The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > Mundane Pointless Stuff I Must Share (MPSIMS)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-31-2000, 07:37 PM
Sir Rhosis Sir Rhosis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
With the inevitable dragging out of the film for the new year, I have a question. Most commentators say something to the effect: "The film concerns a black monolith found on the moon in 2001."

It has been a while since I've seen the film, so is this true as far as the year? I do recall that the mission takes place "18 months later." Does the mission then take place in 2002/2003?

Or was the monolith found in 1999/2000 and the mission to Jupiter itself takes place in 2001?

I always assumed it was the mission proper that occurred in 2001.

Sir

Seemed too trivial for GQ.
__________________
Read my Star Trek script reviews at:

http://www.fastcopyinc.com/orionpres...les/unseen.htm
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-31-2000, 07:49 PM
CalMeacham CalMeacham is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Good Question!

I've been rooting through the book looking for a good "2001 quote for my e-mails tonight. It doesn't seem to sa in the book. Or in the movie. I always assumed that the monolith was found in 2001 (so does just about everyone else. Heinlein in "Expanded Universe" refers to a black monolith found on Luna in 2001, for instance.)
__________________
"My name is Michael Jackson, King of Pop
Look on my works, Ye Mighty, and Despair!"
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-31-2000, 10:28 PM
Short Short is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
I seem to remember the 18mo bit as the trip to the outer planets (Jupiter, I think). That is, the trip to Jupiter took place 18 mo after the discovery on the moon.

Been a while for me to, though.

[hijack]the 2001 question I've been puzzling over is what sort of creatures were the ape-like things in the beginning supposed to be?[/hijack]
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-01-2001, 07:18 PM
Homer Homer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Dude, those "ape things" are us, a couple million years ago.

--Tim
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-01-2001, 08:39 PM
Weirddave Weirddave is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Republic of Marylandistan
Posts: 9,900
In the recap at the beginning of 2010, it said the Tycho monolith was found in 1999.
__________________
"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."

~Barry Goldwater
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-01-2001, 09:22 PM
Scarlett67 Scarlett67 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: The Middle of Nowhere, WI
Posts: 10,667
I dunno, but can anyone explain this: In 3001 (I'm too lazy to hunt up the book for the full title and page number), the most recent book in the series, it is stated that Poole was born in 1996. EXCUSE ME???? He was ~5 years old when he went on the mission? I don't think so. The date is only in the freakin' TITLE OF THE BOOK!!

How did this get past all the people who saw the book through production, including Clarke?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-01-2001, 09:39 PM
minty green minty green is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Sounds like a neat trick of revisionism to me. Unless Clarke wanted his readers to just ingnore the fact that there aren't any Hiltons in orbit or bases on the moon today, he'd have to push back the events of 2001. If Poole's born in 1996, that puts the 2001 stuff around 2030 or so, which is a little more plausible from our perspective. And hey, we've already determined there aren't any real dates in the original, right?

And yes, I know that ignores 2010.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-02-2001, 01:28 AM
Kipper Kipper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Arthur C Clark freely admits that the books are not true sequels but rather a series of books on the same theme. The most obvious example is that in the book the monolith is is orbit around Saturn while in the movie it is in orbit around Jupiter. 2010 the book ignores the diferences between the book and movie putting the monolith around Jupiter.

Also some revision has been done so that the books follow current scientific thinking (at the time each book was written) rather than being conistent with the book before it.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-02-2001, 09:53 AM
minty green minty green is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
The novel 2001 was written while the movie was in production. IIRC, the movie was also supposed to use Saturn, but it turned out that the f/x were impractical, so Kubrick settled on Jupiter instead because it was simpler. When Clarke wrote 2010, he went with Jupiter because most people knew 2001 through the movie.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-02-2001, 01:01 PM
Me!! Joe!!! Me!! Joe!!! is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
While I can't remember exactly where I read it, I do recall an interview with Mr. Kubrick who stated that the events of the movie don't necessarily take place in the year 2001.
The title is metaphorical, the year 2001 is the first year of the new millenium (2000 ad was actually the LAST year of the 20th century). The theme of the movie itself is the "next step" in evolution. The whole prehistoric sequence dramatizes the step in evolution in which apes became humans(by using tools, fighting each other, etc.) The mission to Jupiter sequence ends with the "next step" in human evolution -- Kier Dullea's character turns into that starchild thing that's seen at the very end. The movie itself never gives a date for the events.

