tag:theconversation.com,2011:/ca-fr/topics/stanley-kubrick-50979/articlesStanley Kubrick – La Conversation2024-03-04T13:41:28Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2239332024-03-04T13:41:28Z2024-03-04T13:41:28ZStanley Kubrick redefined: recent research challenges myths to reveal the man behind the legend<p>Even 25 years after his death, Stanley Kubrick remains one of the most widely known directors of the 20th century. Many of the 13 films he made – including <a href="https://theconversation.com/2001-a-space-odyssey-still-leaves-an-indelible-mark-on-our-culture-55-years-on-209152">2001: A Space Odyssey</a> (1968), A Clockwork Orange (1971) and <a href="https://theconversation.com/kafka-is-the-real-ghost-of-kubricks-the-shining-41853">The Shining</a> (1980) – are still revered today and remembered as some of the best movies ever produced. </p>
<p>To coincide with the anniversary of his death on March 7 1999, I have co-authored the first full-length <a href="https://www.faber.co.uk/product/9780571370368-kubrick/">biography of Kubrick</a> in more than two decades. Based on the latest <a href="https://muse.jhu.edu/article/898140">research</a> into Kubrick, access to his <a href="https://www.arts.ac.uk/students/library-services/special-collections-and-archives/archives-and-special-collections-centre/the-stanley-kubrick-archive">archive</a> at the University of Arts London, other repositories around the world, family members, cast and creatives, we have delved into his life in detail that few others have achieved.</p>
<h2>Shy but not reclusive</h2>
<p>During his life Kubrick was famously shy with the media, and frequently <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2010/04/kubrick-199908">interpreted</a> as reclusive. He granted very few interviews, and only when he had a film to publicise. He learned early on that he was not good at promoting his films personally. In the few interviews with Kubrick that survive, he comes across as nervous and ill at ease. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/54hrLTpsO5g?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Kubrick was so shy and protective of his private life that few people recognised him publicly. Though born and brought up in New York, he settled in England in the 1960s and remained there. He could wander into Rymans in St Albans and buy stationery (he loved paper, pens and the like) or get a new pair of spectacles and no one would recognise him. It helped that he often used his brother-in-law’s name when doing so. </p>
<p>In fact, Kubrick was such an unfamiliar figure that an <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/1999/mar/14/andrewanthony">imposter</a> went around London’s clubs and bars in the early 1990s pretending to be him. The imposter was only found out when Kubrick started receiving strange phone calls from spurned lovers and bars with huge unpaid drinks tabs. </p>
<h2>Kubrick archive</h2>
<p>His archive only opened in 2007, but it provides an insight into this extremely private director’s world as never before. Kubrick was a hoarder and held on to the miscellany and detritus of his personal and professional worlds. This included high school yearbooks, photographs he took for Look magazine, receipts, bills, invoices, as well as the voluminous amount of material a film production (especially a Kubrick production) generated.</p>
<p>Through studying this archival material, combined with our new interviews, we learned about the human being behind the mythology. Kubrick was a film director but he was also a son, brother, husband, father and friend. </p>
<p>He liked to entertain, chat, make jokes and cook. He loved making American-style fast food and huge sandwiches, often using a microwave as he was a lover of gadgets, adopting new technology as soon as it became available. This was as true of his private life (where he used car phones, pagers and computers) as his working life where he was an early adopter of Steadicam cameras and the Avid editing system. </p>
<p>He had a fear of flying, but it was based on his own knowledge as a trained pilot and frequent monitoring of radio traffic control. It’s not true that he never went over 30mph in a car, as has been <a href="http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/faq/index3.html">claimed</a>. Rather, he loved cars – fast German ones in particular – but frequently crashed them.</p>
<h2>Kubrick at work</h2>
<p>We uncovered much about Kubrick’s working practices too. Kubrick was a master of the insurance claim. He never hesitated to file one following an accident or fire on set. Not only did this help him to recoup his budget but it also gave him precious time to regroup and think about his options. </p>
<p>We also discovered how Kubrick had to beg, borrow and virtually steal to get most of his projects greenlit. It wasn’t until he signed with Warner Brothers in the 1970s – from A Clockwork Orange onwards – that he had a permanent financial backer. But even then he wasn’t guaranteed funding if the project wasn’t right. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A black and white close up of Stanley Kubrick's face." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/577010/original/file-20240221-22-d3kke5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C1789%2C1078&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/577010/original/file-20240221-22-d3kke5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=362&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/577010/original/file-20240221-22-d3kke5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=362&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/577010/original/file-20240221-22-d3kke5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=362&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/577010/original/file-20240221-22-d3kke5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=454&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/577010/original/file-20240221-22-d3kke5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=454&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/577010/original/file-20240221-22-d3kke5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=454&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Kubrick was famously shy in public.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Stanley_Kubrick_in_Dr._Strangelove_Trailer_(1).jpg">Mayimbú/Wikimedia</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>And those projects included the famously never made <a href="https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20190808-was-napoleon-the-greatest-film-never-made">biopic of Napoleon</a> as the time wasn’t right, or his never-to-be-made Holocaust film, <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/culture/richard-brody/archive-fever-stanley-kubrick-and-the-aryan-papers">Aryan Papers</a>, which lacked a big star and came too close on the heels of Steven Spielberg’s Schindler’s List. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/2001-a-space-odyssey-still-leaves-an-indelible-mark-on-our-culture-55-years-on-209152">2001: A Space Odyssey still leaves an indelible mark on our culture 55 years on</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>It is also tempting to wonder what would have happened had he made the film <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/jul/15/stanley-kubrick-lost-screenplay-burning-secret-found">Burning Secret</a> in 1956, with MGM studios, with whom he had signed a contract. Would he have become another studio stooge or been fired for being too much of a maverick? What would have been the implications for his career?</p>
<p>While we can only imagine how those projects would have turned out, what remains is an extraordinary body of work that includes thousands of photographs, three documentaries and 13 feature films. Stanley Kubrick may have shunned the limelight, but his films have had a profound influence on the movie and television industries, as well as a lasting impact on popular and political culture.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/223933/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nathan Abrams receives and has previously received external funding, including charity and research council grants.</span></em></p>25 years after the death of the legendary director, a new book offers fresh insights into Stanley Kubrick’s personal and professional life.Nathan Abrams, Professor of Film Studies, Bangor UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2091522023-07-10T15:54:25Z2023-07-10T15:54:25Z2001: A Space Odyssey still leaves an indelible mark on our culture 55 years on<p>2001: A Space Odyssey is a landmark film in the history of cinema. It is a work of extraordinary imagination that has transcended film history to become something of a cultural marker. And since 1968, it has penetrated the psyche of not only other filmmakers but society in general. </p>
<p>It is not an exaggeration to say that 2001 single-handedly reinvented the science fiction genre. The visuals, music and themes of 2001 left an inedible mark on subsequent science fiction that is still evident today. </p>
<p>When <a href="https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Kubrick/Robert-P-Kolker/9781639366248">Stanley Kubrick</a> began work on 2001 in the mid-1960s, he was told by studio executive Lew Wasserman: “Kid, you don’t spend over a million dollars on science fiction movies. You just don’t do that.” </p>
<p>By that point, the golden age of science fiction film had run its course. During its heyday, there was a considerable variety of content within the overarching genre. There had been serious attempts to foretell space travel. Destination Moon, directed by Irving Pichel and produced by George Pal in 1950, and, in mid-century, Byron Haskin’s Conquest of Space both fantasised space travel and, in Haskin’s film, a space station, which Kubrick would elaborate on in 2001. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/oR_e9y-bka0?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">The trailer for 2001: A Space Odyssey.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Most 1950s science fiction films, though, were cheap B-movie fare and looked it. They involved alien invasions with an ideological and allegorical subtext. They were cultural, cinematic imaginations of the danger of communism, which in the overheated political atmosphere of the time was seen as an imminent threat to the American way of life. </p>
<p>The aliens in most science fiction films were out simply to destroy or take over humanity; they were expressions, to use the title of a Susan Sontag essay, of “<a href="https://americanfuturesiup.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/sontag-the-imagination-of-disaster.pdf">the imagination of disaster</a>”. There were some exceptions, including Byron Haskin’s film version of The War of the Worlds and Robert Wise’s The Day the Earth Stood Still. </p>
<p>By 1968, then, as the lights went down, very few people knew what was about to transpire and they certainly were not prepared for what did. The film opened in near darkness as the strains of Thus Spake Zarathustra by Richard Strauss were heard. The cinema was dazzled into light, as if Kubrick had <a href="https://www.rutgersuniversitypress.org/stanley-kubrick/9780813587110">remade Genesis</a>. </p>
<p>The subsequent 160 or so minutes (the length of his original cut before he edited 19 minutes out of it) took the viewer on what was marketed as “the ultimate trip”. Kubrick had excised almost every element of explanation leaving an elusive, ambiguous and thoroughly unclear film. His decisions contributed to long silent scenes, offered without elucidation. It contributed to the film’s almost immediate critical failure but its ultimate success. It was practically a silent movie.</p>
<p>2001 was an experiment in film form and content. It exploded the conventional narrative form, restructuring the conventions of the three-act drama. The narrative was linear, but radically, spanning aeons and ending in a timeless realm, all without a conventional movie score. Kubrick used 19th-century and modernist music, such as Strauss, György Ligeti and Aram Khachaturian.</p>
<h2>Vietnam</h2>
<p>The movie was made during a tumultuous period of American history, which it seemingly ignored. The war in Vietnam was already a highly divisive issue and was spiralling into a crisis. The <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/Tet-Offensive">Tet offensive</a>, which began on January 31 1968, had claimed tens of thousands of lives. As US involvement in Vietnam escalated, domestic unrest and violence at home intensified. </p>
<p>Increasingly, young Americans expected their artists to address the chaos that roared around them. But in exploring the origins of humanity’s propensity for violence and its future destiny, 2001 dealt with the big questions and ones that were burning at the time of its release. They fuelled what Variety magazine called the “coffee cup debate” over “what the film means”, which is still ongoing today. </p>
<p>The design of the film has touched many other films. Silent Running by Douglas Trumbull (who worked on 2001’s special effects) owes the most obvious debt but Star Wars would be also unthinkable without it. Popular culture is full of imagery from the film. The <a href="https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/stanley-kubrick-2001-a-space-odyssey-music/">music</a> Kubrick used in the film, especially Strauss’s The Blue Danube, is now considered <a href="https://theweek.com/articles/702734/planetarium-brief-history-space-music">“space music”</a>. </p>
<p>Images from the movie have appeared <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfK9pEQZyy0">in iPhone adverts</a>, in The Simpsons and even the trailer for the new <a href="https://metro.co.uk/2022/12/16/trailer-for-greta-gerwigs-barbie-spoofs-classic-film-in-best-way-17951854/">Barbie movie</a>. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8zIf0XvoL9Y?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">2001: A Space Odyssey’s influence on this Barbie movie trailer couldn’t be more obvious.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The warnings of the danger of technology embodied in the film’s murderous supercomputer HAL-9000 can be felt in the “tech noir” films of the late 1970s and 1980s, such as Westworld, <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-alien-mutated-from-a-sci-fi-horror-film-into-a-multimedia-universe-204567">Alien</a>, Blade Runner and Terminator. </p>
