Re: 2001's gospel message

mortongr@flash.net
Fri, 05 Nov 1999 19:50:05 +0000

At 07:49 AM 11/05/1999 -0400, R. Joel Duff wrote:
>Glenn,
>
>I remember reading a very interesting paper on the movie once that I can't
>put my hands on right now but one thing that I remember is that there was
>great tension between Clark and Kubrick. In fact, Clark wrote the book off
>the screenplay and after the movie was done almost in protest to how
>Kubrick interpreted the film. So reading the book is not necessarily the
>way to interpret the movie since both had different goals. Clark is an
>newage type atheist (if those can go together) and pushes those themes hard
>in his books. Kubrick has always been very much into looking at what makes
>evil and good. Kubrick did at least believe in some sort of higher being
>though was not especially fond of Christianity. I think David has captured
>the message that Kubrick brought to the film that Clark was not happy
>about. Clark, like in all his books (eg. the Rama series) is obsessed with
>the effects of technology on society and our dependence on them. Our
>savior to him is to be released from the binds of technology. I'll try to
>find that paper, it helped me see the movie in a whole new light learning
>about all the squabbles and fights they had over the screenplay that
>ultimately lead them to part ways and Kubrick just ended up doing it his
>way.

Well, it seems that I am outvoted on this one. I must confess I like Paul
Arveson's interpretation.
glenn

Foundation, Fall and Flood
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm

Lots of information on creation/evolution