Flare Sci-fi Forums
Flare Sci-Fi Forums Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Flare Sci-Fi Forums » Sci-Fi » General Sci-Fi » 1999: The Odyssey before the Odyssey

   
Author Topic: 1999: The Odyssey before the Odyssey
The359
The bitch is back
Member # 37

 - posted      Profile for The359     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, after finally buying 2001: A Space Odyssey, the novel, while in Chicago on Friday, I just finished the book this afternoon. Besides the fact that I am more confused when I was when I watched the movie, I also would like to point out how, since the year is now 1999, and Section II of the novel takes place in 1999, just how close Arthur C. Clarke actually was to guessing at this year. Also, some stuff that was way off too

1) Video Phones: Though everyone has one in the movie/novel, they still exist now

2) Space Planes: Though they were commercial in the movie/novel, they still exist today, in the form of the space shuttle.

3) Computer's with voice recognition: Though HAL could actually recognize exactly what you said, we still have computers today that respond to sound.

4) Life on other planets: Though 2001's lifeform, The Monolith (TMA-1), was much more profound, we still have a glimpse of life from Mars, in the form of asteroid ALH84001

5) Internationally owned space stations: Though ours is still under construction and looks nothing like the movie/novel's, 2001's Space Station One was built to cater to the needs of Americans, Russians, Chinese, French, German, and Spanish.

6) China's Nuclear Capability: In the novel, China is said to be selling aged 50 nuclear warheads for $200,000, and some believed that China was doing this for money and for the fact that China might have built a super weapon. Well, though China itself isn't technically selling nukes, there is still a black market for them.

Now, some major differences:
1) Colonies: First off, we don't have Clavius Base. Colonization of the moon is still a long way off. We also do not have colonies on Mars either.

2) Fusion powered space ships: USS Discovery is powered by massive nuclear reactors. Even though we have some satellites with nuclear power, we don't have any real space craft with nuclear capabilty

3) HAL 9000: Though our computers are advancing at an astronomical rate, we still don't have a Heuristically programmed ALgorithmically Programmed (that is where the letters HAL actually came from, NOT IBM) 9000 series computer.

4) Cryostasis: The only logical way to get humans to other planets would by cryologically freezing them. Though we are still tinkering with the idea now adays, it's still years off.

5) Pan Am: Well, obviously Pan Am ain't around anymore

6) U.S.S.R.: Unfortunatly, the Cold War is over, and there is no more 'Russian Bloc'. Unfortunatly, this really destroys a lot of the plot behind 2010: Odyssey 2.

7) Moons of Saturn: As you may know, the novel version of 2001 has USS Discovery going to Saturn instead of Jupiter, which also screws up 2010 again! Anyway, Clarke's list of moons of Saturn is a bit short. The current list has around 18 moons, though Clarke claimed there were roughly only 10 or so

8) Construction of USS Discovery: USS Discovery was supposed to be built in space, though right now, it would be extremely tough to build an object of that size in space, especially with how slow it takes the US Space Shuttles to ferry pre-built parts up to orbit.

9) Satellites: The number of extraterrestrial satellites sent by Earth is mugh larger then the number sent out in reality. One satellite includes a listening post, Deep Space Monitor 79, a space-borne version of SETI, a Mars orbiter called M 15, and Artifical Comet 5, which has an orbit that goes beyond Pluto (eek!)

Anyone else have anything to add to this?

------------------
"The things hollow--it goes on forever--and--oh my God!--it's full of stars!" -David Bowman's last transmission back to Earth, 2001: A Space Odyssey

[This message has been edited by The359 (edited November 09, 1999).]


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
The First One
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed
Member # 35

 - posted      Profile for The First One         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, there's a lot of stuff that's in the book that isn't in the film. Plus all the extra stuff in The Lost Worlds of 2001. Basically, the book was a mess, a hodge-podge of bits from various drafts which reflects the random way Clarke and Kubrick went about developing the story.

I mean, 2010: Odyssey 2 is actually a sequel of the film, not the book (much as Alistair MacLean did with Force 10 From Navarone); there isn't a great deal of Cold War tension in the book of 2010, it was really boosted for the film version. 2061: Odyssey 3 strayed even further, and by 3001: The Final Odyssey it bears no relation whatsoever! The events of 2001 don't even happen in 2001! That, plus the fact that he was so in love with his descriptions of life on Jupiter and Europa that he recycled them extensively throughout the last two installments. . .

2001 has long been my favourite film, but I've always stopped short of choosing the book as a favourite, even if I do own two copies of it (including a First Edition).


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
Montgomery
Reigning Supreme
Member # 23

 - posted      Profile for Montgomery     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I've read all the sequels, and must say I felt they got lighter and more "speedily-written" as time went by.

*shrug*

------------------
"You will be swept away....
You, your men, your ship, your WORLDS!"



Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
Lt. Tom
Ex-Member


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
359: The movie originally had Discovery going to Saturn, but there was some problem regarding the rings and the VFX. TFO's right, the other three books are sequels to the movie, and Clarke says so in the preface to [u]2010: Odyssey Two[/u].

IMHO, Clarke always has great ideas, but his writing is a little thin. While I loved 2001 and Rendezvous with Rama, I thought the sequels got progressively sillier as they went along.


IP: Logged
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


© 1999-2024 Charles Capps

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3