<p>HAL’s single red eye can be seen in the children’s series, Q Pootle 5, and Pixar’s animated feature, Wall-E. HAL has become shorthand for the untrammelled march of artificial intelligence (AI).</p>
<p>In the age of ChatGPT and other AI, the metaphor of Kubrick’s computer is <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/22/movies/ai-movies-microsoft-bing-robots.html">frequently evoked</a>. But why when there have been so many other images such as Frankenstein, Prometheus, terminators and other murderous cyborgs? Because there is something so uncanny and human about HAL who was deliberately designed to be more <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01439685.2017.1342328?journalCode=chjf20">empathic and human than the people in the film</a>. </p>
<p>In making 2001, Stanley Kubrick created a cultural phenomenon that continues to speak to us eloquently today.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/209152/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nathan Abrams receives funding from charities and research councils. </span></em></p>If you haven’t seen Stanley Kubrick’s 1968 sci-fi classic, then it’s likely you will have seen other films influenced by it.Nathan Abrams, Professor of Film Studies, Bangor UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1954372022-12-02T02:26:46Z2022-12-02T02:26:46ZThe ‘greatest film of all time’: Chantal Akerman’s win shows a generational shift is taking place among critics and filmmakers<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/498568/original/file-20221201-6380-swpnv5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=9%2C4%2C1588%2C893&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">IMDB</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073198/">Jeanne Dielman, 23, quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles</a> – Chantal Akerman’s 1975 hypnotic study of a mother performing domestic chores in microscopic detail – has just been crowned the “greatest film of all time” in Sight and Sound’s prestigious poll.</p>
<p>It is only the fourth film to have topped the list since polling began, and the first directed by a woman.</p>
<p>The full list of 100 films was <a href="https://www.bfi.org.uk/sight-and-sound/greatest-films-all-time">published today</a>, with the top ten:</p>
<ol>
<li>Jeanne Dielman, 23, quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles (Chantal Akerman, 1975)</li>
<li>Vertigo (Alfred Hitchcock, 1958)</li>
<li>Citizen Kane (Orson Welles, 1941)</li>
<li>Tokyo Story (Yasujiro Ozu, 1953)</li>
<li>In the Mood for Love (Wong Kar-wai, 2000)</li>
<li>2001: A Space Odyssey (Stanley Kubrick, 1968)</li>
<li>Beau Travail (Claire Denis, 1999)</li>
<li>Mulholland Drive (David Lynch, 2001)</li>
<li>Man with a Movie Camera (Dziga Vertov, 1929)</li>
<li>Singin’ in the Rain (Stanley Donen and Gene Kelly, 1952)</li>
</ol>
<p>If you are looking for a crash-course in film history, this is not a bad place to start.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gXG4PG55q_Y?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>How did we get here?</h2>
<p>Once a decade since 1952, the British Film Institute’s magazine <a href="https://www.bfi.org.uk/sight-and-sound">Sight and Sound</a> has polled filmmakers, critics, curators and programmers from around the world, asking them to name their ten best films ever made.</p>
<p>In the film world, this is the list that counts. </p>
<p>It is collated by the industry itself, its rankings are a barometer of changing movie-going tastes, and the ten year wait between each announcement cements its reputation. </p>
<p>Polling began in June this year and everyone is sworn to secrecy. Mike Williams, the editor of Sight and Sound, <a href="https://www.thestrandmagazine.com/single-post/2020/01/14/in-conversation-with-mike-williams-editor-in-chief-of-sight-sound">has spoken</a> about the magazine’s “credibility, authority, and an international reputation that’s second to none”.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/H2P4xo9kmPM?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>The first winner in 1952 was Vittorio de Sica’s <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_Thieves">Bicycle Thieves</a> (1948), the masterpiece of Italian neorealism. In the five polls from 1962 to 2002, the winner remained the same: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_Kane">Citizen Kane</a>, Orson Welles’ 1941 debut. </p>
<p>Kane’s status as the “greatest” was consistently reinforced by directors and critics who admired Welles’ authorial single-mindedness, his chutzpah and his daring dismantling of Hollywood’s rules about storytelling and visual composition.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8dxh3lwdOFw?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Citizen Kane was finally dethroned in 2012 by <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertigo_(film)">Vertigo</a>, Alfred Hitchcock’s 1958 twisted tale of obsession and betrayal. </p>
<p>Vertigo’s gradual rise up the list (it first appeared in 1982, and finished only 34 votes behind Kane in 2002) reflected cinema’s ongoing recognition of Hitchcock as an artist. As the critic Roger Ebert <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/a-few-calm-words-about-the-list">wrote</a> at the time, “The king is dead. Long live the king.”</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Z5jvQwwHQNY?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-great-movie-scenes-hitchcocks-vertigo-63320">The great movie scenes: Hitchcock's Vertigo</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>As a film historian, it is fascinating to track the performances of some of cinema’s most beloved and esteemed films. </p>
<p>Casablanca (1942), The Wizard of Oz (1939), Gone With the Wind (1939) and It’s A Wonderful Life (1946) – for some, the apex of Hollywood’s expertise – have never made it anywhere near the top of the list. </p>
<p>The poll’s reluctance to embrace popular genres like musicals, comedies and westerns is reflected in the fact that only Singin’ in the Rain (1952), The General (1926) and The Searchers (1956) have ever appeared in the top ten.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KYkL518Knm0?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>But Hollywood has never dominated the list. To Sight and Sound’s credit, this is a global poll, with voices, opinions and perspectives canvassed from across the world cinema ecosystem. In 2012, a total of 2,045 different films received at least one mention. </p>
<p>The list is always eclectic and international. The Rules of the Game (1939, France) has appeared in every poll until this year, along with the likes of Tokyo Story (1953, Japan), L’Avventura (1960, Italy) and Man with a Movie Camera (1929, Russia).</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5zEKw4VQIeY?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>So what does the new poll tell us?</h2>
<p>In 2022, there are more contributors than ever before – 1,600 industry insiders, up from 846 back in 2012. </p>
<p>Apart from the new winner, this broader church has not shifted the results in any meaningful way. Vertigo, Citizen Kane and Tokyo Story are still ranked two, three and four.</p>
<p>But a generational shift is taking place. New critics have emerged over the past decade and this is reflected in their choices: the masterpieces by Wong Kar-Wai, Kubrick and Lynch have all moved up in the rankings.</p>
<p>The new poll has also skewed towards “newer” films for the first time. In 2012, there were <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sight_%26_Sound_Greatest_Films_of_All_Time_2012">no films</a> on the list made in the preceding decade. This year’s list includes Portrait of a Lady on Fire (2019), Moonlight (2016), Parasite (2019) and Get Out (2017), alongside other relatively new additions The Gleaners and I (2000), Spirited Away (2001) and Tropical Malady (2004).</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/DzfpyUB60YY?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/get-out-why-racism-really-is-terrifying-74870">Get Out: why racism really is terrifying</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>What is even more exciting is a direct challenge to what might be seen as the film industry’s herd mentality. </p>
<p>For years, the same films have been reconfirmed as the only ones worth talking about. The 2022 poll smashes open this echo chamber, recognising not just Akerman, but also Claire Denis, whose majestic <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beau_Travail">Beau Travail</a> (1999) makes its first appearance at number seven and Agnès Varda’s <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0055852/">Cléo from 5 to 7</a> (1962) at 14. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/sRR0_VJFqwg?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/agnes-varda-a-pioneering-artist-who-saw-the-extraordinary-in-the-ordinary-115437">Agnès Varda, a pioneering artist who saw the extraordinary in the ordinary</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Francophone female directors, it seems, are currently at the vanguard of great cinema. </p>
<p>But what will happen in 2032? Will Jeanne Dielman stand the test of time? Is there a film that hasn’t been made yet that will make an appearance in the top ten? Unlikely, given that there is usually at least a 20-year lag between a film’s release and its appearance on the list. </p>
<p>With this year’s list, we learned it takes time for a film to enter the critical consciousness and to reveal its stylistic intricacies or narrative pleasures. </p>
<p>We have just been reminded that the classics will always appear on polls and lists because, well, they are classic. They display craft, precision, elegance and emotional depth. <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2019/07/05/entertainment/movies-what-makes-a-classic/index.html">They resonate down the decades</a>, and they are the films that many of us – from world-famous directors to armchair critics – turn to again and again.</p>
<p>In the meantime, go and watch Jeanne Dielman, 23, quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles and see what all the fuss is about.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/195437/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ben McCann does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Every decade, the British Film Institute releases their 100 greatest films of all time. Here’s who made the cut.Ben McCann, Associate Professor of French Studies, University of AdelaideLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1513762020-12-04T22:01:42Z2020-12-04T22:01:42ZMystery monoliths: why conspiracists are ‘meh’ about the phenomenon — and how you can start a better conspiracy<p>The three recent appearances (and two <a href="https://www.cnet.com/news/another-mysterious-monolith-disappeared-in-romania/">subsequent</a> <a href="https://ksltv.com/449486/dps-crew-discovers-mysterious-monolith-from-air-in-remote-utah-wilderness/">removals</a>) of “<a href="https://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/national-news/18919395.california-monolith-emerges-utah-romania-works-disappear/">monoliths</a>” in Romania, Utah and California are intriguing examples of what can capture the public’s imagination. </p>
<p>These constructions are metallic-looking structures about three or four metres tall, with a simple geometric design and reflective surface. </p>
<p>They’ll look familiar to fans of Arthur C. Clarke’s Space Odyssey novels, sharing an uncanny resemblance to a monolithic structure pivotal to the story. </p>
<p>Adding to the mystery, the Utah monolith was reportedly in place long before it came to light <a href="https://www.cnet.com/news/mysterious-metal-monolith-discovered-in-remote-utah-desert/">on November 18</a>. While its location wasn’t announced, members of the public <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/style/article/utah-monolith-found-trnd/index.html">found Google Earth images</a> of the object dating back to 2016.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1333207303852613632"}"></div></p>
<p>So far, no credible source has suggested the structures are a product of alien technology or supernatural influence. And unlike with UFO sightings and <a href="https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/research/a24152/area-51-history/">Area 51</a> news, governments have not been accused of a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/aug/14/men-in-black-ufo-sightings-mirage-makers-movie">cover-up</a>.</p>
<p>So even though <a href="https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=monolith">Google Trends data</a> shows global search interest in “monolith” has shot up since the structures were found, they’re not yet the subject of widespread conspiracy. And a reflection of past similar phenomena suggests they won’t be.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1333828686584324096"}"></div></p>
<h2>Intriguing artefacts</h2>
<p>The maker (or makers) of the curious objects are likely still around, but they’re not talking. In the meantime, the structures call to mind some major oddities and artefacts from the past, all of which gained considerable fame.</p>
<p>Peru’s <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/archaeology/nasca-lines/">Nazca lines</a> are one example. These shallow depressions in rock from around 500 BCE form colossal shapes of animals and plants which, intriguingly, are best observed from the air. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/372787/original/file-20201203-13-1o5xfnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/372787/original/file-20201203-13-1o5xfnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/372787/original/file-20201203-13-1o5xfnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/372787/original/file-20201203-13-1o5xfnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/372787/original/file-20201203-13-1o5xfnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/372787/original/file-20201203-13-1o5xfnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/372787/original/file-20201203-13-1o5xfnf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The ancient Nazca lines in Peru cover almost 1,000 square kilometres, and form about about 300 different figures.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Flickr</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/crop-circles-the-art-of-the-hoax-2524283/">crop circle</a> phenomenon may also strike a chord. These complex geometric patterns which apparently form overnight in fields across the world have captured imaginations <a href="https://www.livescience.com/26540-crop-circles.html">for decades</a>. </p>
