stenli kjubrik u raljama vremena

[beatakeshi]

Što je mnogo bolje nego kritičko pljuvanje po istoj.

[steins]

Ako šta vidimo do sada na ovom topicu, to je nekritičko pljuvanje po Odiseji.

pa dobro, ajd da se ne lažemo, odiseja je jedan vrhunski ali ubibože dosadan film. Ko nije makar jednom predremao neki deo ima problem sa snom..... :D

[Lrd]

Ako šta vidimo do sada na ovom topicu, to je nekritičko pljuvanje po Odiseji.

Nemoj mi reći da i ti, od svih ljudi, orgazmiraš na Odiseju. Jako bih voleo da čujem tvoje objašnjenje.

[kobni zelaya]

Objašnjenje čega? Šta ti u Odiseji nije jasno?

[Jimmy Kowalski]

THE MAKING OF KUBRICK'S 2001by Margaret StackhouseMargaret Stackhouse wrote some critical commentary on 2001. After reading her remarks, Stanley Kubrick stated the following: Margaret Stackhouse's speculations on the film are perhaps the most intelligent that I've read anywhere, and I am, of course, including all the reviews and the articles that have appeared on the film and the many hundreds of letters that I have received. What a first-rate intelligence! [Agel, p. 201] The amazing thing is that Miss Stackhouse was a junior at North Plainfield (N.J.) High School and 15 years old when she wrote herreflections on 2001! In a statement made to Jerome Agel, she said that she was "primarily interested in science and mathematics. However, Idon't wish to limit myself when there are so many other fascinating fields to explore: psychology, art, music, philosophy, history,anthropology, political science, literature, education, languages, etc. I may decide to go into nuclear physics or abstract (pure) math, or Imay make a study of the mind. I would like to try to find the relationships, if any, in the physical, emotional, and spiritual levelsof the mind. (For example, are there any biochemical bases for the 'soul'?) My major concern at this stage is to find a challenge -- onlythen can I discover my intellectual, social, and spiritual identity. The most outstanding people I have ever known have a basic self-assurance that has enabled them to live life fully and zestfully. This type of living is my goal."Miss Stackhouse's reflections on 2001 were forwarded to Kubrick by David Alpert, of the science department, North Plainfield High School.What follows is the text of Ms. Stackhouse's commentary:1. The monolith - source of infinite knowledge and intelligence A. Perfection represented in its shape; its color -- black -- could symbolize: 1. Evil and death, which result from man's misuse of knowledge; 2. The incomprehensible -- man, with his limited senses, cannot comprehend the absence (perfect black) of color or light.B. Its first appearance. 1. Movie implies that life has reached the stage when it is ready for inspiration, a divine gift, perhaps. [it is interesting that the apes are expectant, waiting for something.] 2. Maybe apes become men when this inspiration is given. [Question: Is man really a separate entity, with something (soul?) that no otherform of life possesses, or is the difference merely in quantity (rather than quality) of intelligence? Is the evolution gradual and continuousor in defined levels? Does the difference in quantity become in fact this difference in quality?]3. Inspiration is given: a. When men (apes) need it; or, b. When they seek it; or, c. At the whim of the force giving the gift; or, d. In various combinations of these three.4. The purpose of the gift may be to allow man to create life-sustaining forces. [in this "cycle," he creates only death; interesting-- death from death (bones).]5. Its disappearance (after weapon is made) -- Reasons: a. It is taken away in punishment for misuse of knowledge; or, b. It is no longer sought -- apes (men) consider themselves masters now and try to continue on their own energies after the initialimpulse. Maybe the monolith is always present, but is invisible to those who don't wish to see it or to whom it does not wish to bevisible; or, c. It is taken away by the force that gave it, to prevent mortal understanding of everything. C. Its second appearance (on Moon). 1. Reasons for appearance: a. Man is subconsciously seeking it again; or, b. It is needed to remind him of his insignificance; or, c. It is given as a new opportunity to create a meaningfulexistence for humanity. 2. Men on Moon touch monolith in the same way that the apes did -- this indicates no basic change in man's nature. Then, after touchingit, they have the audacity to try to take photo -- still conceited, still lacking in understanding of the gift. 3. From Moon, there is a strong magnetic field directed toward Jupiter (this is where man will go next). This indicates that man willstill fail and will need monolith again when he reaches the next stage of exploration. Monolith is always beyond human scope -- man is stillreaching at death. 4. It is ironic that men on Moon believe that the monolith was made by a more advanced civilization. This to them is the ultimate -- theycan't comprehend that anything could be above the mortal level.D. The monolith and infinity. 1. After HAL is made, man shows that once again he has refused, through ignorance and conceit, to take advantage of the chance toobtain superhuman intelligence. Maybe the system is slowing down and it is impossible for man to progress any further on his own energies. 