2001: A Space Odyssey | Vision of a Future Passed:The Prophecy of 2001 | Warner Bros. Entertainment
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 02. 2013
- A short documentary on the foresight of 2001: A Space Odyssey.
Get it on Blu-Ray Here: bit.ly/Shop2001
Connect with Warner Bros. Entertainment Online:
Follow Warner Bros. Entertainment INSTAGRAM: / warnerbrosentertainment
Like Warner Bros. Entertainment on FACEBOOK: / warnerbrosent
Follow Warner Bros. Entertainment TWITTER: / wbhomeent
At Warner Bros. Entertainment, we believe in the power of story. From classics to contemporary masterpieces, explore and watch a library full of extraordinary, stirring, and provocative entertainment that goes beyond the big screen. Subscribe to discover new favorites from the studio that brought you Friends, JOKER, the Conjuring Universe, and The Wizarding World of Harry Potter™.
2001: A Space Odyssey | Vision of a Future Passed:The Prophecy of 2001 | Warner Bros. Entertainment
• 2001: A Space Odyssey ...
Warner Bros. Entertainment
/ warnerbrosonline - Zábava
Look at the flat screen, bezel less tablets they are using at 13:52 ! It is about to be 2018, and we - just now - have these things ! Can you imagine ??? And just look at all of those flat screen displays in the cockpit. This is back in the days when the average television was black & white, and weighed 65-70 pounds, and computers were the size of refrigerators, running at a few megahertz. How did this guy get it so accurate ?
Absolute genius
Exactly. Flat screen plasma displays. They had to use film projectors to achieve that effect in the fuuristic space craft. The 1984 sequel "2010: The Year We Made Contact" recreated the interior of the 'Discovery' space craft but they used colour TV screens which had those inherent curved screens (being cathode tube based tech) of that era which ironically made the 1980s movie more 'dated' than the 1960s original. It just goes to show the genius of Kubrick and his masterpiece.
The movie did predict smaller computers, in meal scene Dr Pool and Bowman are looking at tablets.
Everyone has missed one major flaw when Bowman goes to the hatch to shut down HAL. One can very clearly see that his left glove is NOT attached to his suit when he opens and goes through the hatch. You can see his bare wrist. I'm puzzled that Kubrick didn't noticed it, or if he did was it too late to re-film that piece.
lawrencet83 he ran out of money and simply had to stop. Maybe as you say he just didn’t have the money to fix things like that
Yes. And each of HAL’s “transparent aluminum wafer” memory core slabs could house petabytes each, or more. Roger Ebert’s assumption about Kubrick envisioning the future of technology “incorrectly” really doesn’t hold water. Enough details were left nebulous enough, very much on purpose by Kubrick, to allow for the realized actual details of future technologies to fit in the framework of the film quite nicely.
What the movie didn't predict is that one device could serve as several things, like our modern day smartphones do. Those tablets in 2001 could only do one thing, show video. There were no apps on them. You couldn't make a phone call on them. That's what those video phone booths did. The real thing 2001 failed to predict is consolidation of technology.
@@jefferee2002 "The real thing 2001 failed to predict is consolidation of technology" ? HAL runs the entire ship and is integral to almost every system (including propulsion and navigation.)... [ "Alexa, Alexa ... order more coffee please " ]. The "princely denizens" of the Discovery space craft where almost every need is met... where even a bed is commanded to reposition for greater comfort. + integration of commercial entities / logos and related systems. The original design of the space helmets has the idea of memory modules on the outside where different programs and different mission schemes could be loaded / uploaded you know like an 'App" .
“By 2019 your computer will become sentient”
Well, I’m here & my computer recommends I watch a Chinese man fishing by pouring Mentos in a hole & Pizza Rat.
On the other hand, maybe your computer COULD have been sentient by 2019 but people like Elon Musk are terrified of it. Perhaps rightly so.
The Gold Standard of sci-fi films!
I think the documentary has dated more than the film
This documentary is using the same trope soundtrack as all sci-fi films of the past decade, so at least it has that going for it.
You got that right.
What is a Blackberry?? :D :D :D
They obsess Kubrick's miscalculation, if anything the film's subtlety and cryptic nature is what makes it great. Top 5 films ever made.
This is one of the best documentaries I've ever seen. It really delves into this, one of the greatest films of all time.
