A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » History
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

40th Anniversary of 2001:A Space Odyssey



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old April 6th 08, 03:57 PM posted to sci.space.history
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default 40th Anniversary of 2001:A Space Odyssey



Andre Lieven wrote:
I've heard that Chloris Leachman said similar things about some of her
best work on Blazing Saddles.


I kind of hate to tell you this, but that was Madeline Kahn in Blazing
Saddles....Cloris Leachman was in Young Frankenstein, and did do a
slam-dunk job in that part, although just about everyone else was out
shown by Gene Hackman's cameo as the blind man.
How he ended up in that movie is that he and Gene Wilder used to play
tennis together, and Hackman said he wanted to play some small part in
the movie. Wilder was amazed that he wanted anything to do with
something like that.
I love how they leave the Espresso scene to the viewer's imagination...
if he can wreak that much havoc with soup, just imagine him with live
steam. :-D



This isn't exactly helped by the fact that the people on the Moon in the
movie walk and move as if they are at full Earth gravity, rather than
1/6 G, so you might think they are on the surface of some other planet
that has near Earth strength gravity.


There were, after all, limits to 1968 SPFX technology. Plus, don't
forget,
as of 1968, no member of the public had yet seen humans walking on
the Moon, so there was nothing immediate to visually compare to.


Except other science fiction movies, and a lot of times they had people
jumping around in the low lunar gravity as a staple.
I think the Disney "Man In Space" series of programs made most people
realize that the gravity on the Moon was far lower, and you could leap
around.
Considering all the trouble Kubrick went to to simulate weightlessness,
leaving the low Gs out of the few lunar scenes was a little odd.

Pat
  #22  
Old April 6th 08, 04:51 PM posted to sci.space.history
Paul A. Suhler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 45
Default 40th Anniversary of 2001:A Space Odyssey

Pat Flannery wrote:

Andre Lieven wrote:
The aliens in 2001, we got nothing. I wonder if that non depiction in
2001 inspired Carl Sagan, both in his Cosmos sensawunda and in
not showing the aliens in Contact - we only saw one human form
manifestation of them.


They did think about putting them in the movie, but couldn't decide what
they should look like.
There's one scene during the "big trip" at the end where the space pod
is being escorted by flying tetrahedral things; I always wondered if
those were the aliens.


Those were the same tetrahedral things that Homer Simpson
saw when sitting in a massage chair at The Sharper Image.

Now can we reconcile the differences between the universes of Asimov's
robots, 2001, and The Simpsons?

:-)

Paul
  #23  
Old April 6th 08, 05:22 PM posted to sci.space.history
David Lesher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 198
Default 40th Anniversary of 2001:A Space Odyssey

Andre Lieven writes:


There were, after all, limits to 1968 SPFX technology. Plus, don't
forget, as of 1968, no member of the public had yet seen humans walking
on the Moon, so there was nothing immediate to visually compare to.



And they spent liberally when needed. The jogging around Discovery
scene was only possible by what they did: building the whole set
as an enormous hamster wheel and rotating at the speed he jogged.

One issue was they found that the Kleig lights tended to explode
when inverted while hot. So as a result, glass would rain down
during a take...



--
A host is a host from coast to
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
  #24  
Old April 6th 08, 08:23 PM posted to sci.space.history
Andre Lieven[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 388
Default 40th Anniversary of 2001:A Space Odyssey

On Apr 6, 10:57 am, Pat Flannery wrote:
Andre Lieven wrote:
I've heard that Chloris Leachman said similar things about some of her
best work on Blazing Saddles.


I kind of hate to tell you this, but that was Madeline Kahn in Blazing
Saddles....Cloris Leachman was in Young Frankenstein, and did do a
slam-dunk job in that part, although just about everyone else was out
shown by Gene Hackman's cameo as the blind man.


My bad, I was thinking of Leachman in Young Frankenstein. We
recently saw a documentary about the making of Young F and it
talked about Cloris having great takes ruined because the crew,
including the camera guy, was laughing so hard from her
performance that she later said that none of her best takes made it
to the film for that reason.

How he ended up in that movie is that he and Gene Wilder used to play
tennis together, and Hackman said he wanted to play some small part in
the movie. Wilder was amazed that he wanted anything to do with
something like that.
I love how they leave the Espresso scene to the viewer's imagination...
if he can wreak that much havoc with soup, just imagine him with live
steam. :-D


Exactly. Thats at the core of really great comedy, or really great
stroytelling, in leaving *just enough* unshown/untold so as to let
your
audience's imaginations take them the rest of the way there.

This isn't exactly helped by the fact that the people on the Moon in the
movie walk and move as if they are at full Earth gravity, rather than
1/6 G, so you might think they are on the surface of some other planet
that has near Earth strength gravity.


There were, after all, limits to 1968 SPFX technology. Plus, don't
forget,
as of 1968, no member of the public had yet seen humans walking on
the Moon, so there was nothing immediate to visually compare to.


