Was it Saturn?
No, the book's conclusion was set at a moon of Saturn, but the movie was set around Jupiter.
the psychological strain on HAL causes him to sabotage the ship's antenna control system, breaking the link to Earth; HAL's behavior becomes increasingly suspicious
First, this may be interpretation; I always thought HAL to be acting quite <borg>efficient</borg>, not strained. I can't remember one thing though: Why (in its own logic) had it severed the connection? Was it only a ruse to get Bowman and Poole into a vulnerable position?
Yes, perhaps I was interpreting HAL's actions a little too much - I was partly relying on the analysis of HAL's actions given in the novel 2010. If nobody else does it, I'll review this section.
Second, the second sentence doesn't quite follow up. After the 'destruction' of the AO unit, there was no reason to be only suspicious.
--Yooden
There was no explanation of HAL's actions in the film. Watching 2001 and not the others and not reading Clarke's fiction, it's not immediately clear why HAL is acting the way he is. --KQ
Interestingly, I've heard that HAL is malfunctioning from the beginning: in the chess game, it is not nessacerily mate in three - it's mate, but he could survive for four moves. Is this the beginning of HAL's problems?
And then there's the whole IBM - HAL thing... and the product placement! :D Dave McKee
Wikipedia contains spoilers
While it is true that HALs actions are not explained in the movie 2001, HALs actions *are* explained in [2010 a space odyssey]
? (both the book, and the movie). Apparently HAL has the psyche of a young child. HAL is incapable of resolving the conflict in his orders. I somehow remeber a fragment of dialouge in 2001 about ground control explaining to Dave "We have been able to replicate the same problem in our own ground based computer...", and goes on to explain things. If someone could find a reference to this, that would be perfect! -- [Kim Bruning]
?
Wikipedia contains spoilers
I have not read the book of 2001, but I believe that it is also explained there. It is definitely not clear in the movie, but once you hear the explanation given in the book or in the movie 2010, it makes sense. Note that HAL reported the device failure immediately after conversing with Dave and Frank about the nature of the mission, asking them if they thought there was anything funny or odd about certain facets of it. They said no, they didn't think so. Right after that, he said, "Just one moment, just one moment", and reported the failure. Later in the movie, after Hal was dismantled, Dave saw a tape being played that they weren't supposed to see until they reached their destination, and the tape made it clear that Hal knew all along what the purpose of the mission was.
However, this is all a matter of piecing it together after the fact--after you've already heard the explanation of why HAL went crazy, and the explanation would not be clear to anyone watching the movie without that foreknowledge. -- Egern
I edited the article because it contained a number of mis-statements. It must be remembered that there is nothing in the Kubrick film itself to indicate the presence of beings from another planet - that's simply a hypothesis made by one of the characters. Likewise, the "reasons" for HAL's behaviour listed in "2010" are not mentioned at all in 2001 (frankly, I find them somewhat insulting to the audience's intelligence). To accept what Clarke says about Kubrick's film is not appropriate. --
Alex Kennedy
![[Home]](wikipedia.png)