Going ape over things they don't understand.

Rating: 10/10 (18 May 2008)

The reaction of some people to this work of art seems analogous to one of my all-time favorite movie scenes in the movie itself. The man-apes, not even being sufficiently intelligent to begin to grasp that they are witnessing an impossible miracle, can only screech, jump around and flail their arms at the enigmatic object before them.
It truly is disheartening that there aren't more visionaries of Stanley Kubrick's and Dr. Arthur C. Clarke's caliber. And that society isn't more influenced by the thoughtful visionaries that do exist among us instead of by the all-too-typical power-demented, greed-ridden and/or religiously fanatical sociopsychopaths that hold positions of social, legal and political authority.
I remember seeing "2001: A Space Odyssey" for the very first time when it came to the theater in my hometown in 1968. I was but 14 years old but I had no particular difficulty in 'getting it'. The only part that left me wondering was when the star child returned to Earth; what were his intentions? If that was meant to represent a kind of 'next step' for mankind, did he return to lead humanity on to that next level? I guess not, since the sequel still had humanity blundering along, with the lunatics running the asylum as usual. Speaking of subsequent films depicting space travel or space themes, some people are fond of claiming that "2001" established a standard or precedent for such movies. I tend to disagree. While it may have been influential, most TV shows and movies I've seen would appear to more resemble "Star Trek", which appeared a couple of years before "2001", in character and technique, i.e., appearing to be nothing more than adaptations of western shoot-em-ups, barroom brawls and World War II or Cold War stories. Even "2010", as enjoyable and entertaining as it certainly is, just isn't in the same league with "2001"'s character and level of intellect, tending more toward the typical chatty, angst-ridden humanity-coping-with-some-thing-other-than-human shtick.
"2001: A Space Odyssey", in contrast, is immortal and stands mockingly before such mediocrity as the monolith before the man-apes.
It is profoundly disappointing that Kubrick/Clarke's prophecy of an established base on the moon hasn't been fulfilled, which I submit as being reflective of mankind's general mentality and that of their political representatives, their mental impotence when attempting to deal rationally with technical and scientific issues being only too evident, in many ways. Which is something profoundly portrayed by another recent film based on a story by Dr. Carl Sagan, "Contact", which is one of but few films that come anywhere close to "2001"'s vision such that it can legitimately claim a lineage with "2001", right down to a "wormhole trip" near the end. (Why is it that every time humanity seems to get close to a cosmic epiphany in these movies and TV shows, someone winds up hauling-ass across the universe at 10 million times the speed of light?)
Younger people may find it interesting that much of the technology that they enjoy today was in all likelihood inspired by "2001: A Space Odyssey"; after all, in 1968, color TV was still very much a novelty and transistors were a mind-bending mystery to many, vacuum tubes having been all the rage for several decades (which were a mind-bending mystery anyway for most of humanity). For Kubrick and Clarke to even begin to fathom, let alone portray, the developments that could arise in the decades to come as accurately as they did is nothing short of phenomenal, perhaps even a bit spooky, in retrospect.