Except other science fiction movies, and a lot of times they had people
jumping around in the low lunar gravity as a staple.
I think the Disney "Man In Space" series of programs made most people
realize that the gravity on the Moon was far lower, and you could leap
around.
Considering all the trouble Kubrick went to to simulate weightlessness,
leaving the low Gs out of the few lunar scenes was a little odd.


Perhaps. It may also be that those were all in the earlier parts of
the
film, and that he saw the later part, from Discovery onwards, as being
more of the meat of the story.

Andre

  #25  
Old April 6th 08, 08:25 PM posted to sci.space.history
Andre Lieven[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 388
Default 40th Anniversary of 2001:A Space Odyssey

On Apr 6, 12:22 pm, David Lesher wrote:
Andre Lieven writes:
There were, after all, limits to 1968 SPFX technology. Plus, don't
forget, as of 1968, no member of the public had yet seen humans walking
on the Moon, so there was nothing immediate to visually compare to.


And they spent liberally when needed. The jogging around Discovery
scene was only possible by what they did: building the whole set
as an enormous hamster wheel and rotating at the speed he jogged.


Yep, and thats the one major set that they didn't try to rebuild for
2010. It was a very ambitious set, and it created the needed illusion.

One issue was they found that the Kleig lights tended to explode
when inverted while hot. So as a result, glass would rain down
during a take...


Bring umbrellas. g

Andre
  #26  
Old April 7th 08, 07:04 PM posted to sci.space.history
Joseph Nebus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 306
Default 40th Anniversary of 2001:A Space Odyssey

Andre Lieven writes:

On Apr 5, 9:46 pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
David Lesher wrote:
Kubrick's best-remembered film won't be that; Kubrick's perfect legacy
will be "Dr. Strangelove"... one of the most brilliantly funny movies
ever made.


Sure. More to the point, its a satire of a topic that most people
would
have previously bet was unsatirisable, nuclear war. I would call The
Mouse That Roared more of a farce, in the strict sense.


Although ... Billy Wilder had, apparently, in the late 50s
toyed around with the idea of reuniting the Marx Brothers to make a
``Duck Soup for the Nuclear Age'' movie. When we get the cross-time
trade routes set up, I want to get a look at *that* movie.

--
Joseph Nebus
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  #28  
Old April 8th 08, 12:40 AM posted to sci.space.history
Kevin Willoughby
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 220
Default 40th Anniversary of 2001:A Space Odyssey

In article DNidnaoW1PpnbGvanZ2dnUVZ_sGvnZ2d@northdakotatelep hone,
says...
Saw the whole thing twice in 70 mm film and Cinerama


No, you did not.

Yes, I belive you saw the whole thing twice in 70mm.

I belive you saw a Cinerama logo on the screen when you saw it in 70mm.

I even belive you saw the movie in a theater with the Cinerama logo over
the entrance.

It is even possible that you saw the movie projected onto a Waller
strip-screen.

But you did not see it in Cinerama.

Cinerama has a remarkable 7/8 channel sound system. 2001 had only 6
channels.

At its core, Cinerama was a virtual reality system that showed a very
high resolution (I.e., more resolution than a 70mm print) image on a
140-degree wide by 55-degree high screen. The original negative of 2001
falls short of this, so no reproduction of the negative could meet this
critera.

There were some early contract negoitations about 2001 where Kubreck was
considering using real Cinerama (with the famous 3-strip negative). It
never happened. Instead, Super Panavision was used. Super Panavision is
good. Very good. But *not* Cinerama.
--
Kevin Willoughby
lid

Kansas City, this was Air Force One. Will you change
our call sign to SAM 27000? -- Col. Ralph Albertazzie
  #30  
Old April 8th 08, 03:10 PM posted to sci.space.history
Al
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 81
Default 40th Anniversary of 2001:A Space Odyssey

On Apr 6, 9:01 am, Pat Flannery wrote:
Andre Lieven wrote:
The aliens in2001, we got nothing. I wonder if that non depiction in
2001inspiredCarlSagan,bothinhisCosmossensawundaan d in
not showing the aliens in Contact - we only saw one human form
manifestation of them.



It is interesting, in Stanley Kubrick: A Biography: Vincent
Lobrutto......
Lubrutto relates the story that Clarke , knowing Sagan, invited Sagan
to have dinner with Kubrick and Clarke in early 1965. Discussion
turned to how to represent the 'Monolith Makers' in 2001.... Clarke
was for some kind of humanoid aliens, Kubrick non-humanoid aliens,
Sagan thought this over and said something like, 'well guys this alien
civilization is at least 4 million years old, (maybe older)... too
many unknowns and unpredictables about their representation, why ever
show them at all?
Actually Kubrick strove throughout 1967 to still find some
representation, in the end he took Sagan's advice.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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 11:50 PM
Kubrick 2001: The Space Odyssey Explained Scott M. Kozel Space Shuttle 7 March 6th 05 11:50 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.