55 years of the 2001: A Space Odyssey

On April 2, 1968, Stanley Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey" premiered at the Uptown Theater in the US capital. According to eyewitnesses, about 250 people could not watch the film to the end and left the auditorium before the end of the session. (To complete the picture, it should probably be added that the capacity of this cinema at that time was 1120 seats. Later, the premieres of "Star Wars", "Jurassic Park", "Apocalypse Now" and others were held in this cinema.)

In early 1964, Stanley Kubrick released his seventh full-length feature film "Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb". All of these seven films belonged to different genres. But among the genres to which these pictures belonged, there was no science fiction. More precisely, in the movie "Dr. Strangelove ..." there were some elements of sci-fi, but nothing more. Therefore, while still working on "Dr. Strangelove ..." Kubrick decided that his next film would be purely fantastic. Naturally, the question arose of finding literary material for the future film.

At that time, one of the pillars of science fiction literature was the British writer Arthur C. Clarke, who lived in Ceylon. It was to him in 1963 that Stanley Kubrick sent his telegram with an offer of cooperation in the creation of a science fiction film. Clarke accepted Kubrick's offer with great enthusiasm. On April 22, 1964, Kubrick and Clark first met in New York. The writer prepared six of his stories for this meeting, which, in his opinion, could form the basis of the script for the future film. Kubrick chose the short story "Sentinel of Eternity", which was written in 1948 and published in 1951. After that, a joint work on the creation of the script began, which lasted more than two years and led to the creation of not only a script, but also a novel. Subsequently, Arthur Clarke said in this regard that it is completely wrong to believe, as is often done, that the film "2001: A Space Odyssey" is based on his story "Sentinel of Eternity", since the story and the film are related to each other like an acorn and an oak tree.

In the process of working on the script, the co-authors shoveled mountains of scientific literature, studied all, probably, conceivable and accessible materials related to extraterrestrial life forms, as well as the achievements of scientific and technological progress, including weapons.

The film was shot in the UK from December 1965 to September 1967, then, until March 1968, Kubrick carried out the editing of the picture. Stanley Kubrick was determined to make every frame with effects extremely realistic, which was practically not achieved in previous sci-fi films by other directors. The creation of the film cost $ 10.5 million (approximately $ 94 million today), of which $ 6.5 million was for special effects.

Shortly before the official opening date, Stanley Kubrick arranged a screening of the film for a limited number of people, mostly film critics, but quickly regretted it. The feedback from the participants in this show was mostly unfavorable or, at best, indifferent, such as: "A monumentally unimaginative movie"- Harpers; "Space Odyssey fails most gloriously"- Newsday; and "Big, Beautiful but plodding scifi epic. Superb photography major asset to confusing, long-unfolding plot."- Variety. The film reviewer of the influential The New York Times Renata Adler spoke about the film like this:

"The movie is so completely absorbed in its own problems, its use of color and space, its fanatical devotion to science-fiction detail, that its is somewhere between hypnotic and immensely boring. (With intermission, it is three hours long.)"

Perhaps the critics' assessments influenced the opinions of moviegoers, and in the first weeks of the rental, the picture showed very weak results. So weak that MGM planned to withdraw it from theaters, but several theater owners persuaded them to continue showing the film. These theater owners noticed that the film was popular with young males and continued showing the film for this category of moviegoers. However, the film finished its first year of release with a loss of $800,000.

In 1969, Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey received 4 Academy Award nominations. However, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences awarded Kubrick's film only one award - Best Effects, Special Visual Effects. In the Best Picture nomination "2001: A Space Odyssey" did not participate at all, and in another important nomination - Best Director - preference was given to Carol Reed for directing the film "Oliver!". The company of losers for Stanley Kubrick formed Franco Zeffirelli ("Romeo and Juliet"), Anthony Harvey ("The Lion in Winter") and Gillo Pontecorvo ("Battle of Algiers").

