This is very good. It looks very accurate to the Alpha control set.
@antifatbastard6 күн бұрын
ehh, not that great
@user-ne9tp9nl9v7 күн бұрын
the president looked like john goodman.
@plasmaarmelundАй бұрын
This is such a compelling CGI exploration! Well done.
@garyclouse7234Ай бұрын
Why did you leave out the segment of the shuttle unmatched to the station rotation? Of course they have to match the roll of the shuttle to the station yet you left that out! Too lazy? Not enough time? Not enough money?
@DanYHKim2Ай бұрын
My parents purchased an LP with the music from the movie. The cover had a very striking painting of the space station with the Pan Am shuttle synchronizing itself to the landing bay. One of the things that I noticed in my many hours of staring at that painting was that there were tiny workers in space suits tethered to the struts and girders of the new wheel under construction. I do not know if they appeared in the movie, but they were part of the vision. When making a CGI of this type, it might be worthwhile to add those little men, as well as the small flashes of welding torches as the unfinished wheel falls into shadow. These kinds of effects can really drive home to scale of that habitat ring.
@DanYHKim2Ай бұрын
On a recent airline flight, I happened to take a glance into the cockpit. There I saw the consoles that were used by the pilots. Unlike the array of mechanical gauges, lights, and switches that made up the controls of an airliner in my teenage years, I saw a much simpler console with an LCD screen . I was struck by the similarity between the screen used in that airliner and the control screen used in the lunar lander scene in 2001. I am old-ish. And every so often I will see or hear or experience something and say to myself "I live in 'the Future'"
@KangoVАй бұрын
Nice to see you kept the country flags on the ships :) Nice attention to detail.
@leddyzee247Ай бұрын
All space travel should be accompanied by this glorious music, lovely to watch, well done
@inmyfreetymeАй бұрын
So very cool. Thanks 4 sharing !! 😃
@kevinmcgovern51102 ай бұрын
Nice work! On occasion, I think it would be cool to update the original film with better effects. But then, you might as well do the same with Gone With The Wind; both films are classics that stand on their own. God forbid some moron with a budget decides to “update” or “reimagine” Kubrick by doing a “more realistic” version of 2001, calling it “2100: (Whatever)”, using AI to follow, say, Clarke’s novelization to the letter, with current knowledge, butchering the work. I saw the film in Cinerama in Chicago back in ‘68 and have never lost the awe.
@user-pi7fl2bf5p3 ай бұрын
Awesome!
@patrickmonteau71856 ай бұрын
Aliens exists !
@ericbarash84967 ай бұрын
The pilot that was a never aired by CBS because it was awkward and not factually correct.
@expatexpat65317 ай бұрын
Very nice and very well-executed homage, but of course nothing beats the original 🙂.
@stevevanzandt67847 ай бұрын
❤
@scifieric8 ай бұрын
That is very nice!
@Humbertusmarius8 ай бұрын
Beautiful work. I liked it more than the original by far.
@cameronpickard74568 ай бұрын
its like jaws 3 in 3d
@berniecasey75928 ай бұрын
Fantastic
@Daddyclive10 ай бұрын
Pity Pan America went out of business.
@jppdfw Жыл бұрын
Fabulous. I've read 2061 and 3001 but always thought the powers behind the monolith would have rescued Frank Poole and could have been another story line, as David Bowman was in 2010.
@provia17 Жыл бұрын
Is this model available for download or purchase?
@aldinelt7214 Жыл бұрын
Sorry, no.
@provia17 Жыл бұрын
@@aldinelt7214 I guess I'll have to build one myself. Thanks.
@AndieBlack13 Жыл бұрын
Playing homage to Kubrick is all fine & dandy, but homage to glaring errors Kubrick did ...you'r just not paying attention here! At timestamp 2:31 , the orientation of the space-station, your spacecraft is approaching the docking port...the station is rotating clockwise, the Earth is relatively motionless. OK?, ...but at timestamp 3:28 ..it is now rotating counter-clockwise WTF?...was nobody paying attention?...whos' fault is this?
