Classic movie site with rare images, original ads, and behind-the-scenes photos, with informative and insightful commentary. We like to have fun with movies!
Archive and Links
grbrpix@aol.com
Search Index Here




Monday, July 21, 2025

Scope Samples #2

 

Mastermind and Masterpiece --- Why Did It Take Me So Long to Realize That?

Wide Worlds: 2001: A Space Odyssey

Three of us drove to Winston-Salem for 2001, my cousin behind the wheel for me being two years away from a driver license. Robby and Roland were seniors to my freshman. Roland was student council president that year, so I was amidst high cotton. Here also was my first Winston movie trip not hauled by a parent. Stench from Reynolds Tobacco beckoned us toward town and the Winston Theatre, lately retrofitted for “Ultra-Vision,” which despite label was souped-up 35mm, 2001: A Space Odyssey getting but one North Carolina engagement in 70mm (says trusted authority). The Winston’s was a newly widened and deep curve screen, leagues ahead of the Liberty which notion of scope was essentially letterbox. The only times I experienced true anamorphic was out of town. My two companions were hot for 2001, having read much about it, but I suspected from ads and articles that here was a glorified art film, sci-fi treated with unaccustomed respect. Truth it took years for immaturity to know: 2001 was ahead of me that day sure as events depicted were far in front of characters on the screen. My speed was more space travelers meeting monsters, having no cope for something so sophisticated as this. Further confession: I am but now realizing how great 2001 is. As of a mere past week, it has become my favorite 60’s feature, and among evermore all-time favorites. How oft does epiphany come so late in life? Makes me realize there is still much developing to do.

He Subdued Gorgo, So Why Not William Sylvester to Spearhead This Mission?

First, the effects … they astonished … still do. It was hard then to process what Kubrick and crew had achieved. This wasn’t simulation of space, this was space, more documentary it seemed than science-fiction. We’d not been to the moon yet, but here it seemed we had. Knowing I’d not “get” 2001 going in made high hill of the watch, plus road companions saying how one needed to read Arthur C. Clarke’s book to properly understand what was happening. This I heard further at school among science and sci-fi geeks, same type who saw more to Star Trek that I’d ever divine. It’s been necessary since 1968 to rehab off half-century mild if persistent resentment toward 2001, as in me unequal to concepts smarter boys readily grasped. If this was the future of sci-fi, then give me gothic as in vampires clawing out of graves and leave far-off galaxies to those disposed such ways. 2001 seemed a boy ritual (never knew a girl who saw it, let alone cared for it), a means of asserting smarts over other boys by figuring out Rubic cube Kubrick shaped. I for first time felt sort of left out of movie conversation. The drive home saw Robby and Roland trading insights beyond back-seat-sat-me, a position both literal and figurative. Ann had a volunteer hospital job a few years back and told me Roland was working there (as brain surgeon?). “Ask if he remembers us going to Winston to see 2001 back in 1968.” She did, and he did, or at least said he did. Might I someday encounter Roland at Smokehouse Barbecue (where everybody shows up at least weekly) and tell him how 2001 no longer confuses and mystifies me? Hope so.


It actually does still confuse and mystify me, if less so than at age fourteen. Who can claim true comprehension of eternal paradox that is 2001? Eternity of extras that is 4K of the feature taught me that Kubrick wanted to delve further into mystery he had developed, but money and time ran out, so he essentially had to release what was done. So simple after all as that? Sounds like something that might happen to Wild, Wild Planet, or The Green Slime. 2001 had flavor of a foreign film, which meant down go grosses to ultimate loss clocked by Metro. Critics panned it to start but then came groundswell of youth to groove upon “Ultimate Trip” that was 2001. Moderns have speculated on kids “smoking grass” at screenings, which maybe they did at subsequent grinds, but you’ll not convince me conduct like that went on at roadshows, not with hard ticket patronage and parents with offspring making a night or special day of attending. Lighting up amidst such order would to my mind be unlikely (unless one came in high). Same with myth of Fantasia as drug-fueled seventies reissue, maybe at a few late shows to hippie trade (like Greensboro’s Janus Theatre), but Fantasia was still Disney, and designated family fare. So too was 2001 for that matter, a site where too many grown-ups and monitor/tattletales could too readily narc cannabis consumers.