The festival fate of the film turned out a little better at European film forums. The film received 5 nominations from the British Film Academy, of which it received the BAFTA Award in three (albeit technical). In the important category of Best Film, British film academies gave preference to Mike Nichols' film "The Graduate". The Italian Film Academy awarded its David di Donatello Award to Stanley Kubrick as the Best Producer. In July 1969, Stanley Kubrick's film "2001: A Space Odyssey" participated in the Moscow International Film Festival. The jury of the film festival, chaired by Sergey Gerasimov, awarded the film a prize for the use of technical means. The main award - the Grand Prize - was then decided not to be awarded, and three films were awarded the Gold Prize: the Cuban "Lucia" by Umberto Solas, the Italian "Serafino" by Pietro Germi and the Soviet "We'll Live till Monday" by Stanislav Rostotsky.

As time passed, the attitude towards Kubrick's film changed both among moviegoers and film critics. After re-releases of the film in 1971 and 1974, the total box office of the picture exceeded $ 146 million. Among film critics, too, those who enthusiastically appreciated the picture began to prevail. Thus, the guru of American film criticism Roger Ebert devoted two reviews to the film, in 1968 and in 1997. In both, he gave the film the maximum 4 stars in his rating system, included it in his list of "Great Movies". In a review from 1997, he explained his assessment as follows:

"The genius is not in how much Stanley Kubrick does in "2001: A Space Odyssey," but in how little. This is the work of an artist so sublimely confident that he doesn't include a single shot simply to keep our attention. He reduces each scene to its essence, and leaves it on screen long enough for us to contemplate it, to inhabit it in our imaginations. Alone among science-fiction movies, “2001" is not concerned with thrilling us, but with inspiring our awe....To describe that first screening as a disaster would be wrong, for many of those who remained until the end knew they had seen one of the greatest films ever made. But not everyone remained."

Another authoritative American film critic James Berardinelli at the beginning of the 21st century explained the dynamics of film ratings in this way:

"Perhaps it takes the passage of time to gain the perspective to call some films great. Certain movies, despite being ridiculed upon their initial release, have been "re-discovered" years later and labeled as forgotten classics. It's a universal truth that art isn't always immediately recognized as such - this is why so many revered painters, authors, and composers have died in poverty and relative obscurity. Filmmakers face some of the same challenges - in a business climate, courage is the number one characteristic needed by anyone with the goal of fashioning a work that is deliberately thought-provoking but lacking in mass appeal. ...Watching this film demands two qualities that are sadly lacking in all but the most mature and sophisticated audiences: patience and a willingness to ponder the meaning of what's transpiring on screen. 2001 is awe inspiring, but it is most definitely not a "thrill ride." It is art, it is a statement, and it is indisputably a cinematic classic."

One of the most authoritative Russian film critics, Sergei Kudryavtsev, gave the film a maximum 10 points and began his 2006 review with this paragraph:

"The majestic “space odyssey” (the genre is precisely defined already in the title itself) by then only 39-year-old director Stanley Kubrick acquires even more importance over time. No serious fans of cinema have any doubt that this film is not just an outstanding work, but a true milestone both in the science fiction genre and in the history of world cinema. Kubrick's experience is unique in that he was able to cover a considerable number of key problems of human civilization in one tape - from the distant past to the XXI century, which still seemed so fantastic 33 years before its onset. Philosophical, metaphysical, and sometimes mystical searches for Truth, a kind of Supermind, a Higher Power enclosed in a mysterious black monolith, are embodied by the director in the form of a “big cinematic performance", a grand spectacle... an unforgettable “space journey” in time and space."

The reinterpretation of Stanley Kubrick's picture is indicated not only by the laudatory epithets of modern film critics, but also by the ratings put up by moviegoers on IMDB and Kinopoisk. 71% of users rated the film from 8 to 10, and 29% of users rated the film with the highest score - "ten". Taking into account this indicator and the above, the rating of Stanley Kubrick's film "2001: A Space Odyssey" according to FilmGourmand was 8,813, thanks to which it took the 208th Rank in the Golden Thousand.