I saw this the first time in Calgary, Canada the week it opened. I have seen it at least 100 times since. It has always been my favourite movie.
After all. A computer does not feel pain, an animal does. A computer does not need to require, an animal does.
Great movie thought absolute masterpiece in my book!
OMG these guys are technological idiots. I'm a computer engineer, and HAL still gives me goosebumps. Glass cockpits, the space station, holographic computer logic, even the ice-cold emotions of Bowman and Poole, trained like machines themselves to survive the voyage isolation. Kubrick was a GOD!!!!
PointyTailofSatan I agree. Look at the scene while they are eating: I-Pads! I especially agree with the glass cockpits. They had multiple pages to do with navigation, etc, just as you would see in an Airbus A380.
i think Arthur C Clarke provided the science - with Kubrick adding the magical touches - much of the "advanced" tech seen in the movie was being worked on back then - Clarke tended to avoid making things up - and he was in a position to learn what was going on at the fringes of technology
Totally on these Hollywood guys trying to predict 2009 and 2019... What a laugh! "When will these computers become sentient!" They saw Terminator one too many times LOL
Douglas Trumbull was the technical genius. He's the reason why the film still looks as incredible today as back in the 60s. They didn't have clear shots of Jupiter until the 70s and he managed to achieve a close look with practical effects.
@@cody8860 Trumbull did the effects, and Kubrick got the Oscar for them.
It's great that they got the people who worked on films with Kubrick to talk in this documentary instead of big name directors like Spielberg or Lucas.
Everybody back then was convinced that the world of the future would be space opera. It turned out to be a cyberpunk dystopia.
Very well put.
haha. Less 2001, more 1984
@@seandonoghue2347 Less HAL, more Neuromancer and cyberspace.
We can still make the future brighter. We just can't fall into despair!
Except for Arthur C. Clarke, most of the people interviewed have a very limited understanding of technology, artificial intelligence and human intelligence. They're movie industry people who anthropomorphize.
-Couldn't agree more. The guy at 2'30" already gives you this feeling.
Yep.
.
I always thought it was very risky programming an A.I. with human psychological characteristics. HAL develops paranoia and repeatedly refers to confidence (in himself, the mission, etc.). If you operate on 'confidence', then you can also operate on its opposite. There is a clear undercurrent of 'personality' in HAL's voice from the very first line of dialog he speaks. He is clearly a machine with a self-identity.
I like the bright, pale Earth. I don't see that as a flaw at all.
The thing about HAL, his interaction with the crew, his being the brains of the ship, are all things that require nanoseconds of his memory. To not have a way to manipulate his environment, to put his AI to full use, it's no wonder he went insane.
actually, everyone, space odyssey is completely subjective. I would say that most of Stanley's films are. Simply put: Kubrick's biggest goal was to progress an individuals mind for the betterment of all men. Arguing and insulting almost proves you have taken too little from his films............... Read a psych book if you haven't.
The reason for not building any station that rotates is that in order to produce enough rotation to even approximate Earth gravity, it would have to be huge, or it would have to spin so fast, it's likely to make the astronauts sick from the spin.
Also, the only point of being in orbit for a human being is microgravity experiments, and even they are not too useful.
Also, working on the exterior of a rotating station would be extremely dangerous.
it wouldn't matter how fast in spun in space because they say there is no gravitational pull in space. Same reason they say that the space shuttle can leave the earth while its spinning at 1000mph....because the higher you go the less gravity has any effect.
So if you put your arm out the window in space at 1000mph nothing would happen....your arm wouldn't move since there is no resistance.... it suppose to be a vacuum unlike here on earth where your arm would get yanked back from resistance.
+Show me the evidence
What the heck is you talking about???
@@showmetheevidence8755 You are discounting friction.
@@GeorgeMonet Friction from what? What do you think causes friction?
It's dumb to get filmmakers to talk about 2001's predictions of the future. You need to use scientists involved in computer AI design, astronauts, and engineers.
18:32 “Just in the sound of the voice” ... apparently Kubrick went to great lengths to make Douglas Rain sound relaxed and laid back, even having him take his shoes off and put his feet up on a cushion while doing his lines.