@douggraham5082 Жыл бұрын
Well done. You captured the feel of it.
@braddavis4276 Жыл бұрын
I WAS IN 4th GRADE IT WAS 1969 THIS FILM 🎥 WAS SO OPTIMISTIC TO WHAT THE FUTURE WOULD BE LIKE 💯💯💯💯💥👍. PAN AM WAS THE BEST PART FOR ME, I RETIRED FROM DELTA AIRLINES!!!
@julioarce5259 Жыл бұрын
... genial la melodía... Así habló Zaratustra... por lo que me inspira a proponer el siguiente tema para hacer un film de ciencia ficción (a la manera de una saga y como forma de rendir un homenaje póstumo a Stanley Kubrick): ...la especie humana a la fecha de hoy... ha venido descubriendo formas cada vez más sofisticadas de destrucción masiva... primero fue un mazo a partir de un hueso (elemento utilizado en las escenas iniciales del film titulado 2001: Odisea del espacio)... luego fue la lanza... después la flecha... le siguió la pólvora... en seguida la dinamita... y... ya vamos por los senderos de la energía nuclear... capaz de destruir todo el planeta... convertir a éste en otro cinturón de asteroides dentro de nuestro sistema solar... si la especie humana sobrevive a una catástrofe de esta naturaleza... no se detendrá aquí en su inventiva destructiva... descubrirá la tecnología capaz de desintegrar el sistema solar... los planetas de éste, comportándose como bolas de marfil en una mesa de billar... luego la humanidad descubrirá la tecnología capaz de destruir o hacer detonar nuestra propia galaxia... a continuación descubrirá la forma de hacer detonar la constelación y el grupo local al que pertenecemos... y... así... sucesivamente hasta descubrir cómo hacer para detonar todo el Universo... éste nos necesita para poder reiniciar un nuevo big-bang más... la acción de detonar y detonar es el verdadero destino de nuestra especie humana... su verdadera razón de ser... lo llevamos inscrito en nuestros genes... el Universo no puede existir sin nosotros... nuestro destino último como especie... es reiniciarlo... el gran reseteo universal... la gran detonación... el Universo hizo a nuestra especie demasiado inteligente para poder lograr tal propósito... por lo que a nuestra especie le es inevitable escapar a su último destino... sucederá un nuevo big-bang y el Universo tendrá que esperarse nuevamente otros 13.799 millones de años para que aparezca de nuevo la especie humana y ésta vuelva a hacer lo suyo... al final del film aparecerá nuevamente la imagen del mismo simio que vuelve y descubre una vez más... en el continuo del infinito tiempo... cómo utilizar nuevamente un hueso (que hace volar por los aires majestuosamente) como arma de destrucción masiva...
@festeradams3972 Жыл бұрын
I was 13 when it was released. Wish I could have seen it in Cinerama. Leaving the theater, I looked forward to (the then distant) year of 2001, fully expecting to have a "Space Station V" and Lunar Bases. By the early 70's though most of that hope had been abandoned, as all the knowledge and infrastructure had been mothballed or simply thrown away.
@John_Michael2000 Жыл бұрын
I'm not sure what the point of this was.. It re-created the opening sequence of the movie.. So it's nothing new
@chrisst8922 Жыл бұрын
When they made 2001 they'd have never thought that PanAm would go out of business.
@toyguy1956 Жыл бұрын
I use this as my ringtone kzread.info/dash/bejne/aaWixo-hlNDNls4.html
@toyguy1956 Жыл бұрын
Kubrick was so misunderstood all of his films make you think
@novaexpss Жыл бұрын
CGI has destroyed the Cinema and this is a good example
@kenprice1961 Жыл бұрын
Slow, plodding, dull, boring. Worst movie.