Sheer Physical Size of 2001 Was Enough to Dazzle Us in 1968

2001
had a narrative, and it was flexible. Not till the end do things go abstract, sufficient data so far for all to figure endings that would suit themselves. For every thousand views of 2001, there’s that many meanings to take away. No one figured things out for sure, least of all Kubrick and by his own latter admission, Arthur C. Clarke. Execution was what counted, breathtaking by admission of even those to pan the show otherwise. Do astronauts Dave and Frank arrive at respective afterlives for a finish? Seemed at least momentarily that way for me. Anyone to claim they’ve got the ending licked is kidding you, or just showing off. Intelligent life notion is explored minus aliens. Clarke said to show them would plunge the project into same trap to trip SF since stone age of film. He and Kubrick hashed over the genre and latter pledged to upend it … nothing done before would do here. Clarke sort of liked Fantastic Voyage and 1937’s Things to Come, which Kubrick watched but wrote off as antique. He wanted no part of anything tried previous. What if he had copied, “been inspired,” by even smallest aspect of Fantastic Voyage? We’d take that like something foul in a punchbowl. Fantastic Voyage seems OK until you put it beside 2001. Thing about any SF before 2001 was them all being melodramas at core with orbit or future speculations incidental. Again, nothing about 2001 was like anything tried before or since. A surface could be aped, austerity might be mimicked, like for instance Alien which I saw this week, a horror flecked would-be 2001. Or Star Wars, into which I lasted thirteen minutes on the heels of 2001, verdict … unwatchable.


Surprise at core of 2001 is their mere suggesting life other than ours beyond Earth, this admirable realism and a big reason we believed and still believe 2001. Remarkable that here is a film rushing toward sixty and in all that time, we’ve still no evidence of life elsewhere in the galaxy. Had you asked me in 1968 if extraterrestrials would be found by the year 2001, let alone 2025, I’d have said sure, naturally, of course. At race pace the space program went in those days, we’d have all bet on a Mars landing by mid-seventies at a latest, and surely there’d be populace there. I’m a little disappointed not to have been contacted so far by other planeteers. 2001 pleases by not opting for a glum ending. Better to be confused than take a downer. I suspect if it were made (or remade) today, HAL would prevail and enslave thread left of mankind. Just like AI! creatives would cry, committee filmmaking the victor in a universe where true 2001 would have little chance at fruition. HAL is everyone’s lead because he (it?) becomes a threat and locus of conflict for 2001’s second half. Keir Dullea back when he did SF shows took to stages before worshipful mobs, spoke but six words, Open the pod bay doors, Hal, to get a roaring ovation. Was ever an actor so rewarded by so simple a line spoke so many years before? Dullea is all over extras on the 2001 4K, an ideal spokesman for the film and its still devoted audience. Here’s for sobering: Keir Dullea is eighty-nine years old, Gary Lockwood eighty-eight.


Dullea salutes often 2001 being free of CGI, all effects practical, he proudly states. Notice how old-school FX bespeaks integrity of hands-on filmmaking, a thing gone since digital dominion. We see stills of Kubrick and crew building models the size of a house to hark back on artist workshops of centuries gone, honest effort borne of man showing what hands and the mind might accomplish. In an era of increased AI, let alone CGI increasingly suspect and unwelcome, 2001 plays like Renaissance found, then regrettably lost again. As though to emphasize classical basis for what he did, Kubrick let go a well-along score by Alex North to favor composers long departed and show us again that here is music that won’t date no matter passage of millenniums. Others of modern sci-fi would follow suit, Alien’s ship captain Tom Skerritt playing classical themes to relax between bouts with a monster aboard craft he commands. So what was the before and aft of 2001? What were prior titles Robby and Roland and I reflected upon as 2001 unfolded? There were obvious inferiors to sweep aside, and then a few more-than-worthwhile forebears that for all we know influenced 2001 in perhaps subliminal ways. I’m thinking in particular of Euro-made Ikarie XB-1 (released here, if barely, as Voyage to the End of the Universe) and Planet of the Vampires, these trapped aboard combo vessels and chained to child matinees or drive-in tail ends. 2001 was sold in terms of ultra-prestige in addition to the Winston’s Ultra-Vision. Kubrick’s name would see to that.


More of Winston-Salem as showgoing landscape of dreams HERE.

2 Comments:

Blogger Rick said...

When I clicked on my Monday morning Greenbriar treat and saw that we were discussing 2001, I flinched. "Oh, no," I thought, "is John going to dump on 2001? Is he going to tell us he doesn't get it? Is he going to claim it's only for poseurs and hipsters?" As a massive admirer of the movie, I was fearful, yes. So thanks for being on the right side of science fiction and art here.

I also saw 2001 first-run back in '68 or maybe '69. I loved it from the first but, like most folk, didn't realize its true and genuine greatness for a few years after that. I've now seen it 3 or 4 times in theatrical showings and it just gets better and better.

When I saw it in its 50th anniversary re-release in a large theater here in New York City, I was dazzled yet again. And, again--as seemingly everyone reports--nobody left the auditorium at the intermission. All around me I could hear the buzz of intense discussions. For a 50 year old movie.

If you haven't read it, I cannot recommend highly enough SPACE ODYSSEY:STANLEY KUBRICK, ARTHUR C. CLARKE, AND THE MAKING OF A MASTERPIECE by Michael Benson. My kids still comment on how excited Dad was while reading this book. Every day I drowned them, and no doubt bored them, with what I'd learned from this day's reading.

