I haven't read the original stories (on which the screenplay was based), or the novel (which was based on the screenplay). They're not all that relevant, and I'm not particularly interested in Clarke's work (though I'd readily admit that I could be naive on that).


>Also, just because something is considered classic, doesn't
>mean I have to automatically accept it.

It doesn't mean you have to personally enjoy it. But there's more to a film than your personal enjoyment. For you to so completely dismiss its historical importance, and the quality of its construction, is *factually* incorrect and breathtakingly naive.

>The sound effects are
>terrible!

smh

>The high pitched beeping, terrible.. the piercing
>sounds, terrible...

They are SUPPOSED to be piercing! They are supposed to be painful to the ear. Have you spent a split second considering why those sounds are so piercing?

>the weak scenes of him entering an alien
>world... as if that wasn't an ocean with color filters on the
>footage.. WEAK... try harder...

What are you, a fucking troll? This is ridiculous. What was it, and what was it supposed to look like?

As for "try harder," it was 1968 for God's sake. Anyone who's worked in visual effects will say that the creation of 2001, particularly the "star gate sequence" that you seem to find so lazy, was a seminal moment in visual effects, the beginning of the modern age.


>finally, bring a bit more
>context to the ending