|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
40th Anniversary of 2001:A Space Odyssey
Forty years ago today in D.C. .
Technology detected in the film still as good as gold.... but still probably 50 to 100 years off in the future. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
40th Anniversary of 2001:A Space Odyssey
On Apr 2, 10:18 am, Al wrote:
Forty years ago today in D.C. . Technology detected in the film still as good as gold.... but still probably 50 to 100 years off in the future. Change 'detected' to 'depicted'! |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
40th Anniversary of 2001:A Space Odyssey
On Apr 2, 11:27 am, Al wrote:
On Apr 2, 10:18 am, Al wrote: Forty years ago today in D.C. . Technology detected in the film still as good as gold.... but still probably 50 to 100 years off in the future. Change 'detected' to 'depicted'! So it's 3 months older then me....and I'll still be lucky to live long enough to see it happen... Although rather then Russians to share the moon with it will be Chinese... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
40th Anniversary of 2001:A Space Odyssey
On Apr 2, 10:48 am, eyeball wrote:
On Apr 2, 11:27 am, Al wrote: On Apr 2, 10:18 am, Al wrote: Forty years ago today in D.C. . Technology detected in the film still as good as gold.... but still probably 50 to 100 years off in the future. Change 'detected' to 'depicted'! So it's 3 months older then me....and I'll still be lucky to live long enough to see it happen... Although rather then Russians to share the moon with it will be Chinese... China has the right stuff as is, although perhaps India too has a sufficient cache of right stuff, at least for either of those establishing the initial LSE-CM/ISS as our next Oasis/Depot Gateway. .. - Brad Guth |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
40th Anniversary of 2001:A Space Odyssey
Al wrote: Forty years ago today in D.C. . Technology detected in the film still as good as gold.... but still probably 50 to 100 years off in the future. The instrument panels in the spacecraft are very similar to what we use nowadays. The space helmet visors that darken would also be quite doable nowadays, although probably via a photocell rather than manual control as their major means of operation. I imagine you could dock a Pan-Am spaceliner to a space station the way it's shown in the movie, but I think a de-spun hanger area makes more sense. The big question is of course what exactly is the purpose of the big human presence on the Moon? Clavius Base is apparently huge, and one suspects the Russians have one of equal size. What makes that expendature of time and treasure worth it to the two countries? They seem to get along fairly well on the space station, so apparently it doesn't have something to do with defense, even though both have their orbital thermonuclear bomb satellites shown (unexplained, like most of the movie) in the first scenes after the CPFM throws the bone into the air. Pat |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
40th Anniversary of 2001:A Space Odyssey
On Apr 2, 11:26 pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
Al wrote: Forty years ago today in D.C. . Technology detected in the film still as good as gold.... but still probably 50 to 100 years off in the future. The instrument panels in the spacecraft are very similar to what we use nowadays. The space helmet visors that darken would also be quite doable nowadays, although probably via a photocell rather than manual control as their major means of operation. I imagine you could dock a Pan-Am spaceliner to a space station the way it's shown in the movie, but I think a de-spun hanger area makes more sense. The big question is of course what exactly is the purpose of the big human presence on the Moon? Clavius Base is apparently huge, and one suspects the Russians have one of equal size. What makes that expendature of time and treasure worth it to the two countries? They seem to get along fairly well on the space station, so apparently it doesn't have something to do with defense, even though both have their orbital thermonuclear bomb satellites shown (unexplained, like most of the movie) in the first scenes after the CPFM throws the bone into the air. Pat But a despun hangar would require a lot of machinery to make it rotate and despin... What does not hold up in the movie is a lot of logo artwork, like the Pan Am livery and the old AT&T Bell. By the way the movie can be viewed online he http://www.watch-movies.net/movies/2...space_odyssey/ |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
40th Anniversary of 2001:A Space Odyssey
On Apr 4, 5:08 pm, Kevin Willoughby
wrote: In article 224b6e65-6959-4efe-9bc3- , says... By the way the movie can be viewed online he http://www.watch-movies.net/movies/2...space_odyssey/ The movie was designed to be viewed from a 70mm print, with a 6 channel sound system. To watch it on a 12" laptop LCD with two dime-sized speakers just 12 inches apart is kinda like trying to appreciate a fine meal while being waterboarded. Indeed. A good home theatre system can do it some justice, but I can well recall my pleasure at seeing it at the end of 2001 in a 70MM film house. In spite of the fact that this was in NYC, just three months after 9/11, once that curtain went up and the film started, all that just left me for well over two hours. Ahh.... Andre |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
40th Anniversary of 2001:A Space Odyssey
Andre Lieven wrote: Indeed. A good home theatre system can do it some justice, but I can well recall my pleasure at seeing it at the end of 2001 in a 70MM film house. In spite of the fact that this was in NYC, just three months after 9/11, once that curtain went up and the film started, all that just left me for well over two hours. Ahh.... Saw the whole thing twice in 70 mm film and Cinerama As far as movies go, it's the cinematographic form of the "The Emperor's New Clothes". Spectacular as long you buy into the "revolutionary " aspects of its story. Other than that, a very expensive and unimaginative version of the "Forbidden Planet" school of Sci-Fi with a lot less imagination shown in its plot, portrayal, and story than "The Day The Earth Stood Still" or "It Came From Outer Space" - both of which managed to pre-describe the story concept of "2001" with far less screen-time and money spent on production. One of the top-ten most over-rated films ever done in American cinema - by Stanley Kubrick in particular; all of his other movies were masterpieces that are worth watching time and time again ....or at least worth watching once (I imagine I've seen "Dr. Strangleove" around 50 times, and immediately go to it or "Jaws" by the flip of a coin every time I see it running on TV because those are two of _The Great Movies_ ever done by great American director's in the past century. Any of Kubrick's other films makes "2001" looking pretty mediocre by comparison, when viewed with the space-fan blinders off. Pat |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
40th Anniversary of 2001:A Space Odyssey
On Apr 3, 1:26 am, Pat Flannery wrote:
Al wrote: Forty years ago today in D.C. . Technology detected in the film still as good as gold.... but still probably 50 to 100 years off in the future. The instrument panels in the spacecraft are very similar to what we use nowadays. The space helmet visors that darken would also be quite doable nowadays, although probably via a photocell rather than manual control as their major means of operation. I imagine you could dock a Pan-Am spaceliner to a space station the way it's shown in the movie, but I think a de-spun hanger area makes more sense. That is the one thing that makes the most sense, the massive interconnect of a spinning outer hub and non rotating inner hub would be complicated and expensive. Rotating the space craft would be a logical and cheap way of doing the docking. The big question is of course what exactly is the purpose of the big human presence on the Moon? Common currency in modern science fiction prose from the late 30's to the present.... and people still dream of it ....think of the O'Neill cylinder an even grander concept. Clavius Base is apparently huge, and one suspects the Russians have one of equal size. What makes that expenditure of time and treasure worth it to the two countries? That probably missed the mark, I don't think , even in 1964-1968 anyone had a firm grasp on how expensive that would be. Had Kubrick/Clarke extrapolated that it would have been economically possible as a vast joint international venture they would have been more on the mark! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mariner IV Mars fly-by 40th anniversary | kucharek | History | 2 | July 16th 05 11:44 AM |
Congratulations Proton on its 40th Anniversary! | Jacques van Oene | News | 0 | July 15th 05 09:37 PM |
Kubrick 2001: The Space Odyssey Explained | Scott M. Kozel | History | 10 | March 6th 05 10:50 PM |
Kubrick 2001: The Space Odyssey Explained | Scott M. Kozel | Space Shuttle | 7 | March 6th 05 10:50 PM |