.
However, even today, I have to say that I find the movie excruciatingly boring. It is two and a half hour long and it moves very, very slowly. It takes 50 minutes of movie time before we actually get to the main part of the movie and get onto the Discovery for instance. No matter how great the visuals are, there’s only so much boredom I can stand before it starts to get to me.
In the last 30 minutes or so the movie starts to become very psychedelic. The part where Bowman is pulled into the vortex, the stargate, is going on forever and in the end it just becomes a blur of headache inducing color effects. The final parts of the movie with the three Bowmans of different ages is just weird.
So,as this is a non-professional and personal take on the movie I cannot really motivate more than 3 out of 5 stars.
I hadn’t actually planned to review this movie. Everything has really already been said about it but I could not refrain after having read this crap at Rotten Tomatoes:
Critics Consensus: One of the most influential of all sci-fi films — and one of the most controversial — Stanley Kubrick’s 2001 is a delicate, poetic meditation on the ingenuity — and folly — of mankind.
It’s pretty well known that Rotten Tomatoes is the absolutely worst movie rating site around and the so called “critics” are useless culture elite morons with an over-inflated opinion about themselves at best and politically motivated SJW asswipes at worst but still.
What the hell is controversial about it? Reality check, there’s really nothing controversial about it at all. It is just a fictional story in the future. Then we have that crap “the folly”. What bloody folly? If anything the movie shows a much better future than what we got. A future where the politicians apparently promoted advancement of science and space exploration which is the direct opposite to the money and oxygen wasters we have today.
Sure, if you indulge too much in smoking funny mushrooms or are politically motivated you can probably “interpret” the hell out of any movie and “find” whatever message you want but it is still bullshit.
Well, that was my (controversial?) take on 2001.
My god, it’s full of stars
For all those bewildered by the length and pace of this film (“like, why does he show spaceships docking for, like, 15 minutes?”), here’s a word you might want to think about:
Beauty is an under-rated concept. Sure, you’ll often see nice photography and so on in films. But when did you last see a film that contains beauty purely for the sake of it? There is a weird belief among cinemagoers that anything which is not plot or character related must be removed. This is depressing hogwash. There is nothing wrong with creating a beautiful sequence that has nothing to do with the film’s plot. A director can show 15 minutes of spaceships for no reason than that they are beautiful, and it is neither illegal nor evil to do so.
‘2001’ requires you to watch in a different way than you normally watch films. It requires you to relax. It requires you to experience strange and beautiful images without feeling guilty that there is no complex plot or detailed characterization. Don’t get me wrong, plots and characters are good, but they’re not the be-all and end-all of everything. There are different KINDS of film, and to enjoy ‘2001’ you must tune your brain to a different wavelength and succumb to the pleasure of beauty, PURE beauty, unfettered by the banal conventions of everyday films.
“All art is quite useless” – Oscar Wilde.
Sometimes reading the user comments on IMDB fills me with despair for the species. For anybody to dismiss 2001: A Space Odyssey as “boring” they must have no interest in science, technology, philosophy, history or the art of film-making. Finally I understand why most Hollywood productions are so shallow and vacuous – they understand their audience.
Thankfully, those that cannot appreciate Kubrick’s accomplishment are still a minority. Most viewers are able to see the intelligence and sheer virtuosity that went into the making of this epic. This is the film that put the science in “science fiction”, and its depiction of space travel and mankind’s future remains unsurpassed to this day. It was so far ahead of its time that humanity still hasn’t caught up.
2001 is primarily a technical film. The reason it is slow, and filled with minutae is because the aim was to realistically envision the future of technology (and the past, in the awe inspiring opening scenes). The film’s greatest strength is in the details. Remember that when this film was made, man still hadn’t made it out to the moon… but there it is in 2001, and that’s just the start of the journey. To create such an incredibly detailed vision of the future that 35 years later it is still the best we have is beyond belief – I still can’t work out how some of the shots were done. The film’s only notable mistake was the optimism with which it predicted mankind’s technological (and social) development. It is our shame that the year 2001 did not look like the film 2001, not Kubrick’s.
Besides the incredible special effects, camera work and set design, Kubrick also presents the viewer with a lot of food for thought about what it means to be human, and where the human race is going. Yes, the ending is weird and hard to comprehend – but that’s the nature of the future. Kubrick and Clarke have started the task of envisioning it, now it’s up to the audience to continue. There’s no neat resolution, no definitive full stop, because then the audience could stop thinking after the final reel. I know that’s what most audiences seem to want these days, but Kubrick isn’t going to let us off so lightly.
I’m glad to see that this film is in the IMDB top 100 films, and only wish that it were even higher. Stanley Kubrick is one of the very finest film-makers the world has known, and 2001 his finest accomplishment. 10/10.
Original Language en
Runtime 2 hr 29 min (149 min), 2 hr 22 min (142 min) (theatrical release), 2 hr 41 min (161 min) (initial release)
Genre Adventure, Sci-Fi
Director Stanley Kubrick
Writer Stanley Kubrick (screenplay by), Arthur C. Clarke (screenplay by)
Actors Keir Dullea, Gary Lockwood, William Sylvester, Daniel Richter
Country UK, USA
Awards Won 1 Oscar. Another 15 wins & 11 nominations.
Production Company Metro Goldwyn Mayer
Sound Mix 4-Track Stereo (35 mm magnetic prints), 70 mm 6-Track (70 mm prints), DTS (DTS HD Master Audio 5.1)
Aspect Ratio 2.20 : 1, 2.35 : 1 (35mm)
Camera Mitchell BFC 65mm camera, 65mm Super Panavision Lenses (65mm), Mitchell FC 65 Model, Super Panavision 70 Lenses
Laboratory Metrocolor, Hollywood (CA), USA (prints), Technicolor, London, UK
Film Length 3,845 m (Sweden, 35 mm), 4,805 m (Sweden, 70 mm), 5,050 m (Finland, 70 mm), 5,520 m (premiere version) (70 mm) (USA)
Negative Format 65 mm (Eastman 50T 5251)
Cinematographic Process Cinerama, Digital Intermediate (8K) (2018 remaster), Dolby Vision, Todd-AO, Super Panavision 70
Printed Film Format 16 mm (“flat” version), 8 mm (Cineavision, 1:2,35, anamorphic), Digital (Digital Cinema Package DCP), Eastman Color Print Film type 5385 (anamorphic), Eastman Color Print Film, Type 5385, 35 mm, 70 mm