It's an interesting and paradoxically experience to watch this short documentary in 2023, the style of which is very much of it's time (2007), and watch now passed away critics and writers discuss how dated a piece of science fiction cinema from the 1960s looked to them at the time and the amazing power of handheld devices like Blackberries, which look like something from a museum only fifteen years later.
I'm glad Roger Ebert, Doug Trumbull and Arthur C. Clarke lived long enough to appear in this documentary.
I'm 34 years old and I just saw this movie for the first time, awesome to say the least. It make me wonder though if some people are really that much of visionaries or do they know things that most don't? It really makes you wonder sometimes and makes you think that perhaps there are many things taking place that we're not let in on until many years down the road.
BLAZENYCBLACKOPS Stanley Kubrick, Arthur C Clarke and others did allot of research for the movie. Especially Kubrick is known for his absurd amount of research and eye for detail look up the documentary "Stanley Kubricks Boxes". There were also two advisers from NASA that would help insure that the movie had a base of reality. You can find a short interview here at 2.20.
This is one of my all time favorite movies. Amazing, what they did back then.
I found it interesting how computers might become as smart or smarter then us in the future. I could be wrong, but I dont really see a computer becoming more then the sum of its parts. Plus, they where talking about ethical treatment of a self aware computer, but yet animals like dolphins and chimps that show signs of self awareness, still dont have at lest a basic form of status as a possible intelligent creature...
Very well done video. Thanks.
The movie mentioned that Pan Am would have space flights...but in reality that airline went out of the business 10 years before the real 2001!
@jabba da hutt The big Pan-Am logo on the side of the Orion spaceplane was a bit of a giveaway though.
Notice that progress in space has slowed down since the world's space programmes have become co-operative. We need to bring back adversary. Perhaps this relates to Stanley's theme of conflict and space.
But it was that very adversarial nature which led to the downfall of the USSR. The resource expenditure was simply too much for either side to maintain. Oftentimes adversary just leads to the destruction of both participants if there isn't a timely winner. Just look at animals competing for a mate. Sometimes the fights lead to the death of both.
@@GeorgeMonet 🍷 Interesting point.
That’s a great point, and there is a lot of truth to that.😮
14:40 Incorrect. HAL's neuro network is stored on crystal blocks that Bowman selectively unplugged. Memory at the molecular level. More advanced than today.
Before we go to Mars we ought to have a permanent city on the Moon. It will be much easier to fix unforeseen problems on the Moon than on Mars.
That would be setting up the Mars mission for total failure. If you put a requirement of building something useless for no reason other than to see if we can then you are setting it up to never happen.
0:12 when Hal turned the pod on Frank and it started moving at him with arms outstretched, that was terrifying.
... and suddenly those hands look like claws ...
Actually at 4:28, Dan O'Bannon was wrong. We saw Earth from space since the late 50's early 60's.
Yeah but he correctly predicted that the reanimated dead would need to eat brains to take away the pain of being dead.
The funny thing is that 2001 did a better job predicting technology than the 1984 sequel 2010 did in at least one respect: in 2001 they had flat panel displays, while the Russian ship in 2010 had CRTs.
The one thing that Kubrick did not predict is the environmental movement. Massive space stations and moon bases seem reckless when you consider that all this stuff has to come from the earth. Space travel seems ludicrous if we do not have a home to come back to.
7:52 This scene is the one with the first spoken dialogue in the movie. It doesn’t happen until about 25¾ minutes after it starts.
I am going back to program in Quickbasic, Turbo Pascal just for fun. Remembering the days when it was fun to write procedures, functions.
Kubrick made a damn good guess about the virtual reality, which comes at the end of the movie. That is hardly past, and it is now science fact and is only going to get bigger and more important as technology becomes better.
This film was before it's time and maybe it still is!
That makes sense.. 🍷
Quote "THE COMPUTER WORLD HAS TAKEN A LIFE OF ITS OWN..." How true this statement is.
at 4:26, the statement that Kubrick had no pictures of Earth taken from space, just high altitude aircraft pics -- not true. The Gemini 11 mission in September 1966 reached 800 miles in orbit and brought back pics of the entire spherical surface. That was about the time studio filming had ended and Kubrick and others started the long process of post-production and special effects. Plenty of genuine views of Earth from space were available to them.
We have had photos of the Earth since 1947.
@@catherinelw9365 Since 1872.