<p>Both these phenomena have produced exotic accounts claiming to explain them. Some <a href="https://www.history.com/shows/ancient-aliens/season-5/episode-8">have said</a> the Nazca lines were created to communicate with space travellers. Crop circles, <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2011/06/15/137188796/mysterious-crop-circles-alien-messages-or-hoax">others say</a>, are the product of alien labour meant to send us a message.</p>
<p>No one knows why the ancient Peruvians made their lines. Their motivations may be hidden forever. Crop circles, however, are a modern occurrence. </p>
<p>And despite claims they couldn’t possibly be made by humans, humans make them all the time, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1991/09/10/world/2-jovial-con-men-demystify-those-crop-circles-in-britain.html">often for</a> the enjoyment of their effect on others. Crop circles also <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/travel/destinations/europe/united-kingdom/pictures-crop-circles-tourism-wiltshire-england/">drive</a> <a href="https://stonehengetours.com/weird-wiltshire-stonehenge-crop-circle-tour.htm">tourism</a> in certain parts of the world.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/372786/original/file-20201203-19-13dwm90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/372786/original/file-20201203-19-13dwm90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=428&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/372786/original/file-20201203-19-13dwm90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=428&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/372786/original/file-20201203-19-13dwm90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=428&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/372786/original/file-20201203-19-13dwm90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=538&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/372786/original/file-20201203-19-13dwm90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=538&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/372786/original/file-20201203-19-13dwm90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=538&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Crop circles in fields tend to be heavily geometric and often display concentric circles.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Flickr</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But why are we so easily grabbed by such peculiarities anyway? After all, our lives aren’t impacted by them.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/neverending-stories-why-we-still-love-unsolved-mysteries-141046">Neverending stories – why we still love Unsolved Mysteries</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>When things don’t make sense</h2>
<p>There are many possible reasons people fix their attention on potential oddities, and even start <a href="https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781429996761">believing</a> strange things about them.
One is that they short-circuit our sense of how the world works — injecting novelty into an otherwise routine and coherent existence. </p>
<p>As the physicist and Nobel Laureate <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1965/feynman/biographical/">Richard Feynman</a> <a href="https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691153032/the-quotable-feynman">said</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>…the thing that doesn’t fit is the most interesting.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The tendency to imagine alternatives and to entertain a “what if?” scenario is the same reason we love reading speculative fiction.</p>
<p>If the Nazca lines really were etched to communicate with aliens — and if crop circles really represent alien messages targeted at us — the model of the world in our heads would be flipped. </p>
<p>But of course, as the great science communicator Carl Sagan points out, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3114207/">paraphrasing</a> prominent polymath <a href="https://mathshistory.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Laplace/">Pierre-Simon Laplace</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>…extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>There’s nothing to suggest the above phenomena are evidence of anything extraordinary. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/372940/original/file-20201203-17-usqili.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/372940/original/file-20201203-17-usqili.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=612&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/372940/original/file-20201203-17-usqili.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=612&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/372940/original/file-20201203-17-usqili.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=612&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/372940/original/file-20201203-17-usqili.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=769&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/372940/original/file-20201203-17-usqili.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=769&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/372940/original/file-20201203-17-usqili.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=769&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Antikythera Mechanism is an out-of-place artefact. These are artefacts of historical, archaeological, or paleontological interest which challenge widely accepted historical chronology.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Flickr</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Another interesting “<a href="http://www.badarchaeology.com/out-of-place-artefacts/">out-of-place</a>” artefact is the ancient <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/decoding-antikythera-mechanism-first-computer-180953979/">Antikythera mechanism</a>. This is seemingly an analog computer once used to predict astronomical positions and events.</p>
<p>But perhaps most notorious are the old favourites: Egypt’s <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/archaeology/giza-pyramids/">Great Pyramid of Giza</a> (and the widespread conjecture surrounding its construction), <a href="https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/stonehenge/history-and-stories/history/">Stonehenge</a> in England, and the enigmatic <a href="https://www.easterisland.travel/easter-island-facts-and-info/moai-statues/">Easter Island</a> statues. All have been connected to aliens, lost wisdom or extinct civilisations.</p>
<h2>In case you need a summer project</h2>
<p>When it comes to creating a spectacle worthy of the public’s attention, there are some key lessons to be learned from past successes in making artefacts, including:</p>
<p><strong>Go big</strong></p>
<p>It pays to do something on a large scale, either by making a big artefact, or having small ones appear over a very large area.</p>
<p><strong>Stay obscure</strong> </p>
<p>The meaning of the artefact should remain unclear, or at least allow room for interpretation. It’s in these situations of uncertainty that the human imagination can run wild. </p>
<p>While the monoliths’ intent is unclear, they could be explained as art. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/27/arts/design/john-mccracken-utah-monolith.html">Reports</a> <a href="https://www.theartnewspaper.com/analysis/destructive-sensationalised-and-maybe-not-even-art-the-short-and-shadowy-legacy-of-the-utah-monolith">have pointed</a> to their similarity with artwork by minimalist sculptor John McCracken.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1331627451001282567"}"></div></p>
<p><strong>Aesthetics matter</strong> </p>
<p>It’s nice if the artefact is aesthetically pleasing or interesting. The geometric precision of pyramids and crop circles speaks to significant care and perhaps mathematical sophistication. The monoliths are comparatively <a href="https://globalnews.ca/news/7493097/utah-monolith-romania/">basic</a>.</p>
<p><strong>Be original</strong> </p>
<p>A display that has never been seen before is far more newsworthy. The monoliths are highly derivative of those appearing in Stanley Kubrick’s <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/04/23/2001-a-space-odyssey-what-it-means-and-how-it-was-made">2001: A Space Odyssey</a>. </p>
<p><strong>Be difficult to copy</strong></p>
<p>The monoliths could have been knocked up in a workshop. The “wow” factor for artefacts usually comes through an appreciation of their complexity, or seeming impossibility of their manufacture. The scale of the Nazca lines speak to this, as do potential efforts to construct Giza and Stonehenge.</p>
<h2>Humans can do amazing things</h2>
<p>Whatever the true explanations, most phenomena can be attributed to human ingenuity and a willingness to persevere. Simply, we must ask: </p>
<ol>
<li>is it likely the means of construction were accessible to humans?</li>
<li>is it likely it served a meaningful purpose for the maker? </li>
</ol>
<p>In most cases, the former is true. Although the time and resources required must have been momentous, it was clearly not <em>impossible</em> to <a href="https://www.history.com/news/ancient-egypt-pyramid-ramp-discovery">build Giza</a>. We’ll probably have to face the fact humans are just very clever and industrious. </p>
<p>It’s harder to be sure the second point is true, although that doesn’t mean it isn’t. </p>
<p>But every now and then we also like to have fun with artefacts and generate something unique and novel, even if it is for entertainment value alone.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-ancient-egyptian-economy-laid-the-groundwork-for-building-the-pyramids-107026">How the Ancient Egyptian economy laid the groundwork for building the pyramids</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/151376/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Ellerton is a fellow of the Rationalist Society of Australia</span></em></p>It’s no surprise the unexplained structures have the internet buzzing. But they haven’t entered the ranks of other great conspiracy material — and history helps explain why they probably won’t.Peter Ellerton, Senior Lecturer in Critical Thinking; Curriculum Director, UQ Critical Thinking Project, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1446642020-08-19T20:14:47Z2020-08-19T20:14:47Z10 years on, Inception remains Christopher Nolan’s most complex and intellectual film<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/353512/original/file-20200818-14-1yd1myr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C1191%2C668&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Warner Bros</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Ten years on from its release, and hitting cinemas <a href="https://www.hoyts.com.au/movies/inception-10-year-anniversary">again</a>, Christopher Nolan’s <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1375666/">Inception</a> still puzzles and intrigues.</p>
<p>It is one of those films in which you discover something new each time you watch it. Or, more likely, it makes you reinterpret what you thought you already knew. </p>
<p>Nolan’s oeuvre builds complex paradoxes of time, space and dimension. <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0209144">Memento</a> (2000) and <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0278504/">Insomnia</a> (2002) deal with the order of time; <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0482571/">The Prestige</a> (2006) deals with the illusion of space; <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0816692/">Interstellar</a> (2014) moves through multi-dimensions. </p>
<p>Inception goes one step further, exploring the manipulation and distortion of all three states. It is a narrative set in the subconscious.</p>
<p>Nolan’s other films are set within a real world framework. It is uniquely Inception that moves into the unreal dream dimension. As in Stanley Kubrick’s <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062622">2001: A Space Odyssey</a> (1968) and David Lynch’s <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074486/">Eraserhead</a> (1977) and <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0166924">Mulholland Drive</a> (2001), Nolan explores not a singular subconscious world but billions of worlds interconnected.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-matrix-20-years-on-how-a-sci-fi-film-tackled-big-philosophical-questions-114007">The Matrix 20 years on: how a sci-fi film tackled big philosophical questions</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>It takes an astute viewer to realise what world you are in (are you in the real or unreal, are you in the mind of this character or that one?) throughout the film.</p>
<h2>The complex subconscious</h2>
<p>Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) is a professional thief, stealing information directly from his targets’ subconscious minds. As a payment for implanting ideas into someone else’s subconscious, he can have his own criminal history erased. </p>
<p>At the beginning of the film, Cobb says: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>I know how to search your mind and find your secrets. I know the tricks, and I can teach them to your subconscious so that even when you’re asleep, your guard is never down. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>This could well be Nolan’s secret to the film.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/tHqyyXcnKBg?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Everything you see is a trick. Inception plays constantly with reality and the dream state. Nolan drops visual clues throughout the film, forcing the viewer to become a cinematic investigator to unravel his message. </p>
