3Dsf

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
That or we're seeing the attachment for the Nikkor lens and...no lens:unsure: Lots of set pics with that Pod and no HAL...

I considered that actually, but it turns out that it isn't the case. There are photos in the Archives that show that the pod bay EVA pods had fluted aluminium tubes with glass lenses inside those spots - they didn't have Nikkor lenses or lens mounts. I think there’s one or two shots from the 4K scan that show that also.

Only the attack sequence pod with the internal mechanisms for making the arms move, and the full-sized extra-detailed front panel, had Nikkor lenses.
 
Last edited:

joberg

Master Member
I considered that actually, but it turns out that it isn't the case. There are photos in the Archives that show that the pod bay EVA pods had fluted aluminium tubes with glass lenses inside those spots - they didn't have Nikkor lenses or lens mounts. I think there’s one or two shots from the 4K scan that show that also.

Only the attack sequence pod with the internal mechanisms for making the arms move, and the full-sized extra-detailed front panel, had Nikkor lenses.
Right you are...but what I don't understand to this day is why SK decided to use that EVA Pod for the major scenes? Was it too complicated to affix that Nikkor lens in that front panel? You've mentioned that those lenses were probably rented during production...I mean insurance would've covered any damage/breakage of those lenses...right? Still a mystery to me Neil:unsure:
 

3Dsf

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Right you are...but what I don't understand to this day is why SK decided to use that EVA Pod for the major scenes? Was it too complicated to affix that Nikkor lens in that front panel? You've mentioned that those lenses were probably rented during production...I mean insurance would've covered any damage/breakage of those lenses...right? Still a mystery to me Neil:unsure:

Well, we don't know for certain. There's no documentation that I've seen on the subject.

The most plausible theory is that the pod bay set was constructed, with its pods, and that the HAL-instigated murder scene had not been decided on, details-wise. It's known that they did go through various narrative ideas as to how Frank would be dispatched, and so on.

Then the actual murder scene was filmed later, reusing one of the full-sized pods built for the bay scene. It's at that point that Kubrick decided to show more clearly to the audience that HAL had the ability to see out from the pod using the pod's cameras, and so had a HAL lens installed on that full-sized prop. He then decided that the full-sized pods didn't look good enough for an extreme closeup of the HAL eye for the actual murder scene, and had another front panel built, with more greeblies and details.

This sequence of events would explain the two continuity errors in that sequence.
 

joberg

Master Member
Did you see that Pod (left side) or is this a fake pic?:unsure:

1641398873731.png


That's why we never see the front of the Pod when it catches Poole; it's without HAL as we can see clearly on that pic. But back on the scene from Discovery cockpit, we're back at the original design, sans HAL. And last: then, one can extrapolate that the 1/6th scale model was also without the HAL details.
1641399915531.png
 
Last edited:

3Dsf

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I can assure you that that woman was never in the original film! :)

Also, that's a really strange photo. The background looks like a movie screenshot, but I've never seen any 2001 EVA pod with a flat panel on the front like that. There are numerous mistakes on that pod's front panel, in fact.
 
Last edited:

joberg

Master Member
I can assure you that that woman was never in the original film! :)

Also, that's a really strange photo. The background looks like a movie screenshot, but I've never seen any 2001 EVA pod with a flat panel on the front like that. There are numerous mistakes on that pod's front panel, in fact.
Yes, the woman was never in the movie or publicity photos...and you're right; the Pod seems strange in the pic. I don't know if it's CGI or a montage...or?
 

3Dsf

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
1641426054134.png


A reverse image search doesn't come up with much, except for "Juan Gatti - Photos - VOGUE SPAIN - Una odisea espacial | Michele Filomeno". Same with the image above. So, yeah. Some sort of goofy contemporary Photoshop job.
 
Last edited:

RustBelt

New Member
Yeah, that's an interesting continuity error, isn't it? I actually have a writeup on that aspect of the full-sized EVA pods here:

2001: EVA Pod Continuity - The Age of Plastic

It's in the "Pod cameras and HAL eye" section.
That is a very interesting write-up. One must wonder or consider if it appears in the movie if it can be considered "correct". Not necessarily canon but sort of like a version. I attached a picture of my version of the 1:8 scale model.
 

Attachments

  • 20220113_203419.jpg
    20220113_203419.jpg
    1.4 MB · Views: 37

3Dsf

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
That is a very interesting write-up. One must wonder or consider if it appears in the movie if it can be considered "correct". Not necessarily canon but sort of like a version. I attached a picture of my version of the 1:8 scale model.

Well, generally I think most people consider on-screen appearances to be canon, and in the case of the 2001 EVA pods, there are three different front panels seen in different scenes. :)

Unfortunately the Moebius EVA pod kit is an abbreviated version of the ultra-detailed attack version of the pod, but with some corners cut to lower production costs, plus some additional outright errors. The "trellis" detail to the right of the photo, for example, is a very crude approximation! Or that circle and triangle at the top? No idea where those came from! It's such a shame, as the kit isn't bad at first glance.
 
Last edited:

joberg

Master Member
I can already see a B-29 Superfortress gun turret on the upper right-hand side of the panel. They used those also on the Aries-1B;)
 

3Dsf

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Yeah, there are Airfix railway turntable, travelling crane, SR-N1 hovercraft, whatchamacallit tank car end, etc, parts...
 

Pyramidrep

Well-Known Member
Doug Trumbull has a lot of 2001 pics in his possession and wanted to do a video/documentary presentation about that material.
I think that the publication of the 2001 Taschen book put a stop to it...or maybe the permission for the rights to do so:unsure:
Doing some research this morning on the Museum of the Moving Image website before I travel to New York next week, I came across this documentary discussion with Douglas Trumbull(R.I.P.) About 30 minutes in, Doug reveals tantalising views of his archive which will be of great interest here.
I can only hope that the archive will be bequested to a public museum by Doug’s family, now he has sadly passed.
 
Last edited:

joberg

Master Member
Doing some research this morning on the Museum of the Moving Image website before I travel to New York next week, I came across this documentary discussion with Douglas Trumbull(R.I.P.) About 30 minutes in, Doug reveals tantalising views of his archive which will be of great interest here.
I can only hope that the archive will be bequested to a public museum by Doug’s family, now he has sadly passed.
I sure hope so Pyramidrep;) Not only his inventions in terms of engineering new types of camera/electronic/tech, but also, as you said, his incredible collection of photos showing all of his various film projects he did along the years.(y)
 

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. Your new thread title is very short, and likely is unhelpful.
  2. Your reply is very short and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  3. Your reply is very long and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  4. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
  5. Your message is mostly quotes or spoilers.
  6. Your reply has occurred very quickly after a previous reply and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  7. This thread is locked.
Top