This was great
The "most mind-blowing away" in Movie 🎬 Quality...No equal. Diamond 💎 in the rough...Apex Movie
My favorite motion picture.
the scene from inside the space station, and the passing of The Discovery ship seem to me nearly plaigarised by Star Wars in 1977, but I'd more kindly say a homage or certainly a nod to 2001's importance on the genre
I think the movie from the early 70's called "Colossus: the Forbin Project" starring Eric Braeden is actually going to prove much more prophetic in the end about the nature of AI and its interaction with mankind... It was basically a forerunner of the Terminator movies...
really interesting.
7:35 The Captain of the Earth-Moon Shuttle is played by Ed Bishop, whom some might remember as Commander Straker from the Gerry/Sylvia Anderson TV series _UFO_ . That was made a year or so after _2001_ came out.
Apparently Bishop had some spoken lines in this movie, but Kubrick left them all on the cutting-room floor.
Hojo's in Space... now that is futuristic thinking.
+Marc Parella HoJo had a down year in 1992, the same year HAL was born in Urbana, Illinois. Coincidence? I think not. HoJo's R/HR/RBI line in 1991 read 108/38/117. Next thing that happens, HAL is born. After that, HoJo completely fell apart with the Mets, hitting a measly 7 HR, and from that point suffered one of the worst drop-offs in performance in baseball history, his next 3 years consisting of Mendoza Line mediocrity with negligible punch before his retirement. What I like to think is that Kubrick predicted this and, in honor of Howard Johnson and sad to see how HAL's birth somehow poisoned HoJo's career, placed the Christian name of the once-dominant NY Met on Space Station 5 (albeit in the form of a hotel chain). Taking this logic to its natural conclusion would require us as a species to identify and protect any HoJo-like heros from being somehow compromised by the various Skynets we're bound to confront in the not-too-distant future. There must be something about the HoJo prototype that all AI either needs (like Dracula needs blood) or despises and seeks to destroy. HAL vs. HoJo. Epic rap battle of history.
I still want to talk about that leopard jumping down on the actor.
All I know is by 2021 we have AI and machine learning that's being set up against us. The huge warning that this film sets down in the 60's is sadly being totally ignored.
It's happening now - 2023
Yeah nobody ever listens. We practically deserve it at this point. Let’s just hope the asteroid hits before anything else, that’s probably the most dignified exit we’ll get.
OK. All these analyses of what Kubrick meant re the space race, the future of space exploration, etc., are not what I got out of this movie. The obelisk represented whatever amazing natural phenomenon caused our ancestors to evolve into the technological dominants we are today. The ephemeral essence of evolution is, to me, what Kubrick was trying to capture in 2001. It is a phenomenon and in the movie it is NEVER attributed to an alien civilization. It is an allegory. And it rocked my world.
thx
6:53 One thing that is not explained in the movie, that you might only know if you read the book, is that those “satellites” with various national flags on them, that you see at the start of the flash-forward to the year 2001, are actually orbiting nuclear bombs.
The truth is that technological development has not met the expectations of the 1960s. It has in many ways slowed down considerably. I think the 21 century will be mostly eaten up by serious social and political problems.
+arrotoxietak Au Contrare... it is not technology that has stagnated... it is a sense of future and positive mission among us all that is missing. We work. We shop, we complain. Meanwhile, the power brokers continue to run things while we squabble.
Perhaps because the more radical aspects at the heart of the expectations in the 1960s are actually impossible. They never accounted for limitations on resources, costs, material strengths, environmental strain, population strain, energy potentials, etc. They also never asked why. Why would the majority of people working to make ends meat want this?
@@GeorgeMonet Agreeable! Yes certainly thought provoking point. After all without the why that should govern all actions, what is the point to the greatest of human endeavours? At the same time one wonders why places like schools and governments fail to push and instill higher values of space and exponential development to society at large. Our lives will truly benefit once the mind expands.
Someone needs to tell John Baxter that Science Fiction actually did predict everything he says it failed to, as well as most of the technology we use every day.
I like that you mentioned the moon in your comment theres something there called helluim 3 that they think they can use for fusion reactors.
14:27 Sony VAIO VGN-UX180P The mighty tiny in pocket computing power for 2008
Cleaning the dust out of my IBM PS1. LOL.
The music in this video is eerily similar at times to John Williams' Amistad soundtrack
Kubrick came from the year 2100 using a time machine.