<p>It seems even Nolan realises how difficult it is to understand the film’s universe and narrative. He constantly resorts to large blocks of exposition to explain what we have seen, or what is happening – or going to happen.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-do-you-know-youre-not-living-in-a-computer-simulation-60704">How do you know you're not living in a computer simulation?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>With any other film you’d think this was a big mistake, but in Inception this exposition is a necessary road map to deciphering the mysteries of its increasingly complicated subconscious world. </p>
<p>Even Nolan himself can lose track on this road map, <a href="https://www.wired.com/2010/11/pl_inception_nolan/">as he told Wired</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>One of the things you do as a writer and as a filmmaker is grasp for resonant symbols and imagery without necessarily fully understanding it yourself.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Movie still, a group of people look out over a city bending in on itself." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/353517/original/file-20200819-14-1n1gtu5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/353517/original/file-20200819-14-1n1gtu5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=337&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/353517/original/file-20200819-14-1n1gtu5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=337&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/353517/original/file-20200819-14-1n1gtu5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=337&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/353517/original/file-20200819-14-1n1gtu5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/353517/original/file-20200819-14-1n1gtu5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/353517/original/file-20200819-14-1n1gtu5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Every time you watch Inception you will come away with a different understanding of the story Nolan is trying to tell.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Warner Bros</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>(Un)realities</h2>
<p>Perhaps the greatest trick of all in this film is that by its end you question if you have even been in any true reality (at least in terms of the cinematic world it depicts) – or did we just leap from one subconscious mind to the other? </p>
<p>It’s still a point of discussion among fans. The <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Inception/">Inception subreddit</a> gets daily questions about how to unpack the film. New theories about the different realities are constantly being put forward.</p>
<p>But don’t let Nolan’s complex storytelling or technical wizardry blind you. In all of his films, family is the main motivator for each of the central characters. Family drives the story forward.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/on-interstellar-and-real-physics-33270">On Interstellar and 'real physics'</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Both Memento and The Prestige have obsessive compulsive main characters who are driven to avenge their dead wives. In Interstellar, Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) is brought back from the brink by his daughter. In Inception, Cobb becomes separated from his children because of his criminality and it is his love for them that motivates the entire story.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Movie still, Mal and Cobb on a beach." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/353518/original/file-20200819-14-juf9nu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/353518/original/file-20200819-14-juf9nu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/353518/original/file-20200819-14-juf9nu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/353518/original/file-20200819-14-juf9nu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/353518/original/file-20200819-14-juf9nu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/353518/original/file-20200819-14-juf9nu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/353518/original/file-20200819-14-juf9nu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">At the centre of all of Nolan’s movies is a story of love.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Warner Bros</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Without these familial foundations, Nolan’s films would be smart but they would have no soul. Each of the main protagonists is well aware of what is motivating their redemptive actions. The ends justify the means – murder, mayhem, misery - as long as the end is love.</p>
<h2>Playing with paradoxes</h2>
<p>Inception is by far Nolan’s most complex film and arguably his most intellectual, with its questions of where does the real world end and the subconscious begin? </p>
<p>It is also visually stunning, with a whole street exploding or a hallway spinning 360 degrees, making the characters appear to defy gravity. These are not computer graphics, but effects <a href="https://www.wired.com/2010/07/inception-visual-effects/">created live</a> on set.</p>
<p>While all of Nolan’s films end very neatly and satisfactorily, Inception’s is highly ambiguous. The spinning top at the beginning of the film, which represents the dream world, still spins at the end. Does that mean the whole film has taken place in the subconscious and nothing we have seen is real?</p>
<p>Inception’s re-release comes just two weeks before Nolan’s new film, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6723592/">Tenet</a>, hits cinemas after delays due to COVID-19. Tenet appears to be another mind trip where time, space and dimensional paradoxes are a large part of the narrative. </p>
<p>Watching Inception will attune your skills of observation and interpretation and prepare you for Tenet. But, as with any Nolan film, don’t take anything at face value. </p>
<p>As Cobb would say: Nolan knows the tricks.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Inception is in select cinemas from today</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/144664/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daryl Sparkes does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In the lead-up to Nolan’s new film Tenet, Inception is being re-released in cinemas. Even after ten years, the movie still holds surprises..Daryl Sparkes, Senior Lecturer (Media Studies and Production), University of Southern QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1440622020-08-12T05:06:35Z2020-08-12T05:06:35ZBoundary-pushing films are more than their clickbait headlines<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/352391/original/file-20200812-18-10tfa34.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C1777%2C997&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">The Trouble With Being Born/Panama Film</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Melbourne International Film Festival is currently running online, but one movie announced at their program launch won’t be streaming. </p>
<p>At the end of July, Sandra Wollner’s The Trouble With Being Born was <a href="https://www.nme.com/en_au/news/film/melbourne-international-film-festival-pulls-the-trouble-with-being-born-from-virtual-program-2718966">withdrawn</a> after the festival received “expert advice and following further community consultation”. </p>
<p>The festival cited concerns over the “<a href="https://twitter.com/MIFFofficial/status/1288942442918682625">safety and wellbeing</a>” of the public. Undoubtedly, the Austrian film was a controversial choice to begin with – it portrays (albeit not explicitly) a man’s sexual abuse of a robot child. </p>
<p>Its premiere in Berlin earlier this year was divisive, earning both audience <a href="https://www.eviemagazine.com/post/a-german-film-about-a-man-and-his-robot-daughters-sexual-relationship/">walk-outs</a> and a <a href="https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/the-trouble-with-being-born-berlin-review/5148160.article">Jury Prize</a>. </p>
<p>This film is the latest in a long line to push audiences to extreme discomfort. So how far is too far for cinematic representation? </p>
<h2>‘Rivers of viscera’</h2>
<p>Historically, moral outrage about boundary pushing movies has proven an endlessly renewable resource. Thomas Edison’s 1896 recording of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUyTcpvTPu0">a kiss</a> in close up was termed “absolutely disgusting” by the painter John Sloan, <a href="http://www.artandpopularculture.com/The_Kiss_%281896_film%29">who wrote that</a> “police interference” was warranted. </p>
<p>Racy films of Hollywood’s <a href="https://www.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/news-bfi/lists/10-great-pre-code-hollywood-films">pre-Code era</a> of the early 1930s, right through to the late 1970s were often given a “<a href="https://www.npr.org/2016/03/03/469041022/c-is-for-condemned-a-nun-looks-back-on-47-years-of-unholy-filmmaking">condemned</a>” rating by America’s Catholic Legion of Decency, implying “see this movie and go to Hell”.</p>
<p>Stanley Kubrick’s A Clockwork Orange (1971) and David Cronenberg’s Crash (1996) sparked <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/543594.stm">fierce media backlash</a> upon their release in Britain.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Film still" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/352396/original/file-20200812-16-wxfiv0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/352396/original/file-20200812-16-wxfiv0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=363&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352396/original/file-20200812-16-wxfiv0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=363&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352396/original/file-20200812-16-wxfiv0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=363&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352396/original/file-20200812-16-wxfiv0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=456&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352396/original/file-20200812-16-wxfiv0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=456&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352396/original/file-20200812-16-wxfiv0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=456&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A Clockwork Orange didn’t legitimately screen in the UK until 2000.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Warner Bros</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Films including Claire Denis’s Trouble Every Day (2001) and Bruno Dumont’s Twentynine Palms (2003) prompted Artforum critic James Quandt’s fierce invective against “<a href="http://www.artforum.com/inprint/id=6199">New French Extremity</a>” in cinema in 2004. </p>
<p>Exasperated, Quandt lamented:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>a cinema suddenly determined to break every taboo, to wade in rivers of viscera and spumes of sperm, to fill each frame with flesh, nubile or gnarled, and subject it to all manner of penetration, mutilation, and defilement.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Inciting outrage</h2>
<p>The way society engages with films whose subject matter alone makes us uncomfortable is problematic. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.smh.com.au/culture/movies/melbourne-international-film-festival-dumps-android-child-sex-film-20200725-p55fdr.html">Clickbait headlines</a> reduce challenging or offensive films to one-line synopses that incite outrage or disavowal. Similarly, reviews tend to zero in on a film’s shock factor, and so these extreme factors become the film’s broader cultural touchpoints.</p>
<p>Gaspar Noé’s <a href="https://filmdaily.co/obsessions/irreversible-shocking-15-years-later/">Irreversible</a> (2001) is known as the ten-minute rape scene film; Larry Clark’s <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/movies/videos/kidsnrkempley_c029f5.htm">Kids</a> (1995) is the adolescent promiscuity movie; Pier Paolo Pasolini’s <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1977/10/01/archives/film-festival-salo-is-disturbing.html">Salò</a> (1975) the shit-eating torture flick. </p>
<p>It’s not that these descriptors are inaccurate, it’s that they are hopelessly reductive and prime knee-jerk disgust rather than critical engagement. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Film still" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/352398/original/file-20200812-23-omsqye.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/352398/original/file-20200812-23-omsqye.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=393&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352398/original/file-20200812-23-omsqye.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=393&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352398/original/file-20200812-23-omsqye.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=393&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352398/original/file-20200812-23-omsqye.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=494&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352398/original/file-20200812-23-omsqye.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=494&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352398/original/file-20200812-23-omsqye.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=494&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Salò is remembered for its scenes about defecation over its critique of fascism.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Produzioni Europee Associati</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>As Variety critic Jessica Kiang observes in <a href="https://variety.com/2020/film/reviews/the-trouble-with-being-born-review-1203516473/">her review</a> of Wollner’s film, it is unavoidable that the depraved aspects overshadow the nuance: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>it will be a hard task to get people to mull over ancillary issues in a film destined to be shorthanded to ‘the child sex-robot movie’.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But the fact that the film departs from its paedophile storyline to explore other, less salacious forms of exploitation – such as an old woman using the android to alleviate grief – is lost. </p>
<p>Walking away from Salò, one is far more likely to recall the visceral horror of torture than the characters’ protracted ruminations on power, or that the film opens with an “Essential Bibliography” including works by Blanchot and Beauvoir. But these elements of the film matter, and should not be brushed aside for the sake of outrage.</p>
