# 2001 Space Odyssey remake **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [August 27, 2003, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048 "2003-08-27T19:21:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 7:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/21 "2003-08-28T07:49:47Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Steelerphan \* > **The Sentinel was indeed a short story. 2001 expanded the short story without adding more story elements; it was designed to show off the new moviemaking techniques involving opticals.** What? šŸ˜• ā€œWithout adding more story elementsā€??? The plot derived from the short story _The Sentinel_ occupies only about the middle third of the movie: the discovery of the monolith buried in the moon crater. Thereā€™s nothing about the apes on the African veldt, thereā€™s nothing about the voyage to Jupiter. Iā€™m afraid that any remake that followed Arthur C. Clarkeā€™s novel more closely would fall into Clarkeā€™s flaw of being too literal. He hasnā€™t got Kubrickā€™s knack for the mystical, as _2010_ unfortunately showed. The image of Bowman reborn as the Star Child at the end of the movie was a potent metaphor for everything from Buddhist ideas of rebirth to the millenial idea of mankind reduced to infancy by contact with a vastly superior technology. However, in the novel, itā€™s _literally a giant baby floating in space above earth!_ ---
**Author:** ![Grousser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9d8465/32.png) [@Grousser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grousser)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 7:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/22 "2003-08-28T07:49:49Z")
That may be correct, but even so I wonder why they took so different approaches, near the end. Mmmmā€¦ perhaps because one itā€™s a cult filmmaker and the other is a cult s/f writer. šŸ˜‰ ---
**Author:** ![Grousser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9d8465/32.png) [@Grousser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grousser)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 8:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/23 "2003-08-28T08:00:37Z")
My previous post was in response to Homer J. Simpson, btw. ---
**Author:** ![Grousser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9d8465/32.png) [@Grousser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grousser)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 8:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/24 "2003-08-28T08:10:08Z")
In the novel there is a description of a vast intergalactic net of wormholes that Bowman sees in his awesome tour. I missed that in the movie. Well, it was a post-missing, I saw the movie first! ---
**Author:** ![Early\_Out](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Early\_Out](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Early_Out)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 12:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/25 "2003-08-28T12:50:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Vlad Dracul \* > \*\*Hmmā€¦ how horrible could this remake get? > ā€¦ > > Truly abominable version: > > Keanu Reeves ā€¦ Bowman > Ashton Kutcher ā€¦ Poole > Carmen Electra ā€¦ hibernating scientist > Gilbert Gottfried ā€¦ voice of HAL \*\* **Vlad** , youā€™re a very scary person! šŸ˜ƒ ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/26 "2003-08-28T13:09:25Z")
Although Clarke and Kubrick collaborated on the screenplay, you can see the tension in it ā€“ Clarke was pul;ling for a more rational story, while Kubrick was going for visuals and mystical. Itā€™s _not_ just an excuse to show off the movie technology (although Kubrick and crew did invent new techniques for the film ā€“ in that way, itā€™s like **King Kong** , which introduced many tech innovations.) . A film that was a literal remake of Clarkeā€™s novel (where Clarke was able to force things more towards his vision) wouldnā€™t really be a remake of the _film_. And I think that the special effects still stand up quite well. The great model work and the use of color-separated hand-drawn mattes gives great detail and texture to the scenes. Nobodyā€™s done it since ā€“ itā€™s too expensive. And 2001 doesnā€™t rely on its newness for its appeal. Kubrickā€™s use of classical music in space, the way he frames the shots, his use of the astronautā€™s breathing as the only sound in several scenes, even the use of absolute silence all contribute to this. 2001 is still one of the very few films in which spaceflight is depicted accurately ā€“ the stars donā€™t move inb the background; there is no artificial gravity (except for the centrifugal cage); there is nio sound at all in vacuum; spaceships donā€™t ā€œbankā€ when they turn, but rotate about their center of mass. Itā€™s interesting that one of the few other films to show this accuracy ā€“ **Destination Moon** ā€“ is also called ā€œdullā€ by some people. Reality seems dull nexrt to Fantasy. ---
