Archive 1 May 2006 to June 2007
Proposal: A new synopsis
Here is a suggestion for a new beginning to the synopsis of the movie. This is very short -- far, far shorter than the current description -- and it can probably use some expansion. However, I think a brief synopsis of the movie's plot is sufficient, because it is not the purpose of this article to describe every single nook and cranny and "deeper meaning" behind every single moment of the film. --Modemac 15:33, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Groan. Ok. Fine. -- Jason Palpatine 20:15, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
You are wrong that the monolith teaches the man apes to eat meat, the monolith teaches them to kill. This is a significant fact. Also, Modemac is right, your synopsis does need to be shorter.length of synopsis = perfect -> details needed - - - wikipedia IS for this, otherwise where else then?! 89.217.132.143 20:40, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
you're fun HR: there is NO debate or comment about "plot length" on the page you're mentioning 62.167.44.68 05:31, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
anyway, i do NOT see ANY consensus about a too long synopsis : one guy proposing a shorter synopsis is NO consensus, OR with my position (= synopsis is perfect so) I AM the new consensus!
according to your link (thanks), Plot summaries should be between 400 and 700 words (about 600 words), but should not exceed 900 words unless there is a specific reasons such as a complicated plot. -> 1) why 400, 700 or 600 or 900? it's just a stupid wording and 2) (HR please read this so you can get the point:) unless there is a specific reasons such as a complicated plot (reasonS!?)... "UNLESS" = a) 2001 is longer b) 2001 is full with important details 3) you want more?! 84.227.26.41 04:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)Speculation section
I'm removing the "Speculation" section as original research crawling with weasel words. Any reporting on interpretations of the movie here must be based on the published findings of professional critics. Angr (t • c) 07:31, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Predictions
The "predictions" section of this article seems to imply that 2001: A Space Odyssey was intended to be a prophetic work. I see no particular reason to consider it as such. This caption for an image "This vision of a giant underground moonbase is the most inaccurate of Kubrick's predictions. The political and financial commitment necessary to build such a place would exceed the GNP of the entire world." is worded as a criticism against Kubrick, as though he 'should have known better'. Why not also mention that Kubrick was incorrect in predicting that men would turn into enormous glowing fetuses, or that our computers would try to murder us? It does contain some interesting facts, but I think it should be re-worded to avoid sounding critical of the film. -Bungopolis 18:12, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Image of starchild with Arthur C. Clarke quote
I am removing the quote "There before him, a glittering toy no Star-Child could resist, floated the planet Earth with all its peoples." from the caption for the image of the starchild under Synopsis as it is from the novel and not the film, so I don't think it belongs in this article at all. --Bungopolis 19:56, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Jason Palpatine disagrees with the removal of this quote: "The book and the film are reflections of each other. In fact, an entire chapter from the book is included in the film souvenir program. I believe the quote pertinent and appropriate."
Firstly, we must consider that the quote includes an assertion about the Star Child that cannot be supported with evidence found in the film: namely, that the earth is something of a "toy" for the Star Child. This implies that the Star Child wields a power over the earth, and that the Star Child is a reckless creature. Indeed, according to the trivia, the Star Child was in early production scripted to detonate nuclear devices orbiting the earth: a plot that would have been consistent with Clarke's quote. However, it was decided to remove this element from the film, and as it stands there is nothing in the film to suggest that the Star Child is going to 'play' with the Earth in the way implied by Clarke's quote. Rather, the image of the Star Child is highly ambiguous, unlike in the novel.
Secondly, plot expansions of the Space Odyssey story from the Clarke novels should not be projected into the plot of the film. One cannot assume that a viewer of the film has read any related literature (I haven't, for instance, read any of the Clarke novels), so to include plot that is not drawn directly from the film in the synopsis of that film is misleading and confusing.
Thirdly, even an endorsement of related literature by Kubrick (as might be implied by the inclusion of "an entire chapter from the book... in the film “souvenir program," though I highly suspect that was the result of a marketing director who was uncomfortable with the film's ambiguity) should have no bearing on our decision to expand upon the plot of the film. If the intentions of a director differ from his film then, perhaps, he has failed―but that is a judgment the viewer should make. In this vein we should not attempt to 'correct' Kubrick's ambiguities. In intuitive terms: if Kubrick, one of the most precise directors in history, had wanted us to see the Earth as a "toy" then he would have shown us it to that effect. --Bungopolis 07:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
>>>Nice. But wrong. Read the book. Better still...read the last lines of the 3rd part of the book "For though he was master of the world, he was not quite sure what to do next. But he would think of something.". Then go back and read the last lines of the FIRST part of the book. Those lines are "For though he was master of the world, he was not quite sure what to do next. But he would think of something." Arthur couldn't be any more clear on what he was trying to say to you (and what you've so sadly distorted). He is trying to tell you that THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE between "Moon Watcher" and the "Star Child". They are both the same. They both have the capacity for 'mind'. Duh!