@SicilianStealth Жыл бұрын
Growing up I had the model of the Pan Am space shuttle.
@nexpro6985 Жыл бұрын
As someone who worked for Kubrick I think he would have been happy to replace some of the scenes with improved CGI versions. Superior visuals need not distract ftom the story.
@christinebethencourt6197 Жыл бұрын
I just review this movie last week in an old movies theater in Bordeaux. Except this 👌 classic music part , i must say i don’t like the rest of the movie , some scenes are really too long, too much flashy lights and noises …… i really much preferred 2010 with Rod Steiger 👍
@Sjmby95 Жыл бұрын
I can remember the beginning it's the ending that's confusing
@csakamatsu Жыл бұрын
Some scenes of CGI is nice, but overall original practical effects are better. Some scenes is noticeably fail.
@jayhunthuntcreative Жыл бұрын
The original looked better. CGI looks too clean and fake in this case.
@MrPhotodoc Жыл бұрын
The original analog version was pretty popular. Why would the CGI version be any better? Now I know.
@Voodoomaria Жыл бұрын
As a physical effect, completed in the late 1960's this scene was and IS extremely impressive. The effects on that film have held up magnificently. As a CGI project produced 55 years later..... Not so much. This version looks flat, lifeless and plastic. I applaud your ambition, BUT if you are going to take on one of the TRUE classics of cinema, Of science fiction, AND of the physical effects artist's craft, you had better be able to bring a LOT more than this to the table. KEEP TRYING!! WHEN you can bring us something that equals, or surpasses the original then you will hear us all cheer. You're not there YET, but you COULD be.
@u2mister17 Жыл бұрын
I agree with you. I watched the very first showing from the 3rd row balcony on three screens. 13 years old and completely god-smacked. I would pay good money to watch that pristine 70mm film again.
@kitcanyon658 Жыл бұрын
"Pan American". That didn't age well.
@jean-jacquescortes9500 Жыл бұрын
Nice job but the result is too cold and artificial. I prefer the original scene because it looks real using miniatures.
@Vitalytokarenko Жыл бұрын
Original is much better.
@fpcoleman57 Жыл бұрын
That was very good. I noticed that you gave FULL credit to Stanley Kubrick. If his family or copyright holders have any objection to this I would consider them to be crazy. This is nothing but a hugely respectful homage to a genius. Kubrick is among my favourite half dozen film directors of all time.
@CookyMonzta Жыл бұрын
Not long ago, the episodes of the original _Star Trek_ were remastered with CGI and images that were cleaned up. I wonder if MGM will take a chance at remastering _2001._. In 1968, we did not know what the surfaces of Jupiter's largest moons looked like. No telescope on Earth was strong enough. Now we do, and they ought to superimpose the graphics of those surfaces into the film. Damn shame we don't have any of those objects built yet, or a base.
@davetomlinson9063 Жыл бұрын
The original is the superior.
@mrc4910 Жыл бұрын
One of the best ever. Way ahead of its time.
@Papa-fv1rn Жыл бұрын
Good work. I like the way part of the middle "axle" of the space station is rotating faster than the rest, 2:43.
Пікірлер
This is very good. It looks very accurate to the Alpha control set.
ehh, not that great
the president looked like john goodman.
This is such a compelling CGI exploration! Well done.
Why did you leave out the segment of the shuttle unmatched to the station rotation? Of course they have to match the roll of the shuttle to the station yet you left that out! Too lazy? Not enough time? Not enough money?
My parents purchased an LP with the music from the movie. The cover had a very striking painting of the space station with the Pan Am shuttle synchronizing itself to the landing bay. One of the things that I noticed in my many hours of staring at that painting was that there were tiny workers in space suits tethered to the struts and girders of the new wheel under construction. I do not know if they appeared in the movie, but they were part of the vision. When making a CGI of this type, it might be worthwhile to add those little men, as well as the small flashes of welding torches as the unfinished wheel falls into shadow. These kinds of effects can really drive home to scale of that habitat ring.
