Films/DVD Asylum

Posted by jbmcb (A) on April 08, 2005 at 21:14:03

In Reply to: Jesus, you're bringing 2001 into a discussion of Captain? posted by tinear on April 8, 2005 at 14:47:43:

> Jesus, you're bringing 2001 into a discussion of Captain?

Yep, in film analysis and comparison any movie is fair game :)

> The "plot" of 2001 is convoluted, sure, but it has one: the visting of earth by a far more evolved society and its impact.

Well, that's the plot in the book. They never come right out and say the monolith is alien technology in the movie. It's more of a symbol, or placeholder for human evolution, or perhaps the punctuated equilibrium thereof. The plot of 2001 deals with human evolution and the human reliance on technology, which isn't really a complete plot unto itself, it's just what the film is about.

> and the ultimate fate of the species that so alters "nature."

Interesting question: if humans are the products of natural evolution, how are the creations of humans unnatural? Are bird nests unnatural? Are beaver dams unnatural? Of course the movie posits that external forces shaped human evolution, and tool use is not a factor of natural evolution. Fascinating, as Mr. Spock would say :)

> As time passes, we shall find out if the computer is really our friend or as Clarke/Kubrick envisioned.

HTML tag not allowed

HAL wasn't really evil, it was just carrying out it's instructions, which were to lie, which it was programmed never to do, hence the breakdown. A computer, like any tool, isn't evil* in and of itself, it's only evil if it is used for evil purposes. HAL, being somewhat sentient, could be an exception, however it's evil acts were brought about by human intervention. Without the human's requirement of duplicity, HAL would not have "malfunctioned."

* Define evil as irrationally bad/damaging behavior as caused by any reason you prefer (insanity, demonic posession, chemical imbalances, moonbeams, whatever.)

/*Music is subjective. Sound is not.*/