Talking with Con Pederson
WM: Well, I thought not, but he was so passionate about
things.
CP: We were trying to figure out a way to get him to work on it because
he had worked on a show I did in New York, and oddly enough, the thing
he was most interested in contributing to the film was sound. At that
point in his career he had started doing a lot of sound work, music, and
he was hoping to get involved in that aspect of it. Doug and I were interested
in the slit scan process, although we hadn't really gotten into it. There
came a point on 2001 when we were trying to devise a couple of
effects that needed some sort of stop-motion smearing effect. We fiddled
around with some things, but then Doug went off and bought a Mechano set.
The British have incredible engineers. You can get stuff there that is
just remarkable. For about £100, we bought this huge kit, like a
tinker toy sort of thing, with which you could build just about any kind
of mock up of a mechanical device. Doug actually built a little analog
mechanical computer out of it. One thing led to another and he ended up
using the same bug-eyed camera that we had used to make the dome show
for the New York World's Fair, which we had coincidentally brought over
with us, and built this big machine to do time lapse on a very large scale.
A five foot slit with stuff passing through it, artwork on a big conveyor
belt -- and that is how the stargate sequence came about, because we were
looking for something besides the wet paint stuff that Stanley had done
in New York, which was really his primer for the film, no pun intended.
It was a paint effect that was done by a couple of guys from the Carolinas
called Effects Y'All. They had done this sort of carnival medium of oil
and water. They used different kinds of paint and chemicals and shot it
at about 60 frames a second. The stuff was terrific. They shot an awful
lot of stuff in New York in '65 and that was some of the stuff he'd shown
me in '65 before the production started in England.
It was really beautiful. Most of what we saw became the
foundation of the Stargate sequence in 2001. One good story about
that: Stanley got those guys, or one of them, back over to England to
Borehamwood at MGM where they took a big chunk of Stage 5 and built a
big enclosure with a kind of airlock, like a regular dark room. Wouldn't
let anybody in. They didn't want anybody to know how they were doing this
stuff, no matter where they were. They spent about a month, shooting and
shooting and shooting the same exact effects of paint swirling and that
sort of thing. They had thousands of feet of new stargate material. Finally,
they just closed it down, decided we had enough so we could pick what
we needed. Well, later on Stanley's wife, my wife, and I sat down and
culled through several hours of that stuff and I don't think we used a
single frame of all that stuff that they'd shot in England. Everything
that was shot in New York magically just seemed to work so much better,
and we never knew why. It was just amazing looking, and we didn't have
to do anything to it. Although we did use some of it, and retreated it
optically. In fact, we spent about a year making what we called 'purple
hearts,' which were colorized versions of different effects that were
composited sort of primitively together.
That whole Stargate sequence replaced what originally was a trip through
the cosmos to see where the extraterrestrials were coming from. We had
toyed with the idea of the extraterrestrials being defined and explained
by a narrator. We thought of different narrators and I suggested a guy
named Doug Raine who had done a film on astronomy in Canada that was really
great. I got the film and Stanley liked Doug's voice, but it turned out
that he had to have a new voice for Hal, the computer, which was originally
a woman called Athena in the first version. Anyway, Hal 9000 needed a
voice and Stanley tried quite a lot of people for it, and didn't care
for any of the voices. At that point, we threw out the narrator -- decided
it was going to be too preachy, too stodgy to have a narrator, and too
much of a documentary -- so we tried Doug Raine as the voice of the computer
and the rest is history: he was perfect for it! But originally he would
have been the narrator of the film: there was even a prologue in black-and-white,
along the lines of Cinerama, where you started in black-and-white and
open up, which is by now a well-entrenched cliché, to mix a metaphor.
For that we shot Carl Sagan, and a lot of the eminent astronomers of the
time, talking about the cosmos. That whole thing was thrown out -- again
it was too dry, too didactic. Went through a lot of permutations, there
was a stack of scripts. Arthur Clarke would come from Ceylon and spend
a few weeks until he'd get worried about taxes and then he'd have to leave
the country and go on tour. It was entertaining.
I wish now I'd kept some of that stuff. I didn't keep anything from the
picture. When we were still planning to do a lot of other-worldly stuff,
I spent several months just painting pseudo-Bonestall "science fiction"
things. I don't know what happened to those. They were probably destroyed,
because everything Stanley could, he destroyed. We had all these scripts
and one particular script I really wish I'd kept -- I had no interest
in keeping that stuff at the time -- but in this one, the first page,
if you turned it over, there was all this scribbling on it that was obviously
written during a conversation that Stanley was having with Arthur and
up at the top there were a lot of doodles and in this scribbling handwriting
were sort of ideas: there was "2001" here and "an odyssey"
there, and then "an odyssey in space," and there were all these
little trial balloons and down at the bottom there was "2001: A Space
Odyssey" underscored a couple of times, all of this in Stanley's
ball-point. I just realized a few years later that I should have kept
that. He burned everything that he could for a reason.
























Post new comment