Review of 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) by Phil P — 05 Jun 2015

"I'm sorry David I can't do that.".

Undoubtedly one of those 'must watch' films regardless of your initial thoughts or even final ones. It's a film that begs to be watched the critical praise, the numerous 'Best films' lists and it's general consensus. Like 'Citizen Kane' or 'Vertigo' you're going to see it - one way or another.

Iv'e found that from people I know who've seen it that it is a divisive film. Some hate its slow pacing and lack of dialogue. Others love the hard Sci-Fi and ambiguity. Honestly I had no idea what side I would fall on, even with indications of loving 'Moon' - another different but hard Sci-Fi movie and the recently released 'Ex Machina' - '2001: A Space Odyssey' is still a film very much on its own.

Based upon a short story written by co-writer 'Arthur C Clarke' , '2001: A Space Odyssey' is many things to different people, it's odd and intriguing and has many theories attached to it. Which is as just interesting as watching the film itself. It has several stories that all tie together via the giant monolith. The first being the dawn of man with no dialogue and only sweeping music played throughout as apes evolve after coming in contact with the monolith. 4 million years alter a space mission on the moon humans discover the monolith buried on moon and when a group of scientists get closer it sets off a piercing sound - for initially unknown reasons. It then jumps some years later where a small crew and on-board computer HAL 9000 are on their way to Jupiter.

I admit it's understandable when someone tells me they didn't like it. It's limited dialogue and mysterious story can frustrate and put people off. You aren't going to get answers from this just theories there's no definitive solution to most of the film - which is precisely why I liked it so much.

It created, thanks to the suitably fantastic score a feeling of ethereal, it may seem at times negative but it's a film with wonder at its core - nothing more so than underlines this than the LSD-like flashes and 'The Blue Danube'.

And of course I have to talk about HAL the 'rogue' A.I. I wrongfully before the film started expected him to be a villainous element. It brings up the interesting point that if an A.I with no known faults because of its accuracy and intelligence - can like humans ignore/hide them. As he's a very conflicted character (yes I use character) having been told to withhold information from the crew who he's sworn to obey and protect at the same time. While the crew appear emotionless and generic (until in despair) HAL seems more human.

I could talk about this for hours so many unanswered questions and speculation. What's the significance of the monolith, HAL's sketchy reasons, the inception of the star-child and what the hell was with the room at the end of the film? I'm fine with them going unanswered as I stated part of the pull for the film is its mysterious meanings, reasoning and the ambiguity that comes with it. Yes it really as good as I was told. The most influential Sci-Fi film ever made, hard Sci-Fi at its finest.