**Author:** ![paulberserker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@paulberserker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paulberserker)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/27 "2003-08-28T14:58:46Z")
why dont they try and have a bash at 2060? its the third book isnt it? (fears incoming flame from someone whos bound to know more about this) remaking 2001 would be a bad idea, but like so many other things hollywood does, if it makes cash money, so be it. you only have to look at the original 2001 and the first star wars trilogy for the superiority in using models over CGI IMHO. i even prefer stop motion animation to a lot of the stuff they do now, especially using animals/humans/monsters. ILM have started to suck big time, and you can guarantee its them theyā€™ll use if its big budget. models just seem more honest to me, but perhaps thats growing up on those films that were preCGI. ---
**Author:** ![vibrotronica](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/a9a28c/32.png) [@vibrotronica](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vibrotronica)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/28 "2003-08-28T15:26:17Z")
Donā€™t even think about remaking **2001**. Instead, how about a good version of **Childhoodā€™s End**? ---
**Author:** ![BrotherCadfael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@BrotherCadfael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrotherCadfael)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/29 "2003-08-28T16:02:32Z")
Kubricā€™s version of **Childhoods End** would beā€¦interesting. In fact, heā€™s about the only directory Iā€™d trust with it, so I guess itā€™s too lateā€¦ ---
**Author:** ![aleong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4af34b/32.png) [@aleong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aleong)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/30 "2003-08-28T17:15:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Vlad Dracul \* > \*\*Hmmā€¦ how horrible could this remake get? šŸ™‚ > > ā€œHollywoodā€™s idea of good dramaā€ version: > > Lawrence Fishburne ā€¦ Bowman > Heath Ledger ā€¦ Poole > Catherine Zeta-Jones ā€¦ a scientist in hibernation > Malcolm MacDowell ā€¦ voice of HAL > > Comedy/action version: > > David Duchovny ā€¦ Bowman > Chris Rock ā€¦ Poole > Sandra Bullock ā€¦ hibernating scientist > Orlando Jones ā€¦ voice of HAL > > Truly abominable version: > > Keanu Reeves ā€¦ Bowman > Ashton Kutcher ā€¦ Poole > Carmen Electra ā€¦ hibernating scientist > Gilbert Gottfried ā€¦ voice of HAL \*\* Donā€™t forget that it would be directed by Michael Bay, produced by Jerry Bruckheimer, written by Joe Eszterhas, and featuring new songs by 50-cent and Ja Rule. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Mad\_Hermit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b5ac83/32.png) [@The\_Mad\_Hermit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Mad_Hermit)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/31 "2003-08-28T17:45:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Walloon \* > \*\*What? šŸ˜• ā€œWithout adding more story elementsā€??? > > The plot derived from the short story _The Sentinel_ occupies only about the middle third of the movie: the discovery of the monolith buried in the moon crater. Thereā€™s nothing about the apes on the African veldt, thereā€™s nothing about the voyage to Jupiter. > > Iā€™m afraid that any remake that followed Arthur C. Clarkeā€™s novel more closely would fall into Clarkeā€™s flaw of being too literal. He hasnā€™t got Kubrickā€™s knack for the mystical, as _2010_ unfortunately showed. The image of Bowman reborn as the Star Child at the end of the movie was a potent metaphor for everything from Buddhist ideas of rebirth to the millenial idea of mankind reduced to infancy by contact with a vastly superior technology. However, in the novel, itā€™s _literally a giant baby floating in space above earth!_ \*\* Please donā€™t be upset, **Walloon.** It was late, and I was confusing the short story, which I read years ago, with the novelization. Clarke added much more to the novel, and the space baby blowing up an orbital nuke platform was much different from the Kubrick mystery ending. Iā€™m agreeing with your assessment, adding again that 2001 cannot be made after 2003 and still be 2001. ---
**Author:** ![Avumede](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/avumede/32/7235_2.png) [@Avumede](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Avumede)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/32 "2003-08-28T19:39:25Z")
> [@](#): > > As for it being boring - in my book Hal killing the sleeping astronauts is the best murder scene ever made. No way! Bowman killing is the best murder scene ever made. Man. What a great movie. To remake it under any conditions would be a crime. You donā€™t remake perfection. ---