0:58 Notice Clarke’s T-Shirt begins with “I INVENTED THE SATELLITE...”. I’m guessing the rest reads “...AND ALL I GOT WAS THIS LOUSY T-SHIRT”.
He _did_ actually invent the idea of the geostationary communications satellite, in an article published around 1946.
Emerson Peabody Excellence in Journalism Award Winner.🥇
What's the music at 14:33?
2001 on glorious 4K coming soon!
With the exception of Hal 9000, every bit of technology shown in this movie, and in the book it came from, could have come to pass if we had spent the money on it. I nuclear powered spacecraft traveling to Jupiter or Saturn? The technology for a primitive form of that has been around since the 60s, Project NERVA.
You might also want to know that NASA did have plans for a manned mission to Mars, landing in 1984. No one wanted to pay for it. And now? Every time it comes up (and it comes up every administration), a President will ask for another Study.
Government employee pensions are costing us trillions every year. They retire at 40 and can live another 40 or 50 years. We are paying them millions not to work. The rest of us in the private sector have to save for our retirements. So a lot of money is being spent, that could be spent on space exploration.
Actually, HAL did as well, but we know him as "Watson" built by IBM.
it is not an immoral act to turn off your Computer but you must invoke the magic words "I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!"
Strange that they didn't discuss the monolith at all. It plays a crucial role in the story.
Five decades later and everyone continues to reflect on the genius of 2001 film and Stanley Kubrick's masterpiece.
I am afraid of IBM's Watson . LOL.
Interesting.
Our technology would develop so much faster if we where able to put our differences aside and all work together, sadly that won't happen anytime soon.
OneofInfinity My thoughts exactly. Sadly, countries are more hell bent on waging war than combining efforts to reach for the stars. What a pity!
+kraftpr because there is 8 billion people we will never do that.
kraftpr A good motivator: colonize planets then in a couple of centuries we can wage interplanetary wars against their descendants.
Very true. If people stopped with their bs and put their heads together, the world would be a completely different place. We could get off this planet and explore space (however the secret space program is already doing that)
But we HAVE PUT OUR DIFFERENCES ASIDE AND WORKED TOGETHER. That's literally what's been happening for the past 40 years.
The very reason why industry is so globalized is precisely because the world is at peace and cooperating.
The reason why space travel stopped is because there was no value in it.
Many comments in the documentary show a lack of understanding in a lot of fields. People pondered about what they saw in the movie which is interesting. But conclusions and questions show the lack of knowledge behind those questions.
It was interesting but because of that lack a bunch of ramblings. Pity. Still...love the movie.
At the prehistoric times, the Monolith almost stayed there for a LONG period of time. If that was correct that Hal may had a virus during the central system checkup in the film. Sometimes or not the option you need to get rid of those antivirus system just because you don't need it.
"We'll be able to do this for real"....yeah right!! We are no closer to seeing this happen than when the movie first came out!!
If it wasn't for Congress and the Vietnam War than maybe it would have been a reality.
Nah. It's because there is no money in it. People don't want to pay for something with no tangible value.
2:28 If he’s talking just SF _movies_ , he might have a point. But SF _writing_ has always been much wider than the stuff that made it to the screen. Because so many of the ideas are so way out, nobody has figured out how to make pictures for them yet.
This is a great film. The thing is - it was made to be completely believable. Everything in it - up until the end ... looks like it could really happen.
Now - one thing about this movie and it's optimism - was that if you look at the progress we had made from the Wright Brothers flight in 1903 to going to the moon in 1969 - it's not that hard to believe that by 2001 - we would be able to do the things in this movie.
Another factor about that - is that in the movie - the Soviet Union still exists.
IRL - what happened to the US Space Program was - the Russians Quit. We very much have the Russians to thank for our going to the moon. When they launched Sputnik - that - put us in a race with them which we seemed to be losing. Thus - we could get Congress and the public to support our space program as part of the Cold War. Today - I see CZcams posts by people who decry any involvement by the military in our space program. To me - these people are morons. Without the military - there would be no space program.
Had the Russians landed on the moon too - THEN - we might well have colonized the Moon by now.
.
I think you are discounting how costly the space race was for both participants. At some point one would have been forced to bow out which of course the Russians did. The pace and expenditure of the program could not be feasibly maintained for long.
