2001: A Space Odyssey and 666
Mark Seely
12-22-2002, by Mark Seely
In case thou hasn't heard by now, the late(?) movie director Stanley Kubrick
filled his movie "2001: A Space Odyssey" with the number 666. The U.S.
government agency NASA from the beginning praised this movie, and they have
not retracted their endorsement of it.
To summarize the occurrences of 666 in the movie:
1) The "monoliths" in the movie appear for 666 seconds. The time between
the first appearance and final disappearance of each of the four
"monoliths'," the four times added together, is between 666 and 668 seconds
(difficult to discern).
2) The number of camera shots starting from "The Dawn of Man" (the first
shot after the opening credits) to "The End" (the last shot of the closing
credits) is 666.
3) The running time of the movie is 666 in two different ways. The running
time of the film in seconds, from the beginning of the "Overture" to the end
of the "Exit Music" (total exhibition time), is equal to the number of moon
orbits contained in 666 years (8903). The running time of the film in
seconds, from the beginning of the MGM lion logo to the fade-out of the
story, is equal to the number of moon phases contained in 666 years (8237).
Everything before and after the movie proper, that is, the "Overture," end
credits, and "Exit Music" times, adds up to 666 seconds.
4) For an "added bonus," the director Stanley Kubrick was reported to have
died 666 days before the year 2001, on March 7, 1999.
So now we know where both Hollywood and the U.S. government stand: firmly
behind "666." And that explains a lot.
And that is one of the evidences for why I do not support the U.S.
government in any thing, war, peace, or otherwise.
-----
For further reading:
------------------------------------------------------
"The 1968 Movie "2001: A Space Odyssey" May Have Been a Prediction about the
Events of September 11, 2001, And It May Have Cost the Movie Director,
Stanley Kubrick, His Life"
http://www.angelfire.com/moon/busta
------------------------------------------------------
JW Moore
Well, the "otherwise" is pretty indefensible, but...
...this must be about the 666th time I've read this numerological horseshit. It's only a
movie, fer crissakes.
~~Jack
Mat Hunt
> >1) The "monoliths" in the movie appear for 666 seconds. The time between
> >the first appearance and final disappearance of each of the four
> >"monoliths'," the four times added together, is between 666 and 668 seconds
> >(difficult to discern).
> >
> >2) The number of camera shots starting from "The Dawn of Man" (the first
> >shot after the opening credits) to "The End" (the last shot of the closing
> >credits) is 666.
> >
> >3) The running time of the movie is 666 in two different ways. The running
> >time of the film in seconds, from the beginning of the "Overture" to the end
> >of the "Exit Music" (total exhibition time), is equal to the number of moon
> >orbits contained in 666 years (8903). The running time of the film in
> >seconds, from the beginning of the MGM lion logo to the fade-out of the
> >story, is equal to the number of moon phases contained in 666 years (8237).
> >Everything before and after the movie proper, that is, the "Overture," end
> >credits, and "Exit Music" times, adds up to 666 seconds.
> >
SK recut the film after its premiere, so the current running time and
shot sequence is not the original one. The only recurring number SK
was interested in was (CRM)114.
> >4) For an "added bonus," the director Stanley Kubrick was reported to have
> >died 666 days before the year 2001, on March 7, 1999.
LOL. He died of a heart attack in his sleep, there was no way he could
have planned it to happen on a certain day.
> >
> >So now we know where both Hollywood and the U.S. government stand: firmly
> >behind "666." And that explains a lot.
There are lots of ideological reasons to oppose Hollywood and the US
government, so why fixate on this bizarre 666 conspiracy theory???
Mat.
Saddlebags
Are you actually being serious? If so, seek help, because you are a
cretin.
Still, you have a point... 6 is the number of films that SK made in
colour (discounting Spartacus because he was a hired hand on that
one.) In those films, six male protagonists who we are unsure whether
or not to root for (Dave Bowman is a boring scientist who kills the
one exciting character in the film, but he's also just so... nice,
Alex is a brutal bastard but we like him, Redmond Barry is selfish but
we feel sorry for him, Jack Torrance tries to kill his wife but she IS
a pain in the arse, Joker is neither good nor bad, and Bill Harford is
an arrogant, ignorant swine, but we really wish he could actually
manage to get laid). So 6 films, 6 protagonists in which the
goodbalances thebad (God vs. the Devil, in all of us??????)
All we need to do is discover the other 6 factor and we have 666, and
therefore proof that Kubrick was paving the way for the Antichrist.
So... is it more than coincidence that STEVEN SPIELBERG (how's that
for your Pre-9/11 Jewish plot to implicate Muslims?) takes over A.I, a
story that tells of the end of human civilisation? I think not...
Sigh. See how easy it is to sound like you?
Ike Man
Ike Man
>
>2) The number of camera shots starting from "The Dawn of Man" (the first
>shot after the opening credits) to "The End" (the last shot of the closing
>credits) is 666.
>
I know I shouldn't do this, but just out of curiosity, why are the
opening credits excluded and the closing credits included in your
tally? (besides, of course, the fact that they wouldn't total 666
otherwise)
Oh, of course! How silly of me. Everyone knows that closing credits
are much more evil than innocent opening credits.
Tjosephk
times over the last three years.
Sometimes twice a day: 2x3=6! and, if memory serves, 666 minutes before new
year's day 2001, I was masturbating.
Obviously I am wrapped up in a nefarious network of evil conspiracies. Or, I
jerk off too much.
Al Jackson
> Updated assessment of the movie "2001: A Space Odyssey," in summary
>
> 12-22-2002, by Mark Seely
>
> In case thou hasn't heard by now, the late(?) movie director Stanley Kubrick
> filled his movie "2001: A Space Odyssey" with the number 666. The U.S.
> government agency NASA from the beginning praised this movie, and they have
> not retracted their endorsement of it.
Hmm... an obvious troll, NASA never had much of anything to say about
the film, in 1968 or even in subsequent times!
Saddlebags
> Hmm... an obvious troll, NASA never had much of anything to say about
> the film, in 1968 or even in subsequent times!
Distrubingly enough, I'm not sure if he is a troll- he actually has a
website for all this crap...
Mat Hunt
Mat.
iamsb
****
Meanwhile, over in a gripping scene in another Kubrick film:
Though break for handjob. He jerked off in the shrinks outer office.
Instant section eight.
Or something along that vein...
Best,
Steve.
****
Thornhill
There's got to be some value to these insights, you know. Really.
Probably much more than merely the contents of _The Big Book of
Satan's Stanley_, and other fine, and lucrative insights via
fundamental lunerosity ("Today, for *you*, at the sacrifice price of
only $29.95...").
Much more value.
And, one man's crap is another man's gold.
Thornhill