The work that Kubrick and clarke created together as a script, and after months after the film was shot, clarke made some corrections into a book ... I burn to him ...
It is no coincidence that the letters of the HAL are preceding letters of IBM. As a matter of fact, the version used in the movie is already ibm. and the reason for his deviation ( referring to Isaac Asimov 's 3 robot law ) is that he is in conflict between the life of the people and the completion of the task because the state knows that at the end of the task people cannot return.
Apart from the technical superiority and visual-auditory excellence of 2001, he thought and surprised as many people with his ideas. Apart from the questioning of the existence of an external intervention in the emergence of our talents such as abstract thinking and inventing, it is also curious whether the "thinking" being can be accepted alive, and therefore has the right (and sacredness) to live. yes, hal9000 is a machine, but it thinks like you and me, it fears, it can go into tribe. While hal9000 begging "do not dave", how many people did not forget the kind of fag he made and said "don't do the dave that comes"? Didn't his unshakable and childish devotion to himself like Charles Foster Kane in citizen kane and his attitude on the road from greatness to destruction have not made us think? What is the lack of a machine that can think that way even if it has the chance to urgent again, so that it is not subject to universal human rights? Even people with cerebral activity can be treated like a living cadaver and be inserted through life-binding devices, while a mind that does not have a body, but whose brain is idle, that dreams, creates a mind, is not our intervention in the nature of the thing.
Kubrick's cold gaze and his "mechanical person" shot with the foresight of "look what I'll do to you"; The movie, which is no longer necessary to say "whether science fiction has thrown its dust or is human" ...
in another part of space Kubrick's in now, every film school film * gate is des watching the monkey bone throwing scene indicated the intention is not much of a fan of Michel Foucault 'with the union "to achieve this is a pipe, the pipe" yet witnessed even cherished the least they shaped eğleş, inheritance left by mechanical We have a lot of fun with our people.
The fact that he has settled all futuristic predictions must have upset the tom cruise the most (eh mahrem, let's not open it too much) .. While the main idea of entri escapes, at least we should also point out that the letter-game legend between ibm and hal has the pseudonym Kubrick.
The film in which the transition in the riot of colors during warp jump in space creates a very beautiful visual feast
It is an incredibly beautiful film, learning that it was made in 1968 gives you a separate enthusiasm, I am so glad that I do not understand anything from the film, especially from the end ...
maybe he talks about the secret of the universe, my brother finally, do I have to understand something?
It is a rare situation where both his book and his movie leave wonderful tastes.
a true legend written by clarke and ruled by kubrick.
As dave bowman turns from the darkness of the space, that is, the subconscious, to his infancy, the movie / book, which makes us think that everything happens in a cycle, that nothing has an end, and that bowman can move with the speed of thought in the universe invokes his journey into the subconscious.
For an animated, interesting and different explanation:
http://www.kubrick2001.com/
Since it divides people into two as those who admire and those who do not like at all, the movie should also be examined in this respect ...
Those who do not have confidence in the producer * to be able to easily participate in the process of feeling intended in art branches such as music and cinema and who do not realize that they should watch-listen-see the work as "sincere" and criticize it in this way, even if it does not seem sincere, can not understand "a shit" and miss many things. An example. Those who find this movie "boring" are likely to be the same people who do not listen to some music tours because of the details that they think are not sincere just because they are striking in the general image of the performers and not understanding * * . If we need to connect with the subject of the film at this point, we can say that; The more a person becomes "indifferent", the more mature his internal harmony becomes. Therefore, I recommend to those who do not like this movie to ignore all their prejudices and to watch it again and with different feelings until they are able to get involved in the film enough to watch every frame they are bored with without getting bored. There will be people who do not like the "ninth symphony", which is a beautiful example where almost every person can easily leave himself and reach the intended feelings. Here is the water to be understood that;
-If we don't love something, it means we don't understand.
So will we love everything we understand?
-ahaha ... no oole bi $ ii ...
-We can also love? ..
-Nothing oole ... there is only understanding and not understanding. And intermediate values of course ...
-Ha?
sheet & a ...
In order to criticize any human-made thing, we must first have all consistent determinations of a person who admires him and then do the opposite. But if we don't really know what, why we like and why we don't, and if we only use relatively unscientific definitions such as "boring", it is time to confront ourselves. just like in the movie ...
and again, there is a "periodic repetition" event that can be carefully selected or at least noticeable about the macro of the film, which we can also see in sociological analysis. This means that life curves corresponding to different "corresponding" issues in various issues in society are constantly fluctuating, putting parameters into the cycle. That is why, after all people realize, the " entropy " point of some truth now comes and vice versa is questioned. In the same way, we can observe that the opposite is happening, with the rise and joy of the philosophical currents that are suddenly called "I wonder? and even when it got to this point (see determinism )