Of course, that was all tossed out the window when "2010" came out, but Kubrick had nothing to do with that movie.

The original short story by Arthur Clark wasn't called 2001 either. It was entitled "the Sentinel" IIRC.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-02-2001, 04:55 PM
Enderw24 Enderw24 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: KC. MO -094 35.3 39 4.9
Posts: 10,227
The movie says that the event on the moon happened in 1999. The main part of the movie (the trip, HAL 9000, etc) happened in 2001. This is the same as the book except that there is no mention of a specific year that the events on the moon took place. The year of HAL's creation does change by five years though.

I can't believe that Clarke would change the date of Poole's birth just to keep its possibility of happening alive. I mean, people still read 1984, right?
__________________
Puedo tenerz las hamburguesas conz queso?!?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-02-2001, 05:18 PM
Padeye Padeye is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Phoenix, AZ, US
Posts: 7,672
I'll have to review my DVD but in the interview they give a specific date in the mid nineties that HAL became operational.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-02-2001, 05:33 PM
Sofa King Sofa King is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
"I am a HAL Nine Thousand computer Production Number 3. I became operational at the Hal Plant in Urbana, Illinois, on January 12, 1997."

In the book, the Discovery was scheduled to go on a scientific mission to Jupiter, but the radio emission from TMA-1 was specifically targeted its signal for the moon Iapetus, orbiting Saturn. As a result, the mission profile was changed to make a gravity-assist bypass of Jupiter and head to Saturn. Also, I believe the orginal crew members scheduled for hibernation were yanked and replaced with new scientists unknown to Bowman and Poole.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-02-2001, 06:11 PM
Montfort Montfort is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Close

12 January 1992.
__________________
First Anniz said "Yes,", then she said "I do," and then she [url="http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=209517"]bore my son. How can you not love her?

I asked and Cecil answered me.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-02-2001, 06:19 PM
stargazer stargazer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
2001. As we see here.

I love Seattle.
__________________
A condition of complete simplicity,
Costing not less than everything.

-T.S. Eliot, "Little Gidding"
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-02-2001, 06:27 PM
minty green minty green is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by Enderw23
The movie says that the event on the moon happened in 1999.
I've seen the movie a bunch of times, and even have the videotape. I do not recall the movie ever stating a year, and apparently neither do any of the other posters. Would you care to point out where the movie says 1999?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-02-2001, 06:29 PM
Montfort Montfort is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Quote:
Originally posted by stargazer
2001. As we see here.
Oh, that's great! Whomever responsible deserves a Nobel Prize.

Based on the picture, it looks like it's not all-black, though. IIRC, they had a bitch of a time making the real monoliths for the movie (I think they used painted plexiglass).

Can one of our SeaDopers check this out and take some better pictures? Please?
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-02-2001, 08:01 PM
Enderw24 Enderw24 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: KC. MO -094 35.3 39 4.9
Posts: 10,227
1997, '92, stop stop! you're both right! They changed the year between the book and the movie for some reason.

Minty green,

As I don't own the movie, I cannot say with 100% certainty, but I can distinctly remember watching it on the VCR and it saying "1999" in white letters on the screen. This is right as you see the moon, the area leading down to the monolith is on the left and there are astronauts and vehicles all around.

If you say it isn't there, I'll believe you, but I remember it being there.
__________________
Puedo tenerz las hamburguesas conz queso?!?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-02-2001, 08:41 PM
minty green minty green is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Just checked, EnderW23, and it ain't there. The scene of Floyd arriving at the monolith site is there, of course, but no date. Wonder if that was maybe a preview or something similar that you saw?

Moral of the story: I have got to update my copy to DVD. FF scan just don't cut it anymore.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.