Every Hollywood space movies had spinning space station
Which is best? SKs film sets of 2001 or the one he did with Armstrong and Aldrin?
What kind of a computer they have at ISS(international space station)?
Probably a Commodore Vic 20.
An electronic brain can never replicate a human being. Electrons don't have thoughts.
What about the electrons in your brain? Assuming you have one.
@@jcf20010 I am guessing what CF stands for.
If there's one element in 2001 that is begging for some CGI tweaking aka enhancement it's the shots of the Earth seen from space.
AAAHHH!!THANKS FOR THE COMMENT.FRGLEE:FROM(U.K.).
Imagine if it was filmed for the first time now considering the available knowledge and technology today.
It's 2018 and my laptop is rubbish. Not as this documentary reckoned...
17:18 Yea unless human memory is 256 GB .... Yea we are pretty bad at predicting future haha
In 2001 people doubt the landing on the moon.
When was this documentary made?
It came out in October of 2007.
www.imdb.com/title/tt1147658/
It's sad. The reason the reason why we (USA) havn't done much in space since beating the Russians to the moon, is because America isn't really interested in exploration. We're a military power, and as such, we don't really feel the need to explore. That's for smaller, lesser nations to do.
Pretty much. Nixon cancelled the future, so we could concentrate on killing yellow people.
The US (and others, such as the European Space Agency) has done PLENTY in space since the moon landings. Indeed, I would say that the greatest era of solar system exploration is RIGHT NOW.
Obviously, MANNED space flight has been stuck in low earth orbit for 40 odd years - but that looks like it is going to be ending very soon.
I'm optimistic. The future for both manned and unmanned space EXPLORATION, is looking very bright.
In addition, the past 50 years has seen the exploitation of space as a resource to aid commerce and humanity as a whole has expanded exponentially. We are making use of space in ways we possibly could not have imagined 50 years ago.
@@nonyadamnbusiness9887 killing yellow people??? Haha you wouldn't have that attitude if you were in a cage with "yellow" people shooting you with BBs for fun.... Idiot.
You probably hate Trump, trump does more for space in one day than you have done in your whole lifetime.
Douglas Trumbull: the answer to your question at 10:57 is because we can't get into "space". It's not possible. What we call "space" is actually the opposite of what we experience on Earth. Think of it like a shadow. You and I can cast a shadow, but we can't literally go into it. For more info, look into the ETHER and FIELDS (Magnetic/Dielectric). The only place we can go where there is "zero gravity" is the North Pole-The Center of the Entire Universe.
@J Webster Smith II Maxwell, Tesla and Dollard???
Cue theme music from "Twilight Zone".
I have a bridge I'd like to sell you Webster.
I can't help noticing all the music credits, alas they make no mention to their use of Alex Norths music used in some of the clips. Music he originally scored for the film before Kubrick decided to go with the classical pieces.
I love it as it is, but to use his music and not credit him is a bit...............ignorant?
Kubrick and Clarke didn't get the future wrong ..... they just got the date wrong. Give it time.
agreed. there is only the entire rest of the infinite universe to explore, that's all..
"Science fiction was optimistic at that time.... It didn't predict feminism."
What year this documentary was made ? Anyone !!!
Yeah okay, it's 2007. It's more like it.
Clarke & Kubrick were so far thinking it's scary, of course many things didn't happen in the film by 2001 but they are happening or will do eventually.
It's science fiction / prediction not science fact / definite........Clarkes books and the film are surely the most accurate and forward thinking so far ?
as a teen my first impression was the story was technology (not aliens) domination over mankind,, now 50 years later I have come around 360.
14 years later, what a let-down....where is the base on the moon? And travelling to Jupiter? Mars is so far away, probably not at least for 100 years....at this rate.
Are you serious? Never.
This people don't what they're talking about clearly. it's not happened in 2001 maybe, it doesn't mean that that's wrong. it could easily be like 2021 or 2031. AI, Space exploration, and technologies etc.
it seems that they complain about things that don't matter at all
The Monolith = The Smartphone
who ever said animals don't have souls? or non-human living 'things'?...
2001: A Space Odyssey , could it become a horror movie to Sophia?
2001 was the first year of the 20th century. 2000 was the last year of the 19th century. The year 0 was the first year of the first century. Because who starts at counting a 0. You start at 1.