In reply
I believe I DID earlier justify my actions. Mr. Bungopolis, I am at work now. I will give you a more lengthy reply in the next couple of days. Suffice it to say, I am of the opinion that you are wrong. Also, please read the related material I originally posted under the topic Consider :
They are separate works for the purposes of the plot summary only when you delve into the detail level. These works are reflections of each other and on a general level, compliment each other.
Yes there are many differences in scene depiction, dialogue, and exposition. The biggest difference of course is the destination of Discovery One. However there are MANY base points in the two stories that are the same:
- In the background to the story, an ancient and unseen alien race uses a mechanism with the appearance of a large black monolith to investigate worlds all across the galaxy and, if possible, to encourage the development of intelligent life (the monoliths are perhaps Von Neumann probes, although the segment explaining this was cut from the film). One such monolith appears in ancient Africa and teaches a group of the hominid ancestors of human beings how to use tools and eat meat.
- We then leap millennia to the year 1999, detailing Dr. Heywood Floyd's journey to Clavius base on the Moon.
- The Americans have found a magnetic disturbance in Tycho, one of the Moon's craters. An excavation of the area has revealed a large black slab, they have designated “Tycho Magnetic Anomaly-One (TMA-1)”. It was buried millions of years in the past.
- They arrive just as sunlight fully hits upon it for the first time since it was buried. It then sends a piercing radio transmission to the far reaches of the solar system.
- We then leap forward to the Discovery One mission. David Bowman and Frank Poole are the conscious human beings aboard the ship. Three of their colleagues are in a state of suspended animation, to be woken when they approach their destination. Additionally, the HAL 9000, an artificially intelligent computer, maintains the ship and is an active part of life aboard.
- HAL predicts that the AE-35 unit of the ship will malfunction. The unit is swapped out. Bowman conducts tests on the AE-35 unit that has been replaced and determines that there was never anything wrong with it.
- HAL murders Frank Poole by teleoperating his space-pod during the second EVA to the antenna complex.
- HAL attempts to murder David Bowman.
- HAL causes the deaths of the hibernating crew.
- Bowman enters HAL's computer vault and disconnects him to regain control of the ship.
- Bowman discovers a second, larger monolith.
- Bowman goes EVA in a pod to make a closer inspection of the second monolith.
- The monolith swallows Bowman's pod and sends him on a journey out of our Solar System -- possibly even our dimension.
- Eventually, he is brought to what appears to be a nice hotel suite,
- Bowman is " is reborn, an enhanced being, a star child, an angel, a superman, if you like, and returns to earth prepared for the next leap forward of man's evolutionary destiny." (Kubrick quote)
These barebones facts are the story in a nutshell.
Your first argument is that the quote includes an assertion that cannot be su
EATS | dallasnews.com
More decisions: Which of the two ... patio on a beautiful spring day!! Best food and ... I recommend Ziziki's for brunch. The food is wonderful; both traditional breakfast and Greek
Blondie and Brownie
For more Mimi's brunch photos ... Every day since, I've thought about that breakfast as well as this beauty hiding in a paper bag. After savoring my ... The best part were the ...
CenterstageChicago.com - Articles Archive: Chicago restaurants, food ...
Food directory of pizza, sushi, BBQ, Chinese, Mexican, Thai, American, breakfast, brunch, lunch, BYOB and ... We've found the best breakfast ... You'll want to be part of this Breakfast ...
Brunch Recipes and Menus - SAVEUR.com
Brunch menus and recipes including eggs, scrambled eggs, breakfast brunch recipes, omlettes, egg ... Cure those Monday morning blues by making ... As fall weather looms, the days are ...
Fox, Margaret S. & Bear, John B. Morning food; breakfasts, brunches ...
Fox, Margaret S. & Bear, John B. Morning food; breakfasts, brunches & more for savoring the best part of the day. ... A champagne brunch. MOTHER'S DAY BREAKFAST BY THE LAKE; BOY SCOUTS ...
An Even Better Breakfast Bar - Food
An Even Better Breakfast Bar . It's fortunate for you ... Morning food : breakfasts, brunches & more for savoring the best part of the day by Fox, Margaret S.
Amazon.com: Brunch (0694055001138): Louise Pickford, Ian Wallace ...
Take the best of breakfast and lunch and turn it into brunch--the perfect ... Morning Food: Breakfasts, Brunches and More for Savoring the Best Part of the Day 4.7 out of 5 stars (13) ...
Tips And Recipes For Hosting Terrific Brunches: The Best Brunch-ideas ...
Morning Food: Breakfasts, Brunches and More for Savoring the Best Part of the Day ... A collection of quick and easy breakfast and brunch recipes ...
Amazon.com: Brunch (9781416563570): Georgeanne Brennan: Books
... Essentials of Breakfast & Brunch ... hosting a brunch is the perfect opportunity. With more than ... award-winning Food and Flavors of Haute Provence and Aperitif, as well as Savoring ...
French Food, Recipes and Cuisine - SAVEUR.com
Breakfast/Brunch; Dessert; Side Dish; Occasion; Cocktail Party; Birthday ... Assemble this hearty casserole the day before, then bake it the next morning for a zero-effort breakfast.