**Author:** ![Avumede](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/avumede/32/7235_2.png) [@Avumede](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Avumede)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/33 "2003-08-28T19:41:33Z")
That is to say, Bowman killing HAL is the best murder scene ever made. ---
**Author:** ![Homer\_J.Simpson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a698b9/32.png) [@Homer\_J.Simpson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homer_J.Simpson)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/34 "2003-08-28T19:49:40Z")
> [@](#): > > 2001 is still one of the very few films in which spaceflight is depicted accurately ā€“ the stars donā€™t move inb the background; there is no artificial gravity (except for the centrifugal cage); there is nio sound at all in vacuum; spaceships donā€™t ā€œbankā€ when they turn, but rotate about their center of mass. If they really tried to film it accuratley, you wouldnā€™t see much. It would be too dark. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/35 "2003-08-28T20:37:06Z")
> [@](#): > > Itā€™s interesting that one of the few other films to show this accuracy ā€“ **Destination Moon** ā€“ is also called ā€œdullā€ by some people. Reality seems dull nexrt to Fantasy. Incidentally, Heinlein was satisfied with the end result of _Destination Moon_, but the process of getting it right was so painfully difficult that he gave up on movies. Whenever Hollywood comes out with some new bastardization of one Heinleinā€™s works, I always get the urge to watch _Destination Moon_. And _2001_ the book was a bit slow and plodding, but the movie was the pinnacle of its genre. Any ā€œupdatingā€ could only be for the worse. ---
**Author:** ![Duderdude2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/cdc98d/32.png) [@Duderdude2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duderdude2)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/36 "2003-08-28T20:40:57Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Homer J. Simpson \* > \*\*If they really tried to film it accuratley, you wouldnā€™t see much. It would be too dark. \*\* Itā€™s the most accurate science fiction movie Iā€™ve ever seen, and itā€™s the effort that should be commended. Obviously some sacrifices had to be made, for the benefit of the viewer (e.g. seeing whatā€™s going on), but sans the necessities required by a movie, the film was quite accurate, as one would expect from a Clarke production. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/37 "2003-08-28T20:55:23Z")
The Internet Movie Database does record these errors: > [@](#): > > When Floyd travels from the space station to the moon, both the earth and the moon are gibbous at the same time (as seen from each other). > > The earth should appear closer to the horizon at Clavius than at Tycho, not vice versa. ---
**Author:** ![Duderdude2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/cdc98d/32.png) [@Duderdude2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duderdude2)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/38 "2003-08-28T21:36:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Walloon \* > \*\*The Internet Movie Database does record these errors: \*\* Every movie has errors/mistakes/whatnot, but it doesnā€™t undermine the effort put into the production values. .On the whole, in comparison to other movies (especially sci-fi), 2001 is in a league of its own as far as accuracy is concerned. ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/39 "2003-08-28T21:47:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by CalMeacham \* > \*\*Kubrickā€™s use of classical music in space \*\* Kubrick had trouble getting the studio to let him use the music heā€™d picked out for the soundtrack. Specifically, _The Blue Danube_. The studio heads felt that most people would associate the music with player pianos (since it was a common roll for them). Kubric told the studio heads that once anyone saw the film, they never would associate the music with player pianos again. Personally, I never associate the music used in the movie with anything else. ---
**Author:** ![Super\_Gnat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e274bd/32.png) [@Super\_Gnat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Super_Gnat)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2003, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048/40 "2003-08-28T23:06:53Z")
Why would they remake 2001? It doesnā€™t seem like the kind of movie youā€™d need to do over. **Tuckerfan** : Itā€™s so weird you would say that. _Blue Danube_ was running through my head as I read this thread, and I didnā€™t know why. Weird, eh? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2001-space-odyssey-remake/198048.md?page=3)