Awe Inspiring Work Filled with Discoveries

Rating: 9/10 (1 November 2014)

A movie fan at one of the cinematic conferences once spoke up and said that the best idea in a film is not to give any ready made answers but leave everything open to viewers' interpretations. In this case, we are all a part of art that we watch, we admire, we criticize but, foremost, discover. This assumption proves particularly suitable for Stanley Kubrick's 2001 SPACE ODYSSEY inspired by a short story by Arthur C. Clarke.
What strikes viewers most about the film are the questions that the theme provokes and answers that we are likely to find in ourselves. But...nothing ready on a platter! Not much is given to us except for thrilling experience of a journey, a titled odyssey. The central theme-ODYSSEY the location-SPACESHIPS/THE UNIVERSE. In that respect, it seems inevitable to quote Roger Ebert who rightly pointed out in his review that Kubrick's genius does not lie in "how much" but "how little." Almost everything is left to us, which makes it a very difficult screen achievement and, simultaneously reflective, such "a philosophical statement about a man's place in the universe" (Ebert).
From the first sequence titled "Dawn of Man," we see apes with an obvious aspect of imprisoning our vision within a certain framework. Nevertheless, soon, we discover that these apes begin to think. A sort of Cartesius' "Cogito Ergo Sum" or rather an inner existence that blends with the outer reality. Something driven by some supreme power? While we begin with dawn of man, we don't end with twilight of man. Here, rather, one could quote Steven D Greyfanus who observes that the movie makes a point about our existence and consciousness which are not self explanatory. Questions arise when a black monolith appears: a challenge for the apes...some mystery which will appear more times in the movie. Is it some limitation that emerges from it? Or rather some superior reality to discover only when man drowns in it?
Steven D Greyfanus interestingly claims that "2001: A Space Odyssey doesn't just depict a quantum leap forward in human consciousness â€” it practically requires such a leap, on an individual scale, from the viewer." The movie is a challenge in itself, a challenge to rise above any ready made concepts of what a movie should be like, what it should look like, what it should evoke but encounter something new, even in the genre itself. To develop this point a bit, Greyfanus goes deeper comparing this odyssey to classical Odyssey by Homer...while in the mythology, the destination is clear, it is home, in the film, it is unknown. For can any man grasp the indefinite reality of the universe and its mystery? Roger Ebert memorably notes: "the film is not about a goal but a quest."
The characters are the heroes of this quest. Mind you that many of them, in particular Dr Heywood Floyd (William Sylvester) or Dave Bowman (Keir Dullea) in the star sequence are the characters who rely solely on the intellect. In a truly unforgettable 'communication' with the on-board computer HAL 9000, there is, however, an intense desire for meaning, a quest for reasoning, search for answers. At the same time, there appears intense care not to allow any 'violation' of the mission's goals. But...at one point, man breaks a certain limit and goes too far. The realms of technology are going, the realms of human mind are going, what is left if the gravity of mind does no longer occur sufficient?
The infinite that goes with Jupiter (not only the name of the planet but, for some reason deliberate or coincidental, the name of the Roman god).
At that moment, we may all agree with Roger Ebert who says that it is a "transcendent film" and a "silent film."
Primarily, 2001 SPACE ODYSSEY relies on visuals and music. There is not much dialog and if it appears, it is reduced to the maximum minimum, almost to a pseudo computerized interaction. There is not much 'humanity' in the language, not to say feelings. Even the 'Daisy' song or 'Happy birthday' that parents sing to their son seem to lack the basic enthusiasm and result in something artificial, robot-like. Visuals and music! The former is a unique achievement that helps us all experience the film in an unforgettable way. Seeing the movie on the big screen recently, I felt its intense effects to a grand scale. Kudos to cinematographer Geoffrey Unsworth. Music, however, is an even more inspiring aspect.
What a terrific choice of CLASSICAL MUSIC! Not only is it an undertone of a unique human ability, but there is another greater undertone to that. Let me quote Roger Ebert again. He observes that any music score would go with conventionalized methods of evoking action and would underline the storyline. "The classical music," however, "exists outside the action." It is an ever present companion of man on his journey to the unknown, on his way to hear deeper, more profoundly. The waltz by Johann Strauss THE BLUE DANUBE seems to evoke a dance in the universe, outside of any gravity and within a greater power. Meanwhile, "Thus Spoke Zarathustra" by Richard Strauss marks the crescendo of emotions within phases of discoveries.
The absolutely unpredictable finale brings everything to an uncommon conclusion, after all. You feel as if you have just started to watch this film. Time is not important but far more thought provoking is the fact that this art does not resort to pessimism of nothingness but appears to celebrate, inside us and outside us, the infinite mystery of human life.
Prepare for something hard, sometimes vague and very odd, but worth enduring till the end.