On a recent airline flight, I happened to take a glance into the cockpit. There I saw the consoles that were used by the pilots. Unlike the array of mechanical gauges, lights, and switches that made up the controls of an airliner in my teenage years, I saw a much simpler console with an LCD screen . I was struck by the similarity between the screen used in that airliner and the control screen used in the lunar lander scene in 2001. I am old-ish. And every so often I will see or hear or experience something and say to myself "I live in 'the Future'"
Nice to see you kept the country flags on the ships :) Nice attention to detail.
All space travel should be accompanied by this glorious music, lovely to watch, well done
So very cool. Thanks 4 sharing !! 😃
Nice work! On occasion, I think it would be cool to update the original film with better effects. But then, you might as well do the same with Gone With The Wind; both films are classics that stand on their own. God forbid some moron with a budget decides to “update” or “reimagine” Kubrick by doing a “more realistic” version of 2001, calling it “2100: (Whatever)”, using AI to follow, say, Clarke’s novelization to the letter, with current knowledge, butchering the work. I saw the film in Cinerama in Chicago back in ‘68 and have never lost the awe.
Awesome!
Aliens exists !
The pilot that was a never aired by CBS because it was awkward and not factually correct.
Very nice and very well-executed homage, but of course nothing beats the original 🙂.
❤
That is very nice!
Beautiful work. I liked it more than the original by far.
its like jaws 3 in 3d
Fantastic
Pity Pan America went out of business.
Fabulous. I've read 2061 and 3001 but always thought the powers behind the monolith would have rescued Frank Poole and could have been another story line, as David Bowman was in 2010.
Is this model available for download or purchase?
Sorry, no.
@@aldinelt7214 I guess I'll have to build one myself. Thanks.
Playing homage to Kubrick is all fine & dandy, but homage to glaring errors Kubrick did ...you'r just not paying attention here! At timestamp 2:31 , the orientation of the space-station, your spacecraft is approaching the docking port...the station is rotating clockwise, the Earth is relatively motionless. OK?, ...but at timestamp 3:28 ..it is now rotating counter-clockwise WTF?...was nobody paying attention?...whos' fault is this?
Well done. You captured the feel of it.
I WAS IN 4th GRADE IT WAS 1969 THIS FILM 🎥 WAS SO OPTIMISTIC TO WHAT THE FUTURE WOULD BE LIKE 💯💯💯💯💥👍. PAN AM WAS THE BEST PART FOR ME, I RETIRED FROM DELTA AIRLINES!!!
... genial la melodía... Así habló Zaratustra... por lo que me inspira a proponer el siguiente tema para hacer un film de ciencia ficción (a la manera de una saga y como forma de rendir un homenaje póstumo a Stanley Kubrick): ...la especie humana a la fecha de hoy... ha venido descubriendo formas cada vez más sofisticadas de destrucción masiva... primero fue un mazo a partir de un hueso (elemento utilizado en las escenas iniciales del film titulado 2001: Odisea del espacio)... luego fue la lanza... después la flecha... le siguió la pólvora... en seguida la dinamita... y... ya vamos por los senderos de la energía nuclear... capaz de destruir todo el planeta... convertir a éste en otro cinturón de asteroides dentro de nuestro sistema solar... si la especie humana sobrevive a una catástrofe de esta naturaleza... no se detendrá aquí en su inventiva destructiva... descubrirá la tecnología capaz de desintegrar el sistema solar... los planetas de éste, comportándose como bolas de marfil en una mesa de billar... luego la humanidad descubrirá la tecnología capaz de destruir o hacer detonar nuestra propia galaxia... a continuación descubrirá la forma de hacer detonar la constelación y el grupo local al que pertenecemos... y... así... sucesivamente hasta descubrir cómo hacer para detonar todo el Universo... éste nos necesita para poder reiniciar un nuevo big-bang más... la acción de detonar y detonar es el verdadero destino de nuestra especie humana... su verdadera razón de ser... lo llevamos inscrito en nuestros genes... el Universo no puede existir sin nosotros... nuestro destino último como especie... es reiniciarlo... el gran reseteo universal... la gran detonación... el Universo hizo a nuestra especie demasiado inteligente para poder lograr tal propósito... por lo que a nuestra especie le es inevitable escapar a su último destino... sucederá un nuevo big-bang y el Universo tendrá que esperarse nuevamente otros 13.799 millones de años para que aparezca de nuevo la especie humana y ésta vuelva a hacer lo suyo... al final del film aparecerá nuevamente la imagen del mismo simio que vuelve y descubre una vez más... en el continuo del infinito tiempo... cómo utilizar nuevamente un hueso (que hace volar por los aires majestuosamente) como arma de destrucción masiva...