<h2>Balanced distinctions</h2>
<p>How far is too far? Legally, in Australia, this comes down to the <a href="https://www.alrc.gov.au/publication/national-classification-scheme-review-ip-40/issues-paper/the-current-classification-system/">Classification Act</a>. Considerations when classifying include community standards, the impact of a film’s content, and the context in which this content is presented. </p>
<p>Classification boards look beyond a film’s synopsis to try to strike a balance between the freedom and protection of individuals. This depth of consideration is crucial: it aids a distinction between gratuity and purpose. </p>
<p>(While The Trouble of Being Born is yet to be classified in Australia, <a href="https://twitter.com/MIFFofficial/status/1288942442918682625">it was approved to be shown at MIFF</a> under a cultural exemption.)</p>
<p>Consider the British Board of Film Classification’s ruling on the explicit sexual imagery in Lars von Trier’s Antichrist (2009). Trier’s film was <a href="https://www.cineuropa.org/en/newsdetail/109071/">deemed permissible</a> for audiences 18+ based on a determination that the film’s purpose was not arousal. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Film still" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/352401/original/file-20200812-14-yt2e8h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/352401/original/file-20200812-14-yt2e8h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=255&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352401/original/file-20200812-14-yt2e8h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=255&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352401/original/file-20200812-14-yt2e8h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=255&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352401/original/file-20200812-14-yt2e8h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=320&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352401/original/file-20200812-14-yt2e8h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=320&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352401/original/file-20200812-14-yt2e8h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=320&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Antichrist was allowed to screen uncut in the UK when it was determined the sex scenes were not about arousal.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Zentropa Entertainments</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Rather, the board deemed Antichrist was “a serious drama exploring issues such as grief, loss, guilt and fear” and therefore the imagery, in context, was “exceptionally justified” for contributing to the film’s themes and characters. </p>
<h2>Considered viewing</h2>
<p>If the words “child android sex film” or “shit-eating torture flick” make your skin crawl that is a good thing. It would be more worrying if they didn’t. </p>
<p>Fear of confronting cinema is often linked to an assumption that movies exist only for entertainment and pleasure. Enjoyment is one response we might seek in cinema, but it is hardly the medium’s sole purpose. </p>
<p>Extreme films are intended to confront, disturb and provoke – and they’re certainly not for everyone. </p>
<p>But to censor or dismiss them outright based on our discomfort with their very premise is to preclude considered appraisal, not only of the films themselves, but also of one’s own stance on the limits of good taste or the boundaries of artistic expression. </p>
<p>Provided a film has been cleared legally, the question of how far is too far should be a question for individual viewers.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/144062/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alison Taylor does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Trouble With Being Born has been withdrawn from Melbourne International Film Festival – but individual viewers should be able to decide what films they want to see.Alison Taylor, Teaching Fellow, Bond UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1184262019-07-10T10:02:17Z2019-07-10T10:02:17ZMoon landings footage would have been impossible to fake – a film expert explains why<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/281387/original/file-20190626-76713-hm0lk6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Buzz Aldrin on the moon.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">NASA / Neil A. Armstrong</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>It’s been half a century since the magnificent <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/50th-anniversary-of-moon-landing-71605?utm_source=TC&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=moonseries2019&utm_content=inlineasseta">Apollo 11 moon landing</a>, yet many people still don’t believe it actually happened. Conspiracy theories about the event dating back to the 1970s are in fact more popular than ever. A common theory is that film director Stanley Kubrick helped NASA fake the historic footage of its six successful moon landings. </p>
<p>But would it really have been possible to do that with the technology available at the time? I’m not a space travel expert, an engineer or a scientist. I am a filmmaker and lecturer in film post-production, and – while I can’t say how we landed on the moon in 1969 – I can say with some certainty that the footage would have been impossible to fake.</p>
<p>Here are some of the most common beliefs and questions – and why they don’t hold up.</p>
<p><strong>‘The moon landings were filmed in a TV studio.’</strong></p>
<p>There are <a href="http://www.elementsofcinema.com/general/film-digital.html">two different ways</a> of capturing moving images. One is film, actual strips of photographic material onto which a series of images are exposed. Another is video, which is an electronic method of recording onto various mediums, such as moving magnetic tape. With video, you can also broadcast to a television receiver. A standard motion picture film records images at 24 frames per second, while broadcast television is typically either 25 or 30 frames, depending on where you are in the world.</p>
<p>If we go along with the idea that the moon landings were taped in a TV studio, then we would expect them to be 30 frames per second video, which was the television standard at the time. However, we know that video from the first moon landing was recorded at <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4791883.stm">ten frames per second</a> in SSTV (Slow Scan television) with a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_TV_camera">special camera</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p><em><strong>To the moon and beyond is a new podcast series from The Conversation marking the 50th anniversary of the moon landings. <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/podcasts/moon-and-beyond">Listen and subscribe here</a>.</strong></em></p>
<hr>
<p><strong>‘They used the Apollo special camera in a studio and then slowed down the footage to make it look like there was less gravity.’</strong></p>
<p>Some people may contend that when you look at people moving in slow motion, they appear to be in a low gravity environment. Slowing down film requires more frames than usual, so you start with a camera capable of capturing more frames in a second than a normal one – this is called overcranking. When this is played back at the normal frame rate, this footage plays back for longer. If you can’t overcrank your camera, but you record at a normal frame rate, you can instead artificially slow down the footage, but you need a way to store the frames and generate new extra frames to slow it down.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/282034/original/file-20190701-105215-150r8f4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/282034/original/file-20190701-105215-150r8f4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=629&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/282034/original/file-20190701-105215-150r8f4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=629&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/282034/original/file-20190701-105215-150r8f4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=629&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/282034/original/file-20190701-105215-150r8f4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=791&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/282034/original/file-20190701-105215-150r8f4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=791&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/282034/original/file-20190701-105215-150r8f4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=791&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Apollo Lunar Television Camera, as it was mounted on the side of the Apollo 11 Lunar Module when it telecasted Armstrong’s ‘One small step’.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">NASA</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>At the time of the broadcast, magnetic disk recorders capable of storing slow motion footage <a href="https://youtu.be/-TelJ75pzP4?t=348">could only capture 30 seconds in total</a>, for a playback of 90 seconds of slow motion video. To capture 143 minutes in slow motion, you’d need to record and store 47 minutes of live action, which simply wasn’t possible.</p>
<p><strong>‘They could have had an advanced storage recorder to create slow motion footage. Everyone knows NASA gets the tech before the public.’</strong></p>
<p>Well, maybe they did have a super secret extra storage recorder – but one almost 3,000 times more advanced? Doubtful. </p>
<p><strong>‘They shot it on film and slowed down the film instead. You can have as much film as you like to do this. Then they converted the film to be shown on TV.’</strong></p>
<p>That’s a bit of logic at last! But shooting it on film would require thousands of feet of film. A typical reel of 35mm film – at 24 frames per minutes second – lasts 11 minutes and is <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reel">1,000 foot long</a>. If we apply this to 12 frames per second film (as close to ten as we can get with standard film) running for 143 minutes (this is how long the Apollo 11 footage lasts), you would need six and a half reels.</p>
<p>These would then need to be put together. The splicing joins, transfer of negatives and printing – and potentially grains, specks of dust, hairs or scratches – would instantly give the game away. There are none of these artefacts present, which means it wasn’t shot on film. When you take into account that the subsequent Apollo landings were shot at 30 frames per second, then to fake those would be three times harder. So the Apollo 11 mission would have been the easy one.</p>
<p><strong>‘But the flag is blowing in the wind, and there’s no wind on the moon. The wind is clearly from a cooling fan inside the studio. Or it was filmed in the desert.’</strong></p>
<p>It isn’t. After the flag is let go, it settles gently and then doesn’t move at all in the remaining footage. Also, how much wind is there inside a TV studio? </p>
<p>There’s wind in the desert, I’ll accept that. But in July, the desert is also very hot and you can normally see heat waves present in footage recorded in hot places. There are no heat waves on the moon landing footage, so it wasn’t filmed in the desert. And the flag still isn’t moving anyway.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/280931/original/file-20190624-97762-b4blia.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/280931/original/file-20190624-97762-b4blia.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/280931/original/file-20190624-97762-b4blia.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/280931/original/file-20190624-97762-b4blia.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/280931/original/file-20190624-97762-b4blia.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/280931/original/file-20190624-97762-b4blia.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/280931/original/file-20190624-97762-b4blia.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong>MORE ON THE MOON AND BEYOND</strong>
<br><a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/to-the-moon-and-beyond-72729?utm_source=TC&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=moonseries2019&utm_content=inlineasseta">Join us as we delve into the last 50 years of space exploration and the 50 years to come. From Neil Armstrong’s historic first step onto the lunar surface to present-day plans to use the moon as a launchpad to Mars, hear from academic experts who’ve dedicated their lives to studying the wonders of space.</a></p>
<hr>
<p><strong>‘The lighting in the footage clearly comes from a spotlight. The shadows look weird.’</strong> </p>
<p>Yes, it’s a spotlight – a spotlight, 93m miles away. It’s called the sun. Look at the shadows in the footage. If the light source were a nearby spotlight, the shadows would originate from a central point. But because the source is so far away, the shadows are parallel in most places rather than diverging from a single point. That said, the sun isn’t the only source of illumination – light is reflected from the ground too. That can cause some shadows to not appear parallel. It also means we can see objects that are in the shadow.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/282033/original/file-20190701-105164-1h7w5g9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/282033/original/file-20190701-105164-1h7w5g9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/282033/original/file-20190701-105164-1h7w5g9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/282033/original/file-20190701-105164-1h7w5g9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/282033/original/file-20190701-105164-1h7w5g9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/282033/original/file-20190701-105164-1h7w5g9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/282033/original/file-20190701-105164-1h7w5g9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Stanley Kubrick.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Instituto María Auxiliadora Neuquén/Flickr</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong>‘Well, we all know Stanley Kubrick filmed it.’</strong></p>
