The
year 2018 marks the 50th anniversary of Stanley Kubrick's ‘2001: A Space
Odyssey’, and that makes total sense for us to continue our exploration of this
modern classic. This time, we will do something special. I will concentrate on
only a single scene in 2001. While that may seem a bit of an excess, it is
justified because that scene in question is widely considered at one of the
most iconic moments in all of cinema, and serves as a testament to Kubrick's
genius. It is a scene signified by both simplicity and complexity, and
thousands of words can be devoted to one’s interpretations of what that
cinematic image means to him. Indeed, the reason why Kubrick's masterpiece was
termed an ‘Odyssey’ was because he intended this cinematic experience as an
exploration, one that even every member of the audience had a place in.
To
remind ourselves where we are coming from, Moon Watcher, an ape-man from the
ancient times, was inspired by the presence of a black monolith, and he
developed the idea of using a bone as a tool. This new found technology was put
to good use when he used it to kill, or bash the brains in, the leader of a
rival tribe of ape-men. The success of this encounter meant that Moon Watcher
and his friends could claim authority to a property - a water hole, and it was
the very first time they felt they were in control of their lives. As Moon
Watcher was finally alone, he gave a gratifying roar and threw the bone up into
the air. Then, cinematic magic emerged. A match cut led the audience to an
image of a space ship of a similar shape. This represents a leap of millions of
years in only 1/24 of a second, which is the duration of a single frame in
cinema.
This
memorable scene is one of the most ambiguous images in Kubrick’s cinema, or
probably in all of cinema. The reason why Kubrick adopted ambiguity rather than
a clear explanation for his masterpiece was because he was trying to illustrate
the complex nature of the many issues regarding humanity. Certain viewers
prefer ‘Yes-or-No’ type of answers all the time, where a binary opposition has
to be established for whatever issue they are concerned with, be it morality,
social structure, or preferences. In reality, most issues we encounter in real
life can be made sense of with multiple perspectives. In fact, contradicting
sides often emerge from the very same issue. Is technology good or bad for us?
Does culture lead us to a better taste? Can we use morality as a metric for
everything? Kubrick wanted contribution from the audience, and demanded them to
give their own answers to these issues.
Kubrick
encouraged the audience to discover self-knowledge through the confrontation of
his many great films. Self-knowledge does not necessarily guarantee reassurance
- we have to face the positive but also the negative sides of our own nature,
even if we often attempt to avoid or deny the latter. It is through the sincere
appreciation of ourselves that would lead to hope for the improvement of our
well-being and the discovery for the meaning of our existences.
It
is significant to note that the editing style of this scene is a match-cut.
Since the development of montage from the American and Soviet filmmakers at the
start of 20th century, many innovative uses of editing have been
employed to generate visual impacts for the audience. The preference of Kubrick
to use a match cut in his most famous cinematic usage served a purpose far more
important than a mere shocking effect. The match cut emphasized the similarity
between the image of the bone and the space craft, not only in terms of
physical appearance but also the underlying concept behind that. The two
images, when placed side-by-side, led to a continuity. That suggested we could
not detach ourselves from our origin. The connection between the bone and the
spacecraft could be seen as a manifestation of the will, an aggressive energy
and drive that motivated humanity throughout history.
On
the surface, this scene shed a positive light, because one should be in awe how
much humanity has done in terms of progress. The bone is visually a homogenous
material, and the spacecraft is composed of numerous components. Through a
first concept and the application of our intellectual faculties, we have been
able to instill complexity to our creations, and the voyage to the outer space
is a testament to humanity’s achievement. This scene can be easily seen as the
most optimistic moment in cinema.
Yet,
the flip side is, it can just be the most pessimistic outlook from Kubrick,
where a demand for contemplation from the audience is evident. He might be
suggesting that we have not made any fundamental changes at all – no matter how
much we have appeared to be evolved or developed throughout such a long span of
time. The pessimism originated indeed from the continuous nature of the match
cut, which, in a symbolic point of view, not only nothing apparent has been
changed, but it also signified that the only thing that has been passing
through time is our nature to survive at all costs, including the use of
violence and aggression to achieve this end. Humanity’s dark side may just be
so intense that it cannot be eliminated. It can only be transformed, from
primitive violence to institutionalized violence. Kubrick was not trying to
pass any moral or misanthropic judgment in this possible interpretation, he was
merely telling the truth about our nature.
As I have already pointed out, many things can be seen in contrasting perspectives. The duality of issues in life often reflects the duality of Man. Violence and aggression are not a side effect of technology and innovation, but the other way round. Kubrick's antihumanist vision showed that violence has always been part of us, the representation of our animalistic origin. Humanity is often at the most creative and inspiring when it comes to violence and destruction. There has not been another form of organism on our planet that has the power or intelligence to cause such fundamental impact to a place they call home.
It
should be ironic to appreciate that, the process of mechanical dehumanization
commenced at the very point when we were enlightened to use technological
artifices to improve the well-being of our species. The consequence of losing
our humanity was not something to lament on, but it was seen as inevitable by
Kubrick. It is the self-knowledge that we can discover by ourselves that will
prove to be more fulfilling that any forms of gratification or false hope
derived from movies that merely aim for profits or easy 2-hour comfort – the
‘Oh, we are getting better and better’ cliché.
As Kubrick has pointed out in an interview, ‘we are born of risen apes, not fallen angels’. An evolutionary and secular point of view is one that will lead us to a constructive understanding of ourselves. Having a realistic view does not entail one to undermine anything great and beautiful about humanity - our imaginations, creativity and courage are among the key reasons why humanity has arrived at such a sophisticated status in the first place. After all, as Kubrick reminded us at the same interview, ‘we are known among the stars by our poems, not our corpses’. A delicate balance has to be struck if we desire to arrive to the knowledge of ourselves, and what we can become.
After
all, how would anymore not wonder with awe the tremendous achievement our
species have done throughout the long passage of time? Kubrick was certainly
among one of these. As Kubrick’s quantum leap ferried the audience from
watching the moon to exploring the moon, we are ready to embark on the second
part of ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’…
by
Ed Law
6/1/2018
Film
Analysis