I was 13 when it was released. Wish I could have seen it in Cinerama. Leaving the theater, I looked forward to (the then distant) year of 2001, fully expecting to have a "Space Station V" and Lunar Bases. By the early 70's though most of that hope had been abandoned, as all the knowledge and infrastructure had been mothballed or simply thrown away.
I'm not sure what the point of this was.. It re-created the opening sequence of the movie.. So it's nothing new
When they made 2001 they'd have never thought that PanAm would go out of business.
I use this as my ringtone kzread.info/dash/bejne/aaWixo-hlNDNls4.html
Kubrick was so misunderstood all of his films make you think
CGI has destroyed the Cinema and this is a good example
Slow, plodding, dull, boring. Worst movie.
Growing up I had the model of the Pan Am space shuttle.
As someone who worked for Kubrick I think he would have been happy to replace some of the scenes with improved CGI versions. Superior visuals need not distract ftom the story.
I just review this movie last week in an old movies theater in Bordeaux. Except this 👌 classic music part , i must say i don’t like the rest of the movie , some scenes are really too long, too much flashy lights and noises …… i really much preferred 2010 with Rod Steiger 👍
I can remember the beginning it's the ending that's confusing
Some scenes of CGI is nice, but overall original practical effects are better. Some scenes is noticeably fail.
The original looked better. CGI looks too clean and fake in this case.
The original analog version was pretty popular. Why would the CGI version be any better? Now I know.
As a physical effect, completed in the late 1960's this scene was and IS extremely impressive. The effects on that film have held up magnificently. As a CGI project produced 55 years later..... Not so much. This version looks flat, lifeless and plastic. I applaud your ambition, BUT if you are going to take on one of the TRUE classics of cinema, Of science fiction, AND of the physical effects artist's craft, you had better be able to bring a LOT more than this to the table. KEEP TRYING!! WHEN you can bring us something that equals, or surpasses the original then you will hear us all cheer. You're not there YET, but you COULD be.
I agree with you. I watched the very first showing from the 3rd row balcony on three screens. 13 years old and completely god-smacked. I would pay good money to watch that pristine 70mm film again.
"Pan American". That didn't age well.
Nice job but the result is too cold and artificial. I prefer the original scene because it looks real using miniatures.
Original is much better.
That was very good. I noticed that you gave FULL credit to Stanley Kubrick. If his family or copyright holders have any objection to this I would consider them to be crazy. This is nothing but a hugely respectful homage to a genius. Kubrick is among my favourite half dozen film directors of all time.
Not long ago, the episodes of the original _Star Trek_ were remastered with CGI and images that were cleaned up. I wonder if MGM will take a chance at remastering _2001._. In 1968, we did not know what the surfaces of Jupiter's largest moons looked like. No telescope on Earth was strong enough. Now we do, and they ought to superimpose the graphics of those surfaces into the film. Damn shame we don't have any of those objects built yet, or a base.
The original is the superior.
One of the best ever. Way ahead of its time.
Good work. I like the way part of the middle "axle" of the space station is rotating faster than the rest, 2:43.