Why Does Hal 9000 Malfunction?

2001 Space Odyssey, the film that changed science fiction forever. Touted as one of the best movies of all time by directors like Christopher Nolan and Denis Vilenauve space odyssey is long, haunting, and not an easy film to watch for the average filmgoer. Kubrick takes us through three major sections spanning in time, from the dawn of man to our first visit to Jupiter. The film is lonely, cold, and huge much like the universe it seeks to portray. While 2001 is known for many of it’s elements from its breathtaking cinematography and special effects, to its strange and psychedelic third act, what the movie arguably is best known for is, the supercomputer hal 9000 and his breakdown during the spaceship Discovery’s mission to Jupiter. In an attempt to prevent his shutdown Hal kills all the ships crew except Dave Bowman who manages to deactivate the supercomputer in one of cinemas most haunting scenes.

But this raises the question: Why exactly did hal 9000 malfunction? What spurred a 9000 series supercomputer, known to have never made any errors, make such a fatal mistake? Well like any of director Stanley Kubrick’s films the answer is not very clear.
So lets go through this step by step as I present to you my understanding of this segment of the movie, and what it says for the 2001: Space Odyssey as a whole.

[TheEliasNoel]

Sorry for the terrible sound in the beginning working on a new mic system for my office!

[detroitpolak]

I was around 12 (1986) when my uncle showed me this. After the stargate scene and the ending, I said “that was stupid” he said “because it was actually stupid, or because you didn’t understand it?” I’ve spent many years studying this film, and that comment formed my intellectual journey in life. 2001 had a HUGE impact on me. Great video!

[nickwilliams]

HAL was told to keep the existence of the monolith a secret. He was _also_ told - in fact it was his primary function - to do everything he could to ensure the success of the mission. Including telling the crew anything that would help them complete the mission. Since _knowing what the hell the mission was about_ would clearly help them complete it, this created a conflict. A "neurosis".

The malfunctions were caused by HAL's "neurosis" which in turn caused Poole and Bowman to discuss turning him off. At that point, it's them or him.

It wasn't exactly self=preservation though. HAL's primary function was the success of the mission, even in the absence of the crew. Since HAL assessed that he would be more likely to complete the mission without a crew that the crew would be likely to succeed without him (more of the hubris mentioned in the video), he made a completely logical choice.

So it's actually two separate things going on: the neurosis caused by conflicting orders _and then_ the crisis caused when HAL realises he's about to be switched off.

[blaster-zyxx]

My take was always that Hal worked perfectly but was an example of complex set of priorities and unfeeling machine's ability to carry out what it was instructed to do, lead to unintended consequences. Not unlike an alarm clock alarming at night when a human accidentally set the wrong am/pm setting, and the alarm clock carries out the command as instructed, but not as intended.

[rhymereason]

In 1974 I was an usher at a major movie theater with a 3, 000 seat capacity and this movie was replaying. I think it ran for about 3 weeks. I must have seen this movie about 50 times during that period and it fascinated me... every time I watched it I got something else out of it. I got to see all the great movies from 72' to 77' many times and no other one impacted me as much as this one did. A very deep movie filled with all kinds of symbolism.

[johnberkley]

There's also self-preservation. When Dave was extracting Hal's higher functions, Hal said he was afraid, so we know Hal had a certain amount of what could be called emotion. Existential awareness, at least. So throw existential fear into the mix while he's reading their lips (just before intermission in the theatrical release), and realizes what they will do.

[dennisray]

Yes, your logic makes sense. HAL was testing Dave and Frank, but when he sees they were planning to disconnect him, he went into self-preservation mode. Thank you, a very interesting video.

[lucasdeaver]

You're probably too young to remember how paranoid everyone was of the coming computer revolution back then. There were a lot of TV shows, Twilight zone, Star Trek, The Prisoner etc, that show this. This movie is one of the most famous examples but the idea of mistrusting the computers "intelligence" (The term AI wasn't used then) was a common theme.

[walterulasinksi]

Hal went into an M.Möbius loop. His basic programming included coding that would prevent him from withholding the truth. Then just before the mission launch he was instructed to lie to half the crew, as the others that knew the truth, were in hibernation. Once the programming conflict was resolved ( to JpHal’s reasoning) Frank Poole was dead and Dave Bowman trapped on the pod. Hal realized that if the hibernating crew awoke, and poole and bowman were not there, the crew would be suspicious and instead of lying to just poole and bowman, he would have to conceal 5he truth from the rest of the crew. So that meant Hal had to cause their deaths also. .

[kyjack]

I always thought Hal was trying to see if the crew knew about the monolith. Hal knew but was testing them to see if they were lying to him. So he lies to them to see if they reveal their lie. Hals suspicions are confirmed when he reads their lips to shut down hal thinking he made a mistake which convinces hal they know about the missions true objective which shouldnt be because hal is perfect and only he is suppose to know, which is the mistake. Them knowing about the mission contradicts Hals prime directive to be the only one to know so he kills them to maintain him being the only one to know. He didn't make a mistake but rather he was correcting a mistake that wasn't actually a true problem but he thought it was. No matter how perfect Hal is he is still bound by his belief which is what he was programmed and nothing can change that. The humans change, the tool is still the tool.

[coconuciferanuts]

This is fantastic. To analyse Kubrick's masterpiece to this degree. Hal's tone & superior voice are also part of the psychological sway that we see in sci-fi & suspence movies.

[timjohnson]

I had an incident at work where my Group Leader, a physicist and a senior engineer gave me conflicting instructions on building something. I had Hal 9000 moment and bailed to work on something else. When I got called to the carpet to explain myself I said I had a Hal 9000 moment and everyone understood.

[Thorr]

Excellent analysis. Especially as you go beyond the standard "HAL went crazy because he was forced to lie" rationale that's usually put forth about this element in the film.

[paulclementyonkers]

Excellent answer! Kubrick mentioned "deeper meaning" when asked about 2001's meaning. Your answer addresses both the more subtle ideas presented by Kubrick and the Greek Epic symbolism of hubris as the downfall of humanity. As well as the reason for 'Odyssey' in the subtitle of the Movie.

[michaelmurdola]

Excellent discussion on the HAL 9000. Enjoyed an intelligent discussion on this subject and subscribed to your channel

[stevenvallarsa]

What a brilliant analysis of what happened to HAL. Back in the 80's, way before on-demand entertainment, this was one of two movies I would make sure to stay up to watch on the late movie, the other being Logan's Run. I read the Arthur C Clarke version of 2001 (and 2010) when I was in my late teens, finally resolving what the heck happened in that movie, having previously been of the notion that it was the aliens who somehow made HAL crazy. It should be mentioned that the novel version of 2001 makes it clear that it's Haywood Floyd who orders HAL to keep the monolith secret, which was changed for the 2010 movie, as the clip showed.

[frankiecalabro]

This was the most intuitive and accurate interpretation I’ve heard to date. I’m 62 and saw this film classic many times. Bravo, well

[TheFireMonkey]

I never felt that HAL malfunctioned at all - [I should say I took computer programming in the 70s with a focus on AI] To me, HAL worked perfectly, just not in a way expected. HAL did exactly what HAL's programming was supposed to do - it just happens that HAL was required to interpret a situation that had not been anticipated. Now I do find your analysis to be excellent, it's just that from my programming perspective, it never seemed like a malfunction.

[godfreydaniel]

HAL did not "malfunction." He dispassionately swept all obstacles to the completion of the mission aside. He had higher-level programming from above - and executed it...

[Goomer]

It is amazing how infatuated we all are after so many years have gone by. I saw it when it came out, and didn't get it at all. Kubrick really delivered some fine entertainment.