<p>Stanley Kubrick could have been asked to fake the moon landings. But as he was such a perfectionist, he would have insisted on shooting it on location. And it’s well documented <a href="http://flipthemoviescript.com/the-fear-of-flying-affected-stanley-kubricks-career/">he didn’t like to fly</a>, so that about wraps that one up… Next? </p>
<p><strong>‘It’s possible to recreate dinosaurs from mosquitoes the way they did in Jurassic Park, but the government is keeping it a secret.’</strong> </p>
<p>I give up.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/118426/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Howard Berry does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Conspiracy theorists claim NASA used the Apollo special camera to stage the moon landings in a studio and then slowed down the footage to make it look like there was less gravity.Howard Berry, Head of Post-Production and Programme Leader for MA Film and Television Production, University of HertfordshireLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1023032018-10-03T10:33:10Z2018-10-03T10:33:10Z50 years old, ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’ still offers insight about the future<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/238387/original/file-20180927-48653-1d2wlhd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Even 17 years beyond 2001, spacesuits are bulkier than this.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/scarywardrobe/8999720714/">Matthew J. Cotter/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Watching a <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/2001-a-space-odyssey-movie-50th-anniversary/">50th anniversary screening</a> of “2001: A Space Odyssey,” I found myself, a <a href="http://neukom.dartmouth.edu/people/rockmore.html">mathematician and computer scientist</a> whose research includes work related to artificial intelligence, comparing the story’s vision of the future with the world today.</p>
<p>The movie was made through a collaboration with science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke and film director Stanley Kubrick, inspired by Clarke’s novel “Childhood’s End” and his lesser-known short story “The Sentinel.” A striking work of speculative fiction, it depicts – in terms sometimes hopeful and other times cautionary – a future of alien contact, interplanetary travel, conscious machines and even the next great evolutionary leap of humankind.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/sQUr44SO_Is?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">The opening of ‘2001: A Space Odyssey.’</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The most obvious way in which 2018 has fallen short of the vision of “2001” is in space travel. People are not yet routinely visiting space stations, making unremarkable visits to one of several moon bases, nor traveling to other planets. But Kubrick and Clarke hit the bull’s-eye when imagining the possibilities, problems and challenges of the future of artificial intelligence.</p>
<h2>What can computers do?</h2>
<p>A chief drama of the movie can in many ways be viewed as a battle to the death between human and computer. The artificial intelligence of “2001” is embodied in HAL, the omniscient computational presence, the brain of the Discovery One spaceship – and perhaps the film’s most famous character. HAL marks the pinnacle of computational achievement: a self-aware, seemingly infallible device and a ubiquitous presence in the ship, always listening, always watching. </p>
<p>HAL is not just a technological assistant to the crew, but rather – in the words of the mission commander Dave Bowman – the sixth crew member. The humans interact with HAL by speaking to him, and he replies in a measured male voice, somewhere between stern-yet-indulging parent and well-meaning nurse. HAL is Alexa and Siri – but much better. HAL has complete control of the ship and also, as it turns out, is the only crew member who knows the true goal of the mission. </p>
<h2>Ethics in the machine</h2>
<p>The tension of the film’s third act revolves around Bowman and his crewmate Frank Poole becoming increasingly aware that HAL is malfunctioning, and HAL’s discovery of these suspicions. Dave and Frank want to pull the plug on a failing computer, while self-aware HAL wants to live. All want to complete the mission. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qDrDUmuUBTo?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Man versus machine.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The life-or-death chess match between the humans and HAL offers precursors of some of today’s questions about the prevalence and deployment of artificial intelligence in people’s daily lives.</p>
<p>First and foremost is the question of how much control people should cede to artificially intelligent machines, regardless of how “smart” the systems might be. HAL’s control of Discovery is like a deep-space version of the networked home of the future or the driverless car. Citizens, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0267364909001514">policymakers</a>, <a href="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7167238">experts and researchers</a> are all still exploring the degree to which automation could – or should – <a href="https://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/us/security/news/internet-of-things/fbi-warns-public-on-dangers-of-the-internet-of-things">take humans out of the loop</a>. Some of the considerations involve relatively simple questions about the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/mar/22/self-driving-car-uber-death-woman-failure-fatal-crash-arizona">reliability of machines</a>, but other issues are more subtle. </p>
<p>The actions of a computational machine are dictated by decisions encoded by humans in algorithms that control the devices. Algorithms generally have some quantifiable goal, toward which each of its actions should make progress – like <a href="https://theconversation.com/computers-to-humans-shall-we-play-a-game-77383">winning a game</a> of checkers, chess or Go. Just as an AI system would analyze positions of game pieces on a board, it can also <a href="https://spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/robotics/industrial-robots/interview-brad-porter-vp-of-robotics-at-amazon">measure efficiency of a warehouse</a> or <a href="https://www.wired.com/2014/05/google-data-center-ai/">energy use of a data center</a>.</p>
<p>But what happens when a <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-everyday-ethical-challenges-of-self-driving-cars-92710">moral or ethical dilemma</a> arises en route to the goal? For the self-aware HAL, completing the mission – and staying alive – wins out when measured against the lives of the crew. What about a driverless car? Is the <a href="https://theconversation.com/safe-efficient-self-driving-cars-could-block-walkable-livable-communities-103583">mission of a self-driving car</a>, for instance, to get a passenger from one place to another as quickly as possible – or to avoid killing pedestrians? When someone steps in front of an autonomous vehicle, those goals conflict. That might feel like an obvious “choice” to program away, but what if the car needs to <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-everyday-ethical-challenges-of-self-driving-cars-92710">“choose” between two different scenarios</a>, each of which would cause a human death? </p>
<h2>Under surveillance</h2>
<p>In one classic scene, Dave and Frank go into a part of the space station where they think HAL can’t hear them to discuss their doubts about HAL’s functioning and his ability to control the ship and guide the mission. They broach the idea of shutting him down. Little do they know that HAL’s cameras can see them: The computer is reading their lips through the pod window and learns of their plans. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1s-PiIbzbhw?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">HAL reads lips.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In the modern world, a version of that scene happens all day every day. Most of us are effectively continuously monitored, through our <a href="https://theconversation.com/7-in-10-smartphone-apps-share-your-data-with-third-party-services-72404">almost-always-on phones</a> or corporate and government <a href="https://theconversation.com/snowden-a-picture-of-the-cybersecurity-state-65310">surveillance of real-world and online activities</a>. The boundary between private and public has become and continues to be increasingly fuzzy.</p>
<p>The characters’ relationships in the movie made me think a lot about how people and machines might coexist, or even evolve together. Through much of the movie, even the humans talk to each other blandly, without much tone or emotion – as they might talk to a machine, or as a machine might talk to them. HAL’s famous death scene – in which Dave methodically disconnects its logic links – made me wonder whether intelligent machines will ever be afforded something equivalent to human rights. </p>
<p>Clarke believed it quite possible that humans’ time on Earth was but a “<a href="http://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Space-Odyssey/Michael-Benson/9781501163937">brief resting place</a>” and that the maturation and evolution of the species would necessarily take people well beyond this planet. “2001” ends optimistically, vaulting a human through the “Stargate” to mark the rebirth of the race. To do this in reality will require people to figure out how to make the best use of the machines and devices that they are building, and to make sure we don’t let those machines control us.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/102303/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daniel N. Rockmore is Associate Dean for the Sciences, Director of the Neukom Institute for Computational Science, and Professor of Mathematics and Computer Science at Dartmouth College. He is also on the Science Steering Committee of The Santa Fe Institute and a member of its External Faculty. </span></em></p>People are still wrestling with what artificial intelligence could and should do, half a century after the debut of the Kubrick-Clarke classic.Daniel N. Rockmore, Professor, Department of Mathematics, Computational Science, and Computer Science, Dartmouth CollegeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1001702018-08-05T20:11:35Z2018-08-05T20:11:35ZThe great movie scenes: Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/229550/original/file-20180727-106521-1x487ec.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=8%2C4%2C2986%2C1482&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Still from '2001: A Space Odyssey' (1968)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>What makes a film a classic? In this column, film scholar Bruce Isaacs looks at a classic film and analyses its brilliance.</em></p>
<hr>
<figure>
<iframe src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/280301448" width="500" height="281" frameborder="0" webkitallowfullscreen="" mozallowfullscreen="" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>2001: A Space Odyssey was released 50 years ago but it remains as relevant today as it was in 1968. </p>
<p>The film was a collaboration between Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke. Both were determined to make a science fiction film that would not date. They succeeded brilliantly. 2001 has not only stood the test of time, but remains one of the greatest films ever made.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/stephen-hawking-blending-science-with-science-fiction-93430">Stephen Hawking: blending science with science fiction</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In this video, we analyse two scenes that highlight the film’s use of cinematic techniques to explore the evolution of human consciousness. The scenes bookend 2001: A Space Odyssey - they are the dawn of man sequence at the beginning and the final sequence, showing the next evolutionary leap in human consciousness.</p>
<hr>
<p><em><strong>See also:</strong></em> <br></p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/the-great-movie-scenes-hitchcocks-vertigo-63320">The great movie scenes: Hitchcock’s Vertigo</a>
<br>
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-great-movie-scenes-antonionis-the-passenger-65395">The great movie scenes: Antonioni’s The Passenger</a>
<br>
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-great-movie-scenes-eternal-sunshine-of-the-spotless-mind-74166">The great movie scenes: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind</a>
<br>
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-great-movie-scenes-steven-spielbergs-jaws-79043">The great movie scenes: Steven Spielberg’s Jaws</a>
<br>
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-great-movie-scenes-hitchcocks-psycho-and-the-power-of-jarring-music-97325">The great movie scenes: Hitchcock’s Psycho</a>
<br>
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-great-movie-scenes-the-godfather-98173">The great movie scenes: The Godfather</a></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/100170/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bruce Isaacs does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey broke all the rules of science fiction cinema, and allowed the audience to experience a uniquely philosophical film about the evolution of human consciousness.Bruce Isaacs, Senior Lecturer in Film Studies, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/962522018-05-09T19:41:14Z2018-05-09T19:41:14ZArtificial intelligence talks (and talks): the story since ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/217967/original/file-20180507-46350-r40xkb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C14%2C1200%2C630&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Unfortunately for the intrepid astronauts in Stanley Kubrick's _2001, a Space Odyssey_, the HAL 9000 computer knows how to read lips.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062622/">IMDB</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Almost everyone knows the story of HAL 9000, the killer supercomputer in Stanley Kubrick’s landmark film <em>2001: A Space Odyssey</em>, whose 50th anniversary will be celebrated on May 12, 2018 at the 71st Cannes Film Festival. In an intriguing scheduling coincidence, IBM, Kubrick’s partner during the filming of <em>A Space Odyssey</em>, and Airbus have just unveiled the <a href="https://www.ibm.com/blogs/think/2018/02/watson-space/">CIMON</a> (Crew Interactive Mobile Companion) project, an “intelligent, mobile and interactive astronaut assistance system” that will join the International Space Station.</p>
