Kubrick 2001: The Space Odyssey Explained

Kubrick 2001: The Space Odyssey Explained
http://www.kubrick2001.com/

Scott M. Kozel wrote:

Kubrick 2001: The Space Odyssey Explained
http://www.kubrick2001.com/



Occasionally, something can be done with such complete and innocent
earnestness that it becomes the perfect subtle parody of itself. :-D

Pat

Scott M. Kozel wrote:

Kubrick 2001: The Space Odyssey Explained
http://www.kubrick2001.com/

It's already been done - it's Arthur C Clarke's novel. The film 2010 adds a
bit about Hal's motives as well.

Well, it's ONE explanation...

I see 2001 the film as a sort of visual poem anyway and hence ultimately
beyond rational explanation.

--
Malcolm Street
Canberra, Australia
The nation's capital

"Scott M. Kozel" wrote in message
...


Kubrick 2001: The Space Odyssey Explained
http://www.kubrick2001.com/

.... it is obvious that the creators were mindful of us people still
afflicted with s-l-o-w dialup which I do appreciate.
As for the explanation its just like all the rest - it leaves us with even
more questions.

Dudhorse wrote:
"Scott M. Kozel" wrote in message
...


Kubrick 2001: The Space Odyssey Explained
http://www.kubrick2001.com/

... it is obvious that the creators were mindful of us people still
afflicted with s-l-o-w dialup which I do appreciate.
As for the explanation its just like all the rest - it leaves us with
even
more questions.

I was able to attend a presentation by Arthur C. Clarke way back in
1970, just a few years after the movie was released. Of course, lots
of folks had questions about the "meaning" of the movie and the book.

The author's reply to such questions was, "Read the book, see the
movie, repeat dosage as required."

I was able to attend a presentation by Arthur C. Clarke way back in
1970, just a few years after the movie was released. Of course, lots
of folks had questions about the "meaning" of the movie and the book.

The author's reply to such questions was, "Read the book, see the
movie, repeat dosage as required."

Wasn't ACC accused of kiddie-fiddling in Ceylon a while back? What
happened there, claims unfounded?

Ste


--
Take out no before @ and spam after

On 2005-02-22, Ste Kearney wrote:
I was able to attend a presentation by Arthur C. Clarke way back in
1970, just a few years after the movie was released. Of course, lots
of folks had questions about the "meaning" of the movie and the book.

The author's reply to such questions was, "Read the book, see the
movie, repeat dosage as required."

Wasn't ACC accused of kiddie-fiddling in Ceylon a while back? What
happened there, claims unfounded?

UK tabloid Newspaper (Mirror or the Mail, IIRC) claimed he'd said it in
an interview, he denied it, some noises were made about producing the
tapes, nothing then would up in the news (at least, that's the status
last time I checked. Might do a proper dig now I have access to Lexis
and the like)

On the other hand, it should be noted that a year later HMG happily had
him knighted, which if nothing else indicates they were reasonably sure
there wouldn't be a scandal over it. I suspect this goes in the (rumour;
unfounded) column.

--
-Andrew Gray

"Ste Kearney" wrote in message
news:2005022216361975249%stek1961no@spammaccom...
I was able to attend a presentation by Arthur C. Clarke way back in
1970, just a few years after the movie was released. Of course, lots
of folks had questions about the "meaning" of the movie and the book.

The author's reply to such questions was, "Read the book, see the
movie, repeat dosage as required."

Wasn't ACC accused of kiddie-fiddling in Ceylon a while back? What
happened there, claims unfounded?


Yup, Unfounded claims. From what I understand he had commented in an
interview about how happy the kids in Sri Lanka looked "look at the smiles
on their faces" he said. Apparently that set some tabloid writers
imagination off. The reporter needs to have a chat with his own granddad -
he'll get all sorts of commentary on the kids of today.
At the time the accusations were announced ACC was going to be knighted by
Prince Charles (or one of the royals) so someone had to try to ruin that by
digging up some make beleive to sell sensationalist newspapers. ACC himself
asked that the knighthood be delayed until he was cleared. He was cleared
and was knighted a year later. Unfortunately he wasn't knighted by a the
Prince - the tabloids ruined that honour for him.

Nathan