2. Now he is given another chance -- the monolith shows him infinity, perfect knowledge, and the beginning of the universe, but hecan't comprehend it. Reasons for his being shown all this: a. It may be truly another chance for man; or, b. It may already be determined that he must die [maybe all people are shown perfect knowledge at death]; or, c. Maybe perfect knowledge (represented by monolith) is always present, but our understanding of it will always be imperfect.II. HALA. He is evil, but only because he reflects human nature.B. His uneasiness about the mission implies that even the highest development of human intelligence is imperfect in ability tounderstand.C. Man, trying to progress independently of divine aid, attempts,either consciously or unconsciously, to create life, in the form ofHAL. This is not allowed. Man is reaching, or is being forced to reach, a limit in his ability to progress further.D. Reasons for HAL's failure: 1. Eternal human error once again in evidence; or, 2. This may be a divine punishment; or, 3. God will not allow man to become subordinate to his own foolishcreations.E. The fact that man can overcome HAL's evil is optimistic; however, to do this he must destroy HAL, who is nearly a living being -- again, thetheme of death, futility. [This and triviality are shown in HAL's "song."]III. The room (at end) death. A. It is elegant, maybe to show man's cultural achievements, but it is sterile and silent -- nothing has meaning without the spirit of themonolith.This is man's universe, that with which he is supposedly familiar, but even this is hostile to him.B. Room could represent: 1. All that man can comprehend (finite) or infinity. Even in this limited scope, he is confused; or, 2. Man's cultural history, as men remember their past before they die; or, 3. The trivia for which he relinquished the monolith (then at death he realizes his need for it); or, 4. A reminder of man's failure to draw on past -- it could contain more wisdom than the present. [Monkeys responded to the monolith betterthan modern man -- race is slowly degenerating.]C. In this room, man must die, because: 1. He has reached his limit; or, 2. He has failed too much; or, 3. He has been shown infinity.D. Question: Is his death (following degeneration) inevitable after being shown all knowledge, or is this experience still another chanceto improve? Then, when man returns to trivia, perhaps this is the breaking point, the end of his opportunities.E. Maybe he knows what is happening to him but is powerless to change it. The changes in the man may be a vision shown to him as punishment, or they may merely represent the various stages in the life of one man or of all men.IV. The themesA. Animalism and human failure 1. Throughout picture, there is constant eating, made to appear revolting; also, exercising, wrestling. 2. At end, goblet is broken. This may imply that man's failures will continue forever. 3. Animal nature and conceit remain the same throughout. Will there never be any true progress? The monolith is always shown with sunriseand crescent. When first seen, this is a sign of hope, of a beginning; but the sun is never any higher except when man is shown infinity. Thislast fact may symbolize hope that, despite all his past failures, man will ultimately rise above animalism; or it may merely represent theperfect knowledge he cannot comprehend. 4. There is a delicate balance between the animal and divine nature in man. We will never be permitted to go beyond a certain point (asindividuals and as a race).B. Futility 1. It is shown: a. In the rescue and subsequent release of Frank (after the struggle to catch him); b. In the meaningless talk -- "People talking without speaking." 2. Is all that we do in vain? Each person certainly dies without attaining all understanding. Will our race (history) also terminate andbegin again, continually, with no progress ever made?C. Whether the movie is terribly pessimistic or optimistic depends on the answer to the question, "Does the man at the end represent just our'cycle' or all 'cycles' for eternity?" 1. Pessimistic: Man may never become more "divine" -- all chances for rebirth may be merely a mockery. Irony -- no matter how much manruins his life, chances for improvement are always given. Since he will probably continue ruining his life for eternity, this may be the crueltantalizing by some capricious god. 2. Optimistic: The preceding is impossible to believe if one assumes that there is some life-giving, life-sustaining force in the universethat is the source of absolute good. With this belief, one can hope that someday man will be able to use the divine inspiration offered himto propagate life-sustaining forces. Probably he will never be able to understand more, but he will use his understanding better. The sunrise,fetus, etc., seem to indicate this hope. Also, it seems that, despite human stupidity, new opportunities to become sublime are always given.Someday, perhaps, man will learn that he cannot truly "live" unless he accepts the gift, in the form of the monolith, that demands humansubjugation to a divine force. Then he will not be required to create, and to experience, only death.

Edited May 25, 2013 by Jimmy Kowalski

[kobni zelaya]

Pa naravski. Sjajna analiza devojčice, naročito drugog dela (na Mesecu).