<p>These two events propel us into a debate over the risks created by the development of superintelligence that could eliminate jobs on a massive scale or, even worse, wipe the human species off the face of the planet – and raise the question of how to assess such a threat.</p>
<p>To date, we have no experience of accidents or disasters due to faulty or malicious AI. However, the imaginations of artists and scientists are a treasure trove of material that tells the story of superintelligence freed from any human control.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ARJ8cAGm6JE?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>A story of AI going wrong</h2>
<p><em>2001: A Space Odyssey</em> is a forerunner of contemporary controversies. It tells the story of the struggle and eventual conquest of a human being, the only survivor of a methodical programme of extermination led by a sentient supercomputer.</p>
<p>Aboard the spaceship <em>Discovery One</em>, only the supercomputer HAL 9000 has been informed by its creators of the purpose of the mission: to reach Jupiter and search for signs of extra-terrestrial intelligence. Although considered to be infallible, HAL makes an error. The machine refuses to admit this, and, caught out, it claims that the mistake is due to “human error”. In principle the humans are the computer’s designers but, if it is to be believed, could it in fact be the computer itself? Adopting this line of reasoning, the machine gives itself a status that crew members could not imagine – that of a living, sentient and thinking being.</p>
<p>For the crew, HAL’s error is unacceptable. There is no room for forgiveness or charity: error may be human, but it is not machine. There is no appeal: HAL must be taken out of service. The supercomputer, omnipresent and omniscient, immediately discovers the project designed to end its life. To survive and complete its mission, it decides to eliminate the crew. Only one human survives, Astronaut David Bowman, and he resumes, with even more determination, the digital homicide mission.</p>
<p>Bowman succeeds in penetrating the core of the unit and then mechanically, emotionlessly and almost ceremoniously disconnects, one by one, the machine’s memory circuits from their housing. Like a child caught with its hand in the cookie jar, the computer tries, by talking about itself, to derail the lobotomy. In a final attempt, it sings a song it learned in its first hours of “life”, but nothing works, and finally its voice fades away.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/OuEN5TjYRCE?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>AI that can talk about itself</h2>
<p>Much more than the story of a fight to the death, one of the treasures of the film is that is considers the narrative dimension of AI. It’s able not only to make up stories about itself, but also can fail due to circumstances and its own errors. Thus, the elimination of the crew is not the result of HAL 9000 becoming autonomous, but from a “bad story” that the machine tells itself, that of believing that the crew could compromise the mission.</p>
<p>Kubrick’s work thus makes it possible to conceive the risks caused by superintelligence not in terms of technical domination, but as the construction of an imperfect narrative identity. Although reality is still far from catching up with fiction, some initial findings in this area are worth thinking about.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/217558/original/file-20180503-153878-1l9bm6p.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/217558/original/file-20180503-153878-1l9bm6p.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/217558/original/file-20180503-153878-1l9bm6p.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/217558/original/file-20180503-153878-1l9bm6p.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/217558/original/file-20180503-153878-1l9bm6p.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/217558/original/file-20180503-153878-1l9bm6p.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/217558/original/file-20180503-153878-1l9bm6p.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">HAL 9000 au Robot Hall of Fame.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_9000#/media/File:HAL_9000.JPG">Photojunkie/Wikipédia</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In 2016, a novel titled <em>The Day a Computer Writes a Novel… Almost</em> won a Japanese literary prize, the Nikkei Hoshi Shinichi. It was prewritten by an AI research team from the University of Hakodate, whose work initially consisted of selecting words and sentences, then defining parameters that allowed a program to “write” the novel. Of more than 1,450 submissions for the prize, 11 had been written, at least in part, by a non-human. Of course, the jury knew nothing about the “authors”.</p>
<p>The following year, in the same spirit but without a digital co-author, Zack Thoutt, a fan of the TV series <em>Game of Thrones</em>, used a neural network fed with over 5,000 pages of text from the books on which it was based to predict what might happen next in the story. The result is far from equal to the work of author George R. Martin, but the text is, for the most part, understandable and the predictions are similar to some of the theories that are popular with fans of the series.</p>
<p>More recently, a program designed by MIT’s Media Lab – baptised “Shelley” after Mary Shelley, the author of <em>Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus</em> – created terrifying tales, designed to scare. The first stage was to train the program with stories written by humans taken from a database of over 140,000 references. In the second stage, the computer generated its own works that it improved by collaborating with humans who responded to its messages via Twitter.</p>
<p>And in the domain of reading and understanding stories, Google has just launched its “Talk to book” service that allows users to converse in natural language with an automatic learning algorithm that is supposed to help them in their future reading choices.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"929925974178791424"}"></div></p>
<h2>Stories that evoke the risks of AI</h2>
<p>If, like HAL 9000, AI computers try to write stories, they are still far from reaching the standards set by human authors. Although no one can predict with certainty what artificial superintelligence might look like, it remains possible to imagine it by producing stories that stimulate our thinking.</p>
<p>The historian Yuval Noah Harari undertook the task, imagining a future where the automation of machines would cause the disappearance of the majority of jobs. He argued that humans risk losing their economic value because intelligence will be decoupled from consciousness. While intelligence is necessary to drive a car or diagnose a disease, consciousness and subjective human experiences are not mandatory.</p>
<p>Even more alarmist, the philosopher Nick Bostrom puts forward the idea that humans will probably not have the opportunity to experience this disastrous revolution because it is likely they will be exterminated as soon as artificial superintelligence appears.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8xwESiI6uKA?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Both Harari and Bostrom base their conclusions on a reduction of action to its functional dimension, judged solely in terms of effectiveness. But such a vision neglects whole areas of human existence. To remedy this, neuroscientist <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Damasio">Antonio Damasio</a> argues that life represents a complex act in which feelings are the expression of a permanent struggle to achieve a balance that underpins human existence. For Damasio, without subjectivity there is no creativity, and without the emotions that are manifest in the relationships between the body and the brain to perceive reality, there is no humanity.</p>
<p>Accepting this relegates Kubrick to the rank of a genius whose prophecy, albeit poetic, is unrealistic. It also means admitting that an AI computer will never be able to redefine its own mission at the expense of its creators. And finally, we must take very seriously the idea that the main risk to humanity is a cyberwar initiated by humans themselves – a conflict populated by drones and killer robots supported by swarms of computer viruses that all smarter than the others…</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/96252/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Franck Guarnieri ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d'une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n'a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.</span></em></p>Since Stanley Kubrick’s masterpiece debuted in 1968, fictional stories of faulty or malevolent AI are legion. What have recent advances taught us and what might the future hold?Franck Guarnieri, Directeur du Centre de recherche sur les risques et les crises, Mines Paris - PSLLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/941412018-04-09T07:45:25Z2018-04-09T07:45:25ZAI like HAL 9000 can never exist because real emotions aren’t programmable<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/213845/original/file-20180409-114076-onz6wb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption"></span> </figcaption></figure><p>HAL 9000 is one of the best-known articifical intelligence characters of modern film. This <a href="http://www.dazeddigital.com/film-tv/article/39557/1/space-odyssey-stanley-kubrick-hal-9000-ai-in-film">superior form of sentient computer</a> embarks on a mission to Jupiter, along with a human crew, in Stanley Kubrick’s iconic film 2001: A Space Odyssey, which is currently celebrating its 50th year since release. </p>
<p>HAL is capable of speech production and comprehension, facial recognition, lip reading – and <a href="http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/little-known-sci-fi-fact-hal-9000-cheats-at-chess-in-2001-a-space-odyssey">playing chess</a>. Its superior computational ability is boosted by uniquely human traits, too. It can interpret emotional behaviour, reason and appreciate art.</p>
<p>By giving HAL emotions, writer Arthur C. Clarke and filmmaker Stanley Kubrick made it one of the most human-like fictional technologies ever created. In one of the most beautiful scenes in sci-fi history, it says it is “afraid” when mission commander Dr David Bowman starts disconnecting its memory modules following a series of murderous events.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/I1iRWKARwTY?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>HAL is programmed to deliver optimal assistance to the crew of the spaceship Discovery. It has control over the entire vessel, and staggering intelligence to aid it in its task. Yet soon after we become acquainted with HAL, we cannot help feeling that it is worried – it even claims it is experiencing fear – and that it has an ability to empathise, however small. But while there is nothing to preclude the <em>idea</em> that such an emotional AI could see the light of day, if such depth of feelings were to be included in real world technology, they would have to be entirely fake.</p>
<h2>A ‘perfect’ AI</h2>
<p>When, during the film, Bowman starts to manually override HAL’s functions, it asks him to stop, and after we witness a fascinating obliteration of HAL’s “mental” faculties, the AI seemingly tries to comfort itself by singing Daisy Bell – reportedly the first ever song produced by a computer.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yIwhx3NQSLg?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>In fact, viewers begin to feel that Bowman is killing HAL. The disconnection feels like a vengeful termination, after witnessing the film’s earlier events. But though HAL makes emotional statements, a real world AI would certainly be limited to having only the ability to reason, and make decisions. The cold, hard truth is that – despite what <a href="https://theconversation.com/will-ai-ever-understand-human-emotions-70960">computer scientists say</a> – we will never be able to program emotions in the way HAL’s fictional creators did because we do not understand them. Psychologists and neuroscientists are certainly trying to learn how emotions interact with cognition, but still they remain a mystery. </p>
<p>Take our own research, for example. In a study conducted with Chinese-English bilinguals, we explored how the emotional value of words can change unconscious mental operation. When we presented our participants with positive and neutral words, such as “holiday” or “tree”, they unconsciously retrieved these word forms in Chinese. But when the words had a negative meaning, such as “murder” or “rape”, their brain blocked access to their mother tongue – <a href="https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.6119-11.2012">without their knowledge</a>.</p>
<h2>Reason and emotion</h2>
<p>On the other hand, we know a lot about reasoning. We can describe how we come to rational decisions, write rules and turn these rules into process and code. Yet emotions are a <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-emotion-centre-is-the-oldest-part-of-the-human-brain-why-is-mood-so-important-63324">mysterious evolutionary legacy</a>. Their source is the source of everything, and not simply an attribute of the mind that can be implemented by design. To program something, you not only need to know how it works, you need to know what the objective is. Reason has objectives, emotions don’t.</p>
<p>In an experiment conducted in 2015, we were able to put this to the test. We asked native speakers of Mandarin Chinese studying at Bangor University to play a game of chance for money. In each round, they had to take or leave a proposed bet shown on the screen – for example, a 50% chance of winning 20 points, and a 50% chance of losing 100 points. </p>
<p>We hypothesised that giving them feedback in their mother tongue would be more emotional to them and so lead them to behave differently, compared to when they received feedback in their second language, English. Indeed, when they received positive feedback in native Chinese, they were <a href="https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3622-14.2015">10% more likely to take a bet in the next round</a>, irrespective of risk. This shows that emotions influence reasoning. </p>
<p>Going back to AI, as emotions cannot be truly implemented in a program – no matter how sophisticated it may be – the reasoning of the computer can never be changed by its feelings. </p>
<p>One possible interpretation of HAL’s strange “emotional” behaviour is that it was programmed to simulate emotions in extreme situations, where it would need to manipulate humans not on the basis of reasoning but by calling upon their emotional self, when human reason fails. This is the only way I can see that real world AI could convincingly simulate emotions in such circumstances. </p>
<p>In my opinion, we will not, ever, build a machine that feels, hopes, is scared, or happy. And because that is an absolute prerequisite to any claim that we have engendered artificial general intelligence, we will never create an artificial mind outside life.</p>
<p>This is precisely where the magic of 2001: A Space Odyssey lies. For a moment, we are led to believe the impossible, that pure science fiction can override the facts of the world we live in.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/94141/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Guillaume Thierry does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>2001: A Space Odyssey’s sentient computer will only ever be a work of science fiction, says a cognitive neuroscientist.Guillaume Thierry, Professor of Cognitive Neuroscience, Bangor UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/927702018-03-12T13:49:16Z2018-03-12T13:49:16ZStanley Kubrick’s films all had one thing in common: Jewishness<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209916/original/file-20180312-30965-sxedug.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Jewish actor Peter Sellers in Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/x-ray_delta_one/3941702700">James Vaughan/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/">CC BY-NC-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Legendary director Stanley Kubrick was <a href="http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/amk/doc/0110.html">known to have said</a> that he was not really a Jew, he just happened to have two Jewish parents. But though he may have tried to divert from this fact, Kubrick, who passed away in 1999 at the age of 70, was born and died a Jew, and Jewishness threads through and underpins all 13 of his films. </p>
<p>Kubrick was famously silent on the meaning of his movies, so their messages are open to interpretation on a number of levels. He covered many genres and topics – starting with war movie <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0045758/">Fear and Desire in 1953</a>, and ending with marital drama in <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120663/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">Eyes Wide Shut (1999)</a> – and his films <a href="https://indiefilmhustle.com/stanley-kubrick/">broke new ground</a> in cinematic style.</p>
<p>But Kubrick, who is possibly the most written about film director after Alfred Hitchcock, has rarely been thought of as a Jewish director. This is because few dedicated researchers have not bothered to probe his ethnic background in any detail. </p>
<h2>Kubrick the Jewish man</h2>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209912/original/file-20180312-30954-b38z8c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209912/original/file-20180312-30954-b38z8c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=807&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209912/original/file-20180312-30954-b38z8c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=807&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209912/original/file-20180312-30954-b38z8c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=807&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209912/original/file-20180312-30954-b38z8c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1014&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209912/original/file-20180312-30954-b38z8c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1014&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209912/original/file-20180312-30954-b38z8c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1014&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Stanley Kubrick, aged 21, in 1949.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:KubrickForLook_(cropped).jpg">Cowles Communications, Inc./Wikimedia</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Kubrick had a history of working with Jewish actors as his leading men and women. Notably <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uv5KPY5ep00">Paul Mazursky</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0877185/">Joe Turkel</a> (three times), <a href="http://time.com/9953/spartacus-life-behind-the-scenes-of-a-kubrick-classic/">Kirk Douglas</a> (twice), <a href="http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/peter-sellers/31326/the-black-and-white-genius-of-kubrick-and-sellers">Peter Sellers</a> (twice), <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001859/?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm">Shelley Winters</a>, <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/what-to-watch/a-clockwork-orange-stanley-kubrick-controversy/">Aubrey Morris</a>, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2008/jan/04/1">Miriam Karlin</a>, and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120663/">Sydney Pollack</a>. He also worked with Jewish writers, including <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0054331/">Howard Fast</a>, <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2010/04/kubrick-199908">Michael Herr</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1jDvMZcrZ8">Frederic Raphael</a>, and considered adapting the work of such Jewish authors as Arthur Schnitzler, Stefan Zweig and Louis Begley. He adored the work of Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/kafka-is-the-real-ghost-of-kubricks-the-shining-41853">writer Franz Kafka</a> too. But this alone is not makes him a Jewish filmmaker.</p>
<p>Although Kubrick was never a practising Jew and the Jewish references and viewpoint are not explicit or obvious in his films, once you consider his films from the standpoint of his ethnicity, as well as his cultural and intellectual milieu, then some resonant themes emerge. </p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209910/original/file-20180312-30975-1s48xev.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209910/original/file-20180312-30975-1s48xev.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209910/original/file-20180312-30975-1s48xev.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209910/original/file-20180312-30975-1s48xev.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209910/original/file-20180312-30975-1s48xev.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209910/original/file-20180312-30975-1s48xev.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209910/original/file-20180312-30975-1s48xev.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209910/original/file-20180312-30975-1s48xev.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Kubrick with Kirk Douglas on the set of Spartacus.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kubrick_-_Douglas_-_Spartacus_-_1960.JPG">Wikimedia</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Though Kubrick famously worked on a Holocaust film, <a href="http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/128033/kubricks-lost-holocaust-film">The Aryan Papers</a>, which never came to fruition, his body of work went far beyond that in terms of Jewish references.</p>
<p>His first feature, Fear and Desire (1953) is his spin on the World War II platoon movie, which typically contained a range of ethnicities and races. True to form, Kubrick cast Mazursky as the shaky (Jewish) recruit Private Sidney. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048254/">Killer’s Kiss</a> in 1955 is very much moulded in the tradition of the Jewish boxing movie – features such as <a href="https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/body_and_soul_1947/">Body and Soul (1947)</a>, directed by Robert Rossen. Kubrick’s film noir, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0049406/">The Killing (1956)</a>, could well have as its tagline the Yiddish proverb, “Man plans, God laughs”. All three of these early films could also be described as existentialist, a philosophy popular with Jewish intellectuals <a href="http://pluralism.org/religions/judaism/judaism-in-america/postwar-judaism/">in the postwar era</a>, especially in Greenwich Village, New York City, where Kubrick then lived.</p>
<p>In dealing with a major incident of French military injustice during World War I, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050825/">Paths of Glory (1957)</a>, recalls the antisemitic <a href="https://www.history.com/news/ask-history/what-was-the-dreyfus-affair">Dreyfus affair</a>, a major cause célèbre of the 19th century. The epic <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0054331/">Spartacus (1960)</a> posits a Moses-like liberator who leads Roman slaves out of bondage while also considering such issues as <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/arthur-miller-mccarthyism/484/">McCarthyism</a>, the <a href="https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lists/hollywood-ten-men-who-refused-839762">Hollywood blacklist</a>, civil rights, the Holocaust and the birth of the State of Israel – all issues of Jewish concern in the 1950s. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209907/original/file-20180312-30969-1kmllkm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209907/original/file-20180312-30969-1kmllkm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=888&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209907/original/file-20180312-30969-1kmllkm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=888&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209907/original/file-20180312-30969-1kmllkm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=888&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209907/original/file-20180312-30969-1kmllkm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1115&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209907/original/file-20180312-30969-1kmllkm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1115&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209907/original/file-20180312-30969-1kmllkm.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1115&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A Space Odyssey.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2001_A_Space_Odyssey_(1968).png">Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer/Robert McCall/Wikimedia</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In 1964, <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/almost-everything-in-dr-strangelove-was-true">Dr. Strangelove</a> conflated nuclear holocaust with the Holocaust, particularly through its titular character, the former Nazi Dr. Strangelove, at a time when the <a href="https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005179">Adolf Eichmann Trial</a> was fresh in people’s memories. </p>
<p>Looking further at Kubrick’s later films, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062622/">2001: A Space Odyssey</a> – which celebrates its 50th anniversary this year – plays with the Hebrew Bible, Jewish liturgy, as well as Kabbalah, Jewish mysticism. It is full of numerological references with the number four recurring frequently. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066921/">A Clockwork Orange (1971)</a> explores Judeo-Christian ideas of choice and conveys a very traditional Jewish viewpoint on the issue of free will. And <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072684/">Barry Lyndon (1975)</a> warns of the dangers of social climbing in places where you don’t belong – a traditional Jewish fear, particularly in the 19th and 20th centuries. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081505/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">The Shining (1980)</a> – Kubrick’s contribution to the horror genre – deals with the very biblical theme of the sacrifice of the son by the father, as found <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+22&version=ESV">in Genesis 22</a>. And <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093058/">Full Metal Jacket (1987)</a>, while ostensibly about Vietnam, is, on one level, <a href="https://forward.com/culture/film-tv/375378/was-full-metal-jacket-stanley-kubricks-stealth-holocaust-movie/">about the Holocaust</a> and man’s propensity to evil and genocide. </p>
<p>This is all capped off by Eyes Wide Shut, possibly Kubrick’s most Jewish film – given it was adapted <a href="http://www.clas.ufl.edu/ipsa/2003/Greenwich%20conference.html">from the work</a> of Jewish author Arthur Schnitzler and heavily influenced by the theories of his Jewish contemporary Sigmund Freud. It also contains the most explicitly Jewish character in any Kubrick film, Victor Ziegler (played by Sydney Pollack).</p>
<p>Kubrick’s films never offer up anything easy or obvious. He made few statements about them. But he spent a long time working on his movies. He was meticulous and paid great attention to detail. He was extremely cultured, well read, and cultivated. He certainly had views that he wanted to share but did so in the least obvious ways. He wanted to make viewers work to understand his deeper messages.</p>
<p>Kubrick’s films were not just about Jews, Jewishness and Judaism, they are far wider than any single theme. But even though the man himself tried to distract from his Jewish roots, it cannot be denied that some of this material was surely intentional.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/92770/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nathan Abrams receives funding from The British Academy. He is the author of Stanley Kubrick: New York Jewish Intellectual (Rutgers University Press, 2018).</span></em></p>For a man who was “not really a Jew”, Kubrick’s feature films are woven with Jewish references.Nathan Abrams, Professor of Film Studies, Bangor UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.