It was a library copy I read but after returning it, I had to have it for my own. So I bought a new, un-used, hardback copy at full price, figuring author Benson had more than earned my money.

It's the best making-of-a-movie book I've ever read. Better even than PICTURE, or THE FILMING OF THE CANDIDATE, which were my "Best" nominees previously.

Read it. And thanks for a great, satisfying relief of a post.

11:08 AM  
Blogger John McElwee said...

Thanks for your tip on the book, Rick. I just located one at eBay and ordered it.

11:40 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

grbrpix@aol.com
  • December 2005
  • January 2006
  • February 2006
  • March 2006
  • April 2006
  • May 2006
  • June 2006
  • July 2006
  • August 2006
  • September 2006
  • October 2006
  • November 2006
  • December 2006
  • January 2007
  • February 2007
  • March 2007
  • April 2007
  • May 2007
  • June 2007
  • July 2007
  • August 2007
  • September 2007
  • October 2007
  • November 2007
  • December 2007
  • January 2008
  • February 2008
  • March 2008
  • April 2008
  • May 2008
  • June 2008
  • July 2008
  • August 2008
  • September 2008
  • October 2008
  • November 2008
  • December 2008
  • January 2009
  • February 2009
  • March 2009
  • April 2009
  • May 2009
  • June 2009
  • July 2009
  • August 2009
  • September 2009
  • October 2009
  • November 2009
  • December 2009
  • January 2010
  • February 2010
  • March 2010
  • April 2010
  • May 2010
  • June 2010
  • July 2010
  • August 2010
  • September 2010
  • October 2010
  • November 2010
  • December 2010
  • January 2011
  • February 2011
  • March 2011
  • April 2011
  • May 2011
  • June 2011
  • July 2011
  • August 2011
  • September 2011
  • October 2011
  • November 2011
  • December 2011
  • January 2012
  • February 2012
  • March 2012
  • April 2012
  • May 2012
  • June 2012
  • July 2012
  • August 2012
  • September 2012
  • October 2012
  • November 2012
  • December 2012
  • January 2013
  • February 2013
  • March 2013
  • April 2013
  • May 2013
  • June 2013
  • July 2013
  • August 2013
  • September 2013
  • October 2013
  • November 2013
  • December 2013
  • January 2014
  • February 2014
  • March 2014
  • April 2014
  • May 2014
  • June 2014
  • July 2014
  • August 2014
  • September 2014
  • October 2014
  • November 2014
  • December 2014
  • January 2015
  • February 2015
  • March 2015
  • April 2015
  • May 2015
  • June 2015
  • July 2015
  • August 2015
  • September 2015
  • October 2015
  • November 2015
  • December 2015
  • January 2016
  • February 2016
  • March 2016
  • April 2016
  • May 2016
  • June 2016
  • July 2016
  • August 2016
  • September 2016
  • October 2016
  • November 2016
  • December 2016
  • January 2017
  • February 2017
  • March 2017
  • April 2017
  • May 2017
  • June 2017
  • July 2017
  • August 2017
  • September 2017
  • October 2017
  • November 2017
  • December 2017
  • January 2018
  • February 2018
  • March 2018
  • April 2018
  • May 2018
  • June 2018
  • July 2018
  • August 2018
  • September 2018
  • October 2018
  • November 2018
  • December 2018
  • January 2019
  • February 2019
  • March 2019
  • April 2019
  • May 2019
  • June 2019
  • July 2019
  • August 2019
  • September 2019
  • October 2019
  • November 2019
  • December 2019
  • January 2020
  • February 2020
  • March 2020
  • April 2020
  • May 2020
  • June 2020
  • July 2020
  • August 2020
  • September 2020
  • October 2020
  • November 2020
  • December 2020
  • January 2021
  • February 2021
  • March 2021
  • April 2021
  • May 2021
  • June 2021
  • July 2021
  • August 2021
  • September 2021
  • October 2021
  • November 2021
  • December 2021
  • January 2022
  • February 2022
  • March 2022
  • April 2022
  • May 2022
  • June 2022
  • July 2022
  • August 2022
  • September 2022
  • October 2022
  • November 2022
  • December 2022
  • January 2023
  • February 2023
  • March 2023
  • April 2023
  • May 2023
  • June 2023
  • July 2023
  • August 2023
  • September 2023
  • October 2023
  • November 2023
  • December 2023
  • January 2024
  • February 2024
  • March 2024
  • April 2024
  • May 2024
  • June 2024
  • July 2024
  • August 2024
  • September 2024
  • October 2024
  • November 2024
  • December 2024
  • January 2025
  • February 2025
  • March 2025
  • April 2025
  • May 2025
  • June 2025
  • July 2025