‘2001: A Space Odyssey:’ Kubrick’s enduring gamble

The most-esteemed movies of 1968, according to Oscar nominators, were “The Lion in Winter,” “Romeo and Juliet,” “Rachel, Rachel” and the musicals “Funny Girl” and “Oliver!” In the end, “Oliver!” took the bestpicture prize.

Fifty years later, the true landmarks of 1968 look far different. Stanley Kubrick’s “2001: A Space Odyssey” still astonishes with its use of classical music, the villainous computer HAL and the eerie “Star Gate” sequence that hurtles Dave Bowman (Keir Dullea) through a mind-tripping light show. Mel Brooks’ “The Producers” staged “Springtime for Hitler,” a musical scene to rival anything in “Funny Girl” and “Oliver!” Franklin Schaffner’s “Planet of the Apes,” with its shocking final sequence, continues to inspire spinoffs. Roman Polanski’s “Rosemary’s Baby” and George Romero’s “Night of the Living Dead” brought new style and energy to the horror genre.

All five risk-taking films share a creative strangeness that surpasses the limiting respectability of the Academy Awards. Let’s hear it for weird.

Some of this year’s most striking films — Alex Garland’s “Annihilation,” Ari Aster’s “Hereditary” — echo those 1968 movies by challenging the audience in unsettling ways. Films that travel unconventional, even disturbing routes often stand up better in the long term.

That is certainly true of “2001,” the subject of Michael Benson’s detailed new book “Space Odyssey: Stanley Kubrick, Arthur C. Clarke and the Making of a Masterpiece” (Simon & COMMENTARY Schuster, $30).

Not everyone considered it a masterpiece. Pauline Kael, the most influential critic of her day, called it “a monumentally unimaginative movie” and complained “the light-show trip is of no great distinction.”

Most moviegoers disagreed, and “2001” was the biggest moneymaker of 1968. Yet in this era when weekly box-office results are examined with scientific precision, the mysteries of “2001” are far more arresting and enduring than the film’s financial oomph. The film plays at 3:15 p.m. Friday, July 6, on TCM.

Benson goes on to trace the film’s production, reception and legacy over 450 pages — a gold mine for movie buffs.

He stresses that “2001” is “a profoundly collaborative work” between Kubrick and co-writer Clarke.

But Clarke worried about revealing that he was gay to Kubrick.

Benson writes: “During one of their meetings, he chose his moment and then announced abruptly, ‘Stan, I want you to know that I’m a very well-adjusted homosexual.”

“‘Yeah, I know,’ responded Kubrick without missing a beat, and continued discussing the topic at hand.”

Production, which started in 1964, was a stressful gamble, “highly unorthodox in big-budget filmmaking” and “improvisatory, researchbased,” Benson says.

He writes: “‘2001’ never had a definitive script.

Major plot points remained in flux well into filming. Significant scenes were modified beyond recognition or tossed altogether as their moment on the schedule arrived.”

Yet the film reflects a Kubrick-Clarke strategy that “their story’s metaphysical and even mystical elements had to be earned through absolute scientific-technical realism.”

It’s one reason the film stands up, and another is the overriding theme. Benson says the film “is about our situation as creatures conscious of our own mortality, aware of inherent limitations to our imaginations and intellectual capacities, and yet perpetually striving for more exalted states and higher planes of being.”

In 1969, when Oscar nominations were announced, “2001: A Space Odyssey” would receive just four: directing, writing, art/set direction and special effects. Kubrick won for special effects, and that’s all.

Yet that striving for more exalted states lands “2001” at No. 6 on the Sight & Sound poll of the greatest films ever made. In that 2012 poll of critics, academics and industry insiders, Alfred Hitchcock’s “Vertigo” ranks No. 1 and Orson Welles’ “Citizen Kane” lands at No. 2.

As for “2001,” Tom Hanks is speaking for many when he calls it “the greatest motion picture I’ve ever seen.”