2. Men on Moon touch monolith in the same way that the apes did -- this indicates no basic change in man's nature. Then, after touchingit, they have the audacity to try to take photo -- still conceited, still lacking in understanding of the gift. 3. From Moon, there is a strong magnetic field directed toward Jupiter (this is where man will go next). This indicates that man willstill fail and will need monolith again when he reaches the next stage of exploration. Monolith is always beyond human scope -- man is stillreaching at death.

Ovo je sjajno, ponekad izgleda da i sam film ima sličnu sudbinu kao monolit.

[Jimmy Kowalski]

Bas tako.Inace, zasluge treba pripisati i Kubricku i Clarku. Dvojica genija se udruzili i stvorili remek-delo.

[Turnbull]

Ma, WTMIL! Čuj, Spilberg se voli. Pa da je ovo neka država, ti bi odgovarao za ovakve izjave.

[Lrd]

Objašnjenje čega? Šta ti u Odiseji nije jasno?

U Odiseji mi je jasno, nisu mi jasni ljubav i poštovanje prema to filmu.

[beatakeshi]

Mislim da posle jednog gledanja NIKOM nije jasno o čemu se radi u filmu. Ima neka Klarkova izjava u tom smislu. Meni su se stvari pojasnile tek kad sam pročitao knjigu, koja se poprilično razlikuje od filma, u stvari nadopunjuje ga. Nešto kao Stalker i Piknik kraj puta.

[kobni zelaya]

Ne znam, ja knjigu nisam čitao, tako da ne mogu tu ništa da ti kažem. :)

U Odiseji mi je jasno, nisu mi jasni ljubav i poštovanje prema to filmu.

Jedan čovek, čije mišljenje veoma cenim je svojevremeno ovako klasifikovao umetnost: Postoje četiri nivoa umetnosti (misli na bilo koju vrstu umetnosti) Prvo - diletantizam, gde je umetnik mnogo čega nesvestan, ali ipak uspeva, zahvaljujći ko zna čemu, da napravi nešto što je zanimljivo i umetničko. Drugo - profesionalizam - tu gde zanat omogućava umetniku da se artikulisanije, svesnije i komunikativnije izrazi i ostvari svoje delo. Treće - nivo slobode - gde umetnik, uprkos svom poznavanju zakonitosti i okvira koje mu pruža zanat, uspeva, koristeći pritom taj zanat, da proširi okvire i stvori nova polja slobode. Četvrti nivo i najviši je, po njemu, nivo tajne - nije samo stvar u tome da je tajna kako je nešto napravljeno, već je ta tajna sveprisusutna, kao suština tog dela, tu je, sa koje god strane pogledaš. E, meni je Odiseja taj nivo tajne (pitanje monolita je samo deo te tajne). Tako mogu da objasnim svoje poštovanje prema ovom filmu. :)

[Bakemono]

Jao, kako je to dobar post, kobni! I skroz se slažem sa definicijom. Ja tako doživljavam kafku.

Edited May 25, 2013 by Bakemono

[Bakemono]

Sad mi se gleda Odiseja.

[beatakeshi]

Ne znam, ja knjigu nisam čitao, tako da ne mogu tu ništa da ti kažem. :)Jedan čovek, čije mišljenje veoma cenim je svojevremeno ovako klasifikovao umetnost: Postoje četiri nivoa umetnosti (misli na bilo koju vrstu umetnosti) Prvo - diletantizam, gde je umetnik mnogo čega nesvestan, ali ipak uspeva, zahvaljujći ko zna čemu, da napravi nešto što je zanimljivo i umetničko. Drugo - profesionalizam - tu gde zanat omogućava umetniku da se artikulisanije, svesnije i komunikativnije izrazi i ostvari svoje delo. Treće - nivo slobode - gde umetnik, uprkos svom poznavanju zakonitosti i okvira koje mu pruža zanat, uspeva, koristeći pritom taj zanat, da proširi okvire i stvori nova polja slobode. Četvrti nivo i najviši je, po njemu, nivo tajne - nije samo stvar u tome da je tajna kako je nešto napravljeno, već je ta tajna sveprisusutna, kao suština tog dela, tu je, sa koje god strane pogledaš. E, meni je Odiseja taj nivo tajne (pitanje monolita je samo deo te tajne). Tako mogu da objasnim svoje poštovanje prema ovom filmu. :)

Ko je 1 čovek? (Lep post) Edited May 25, 2013 by beatakeshi

[kobni zelaya]

Jedan moj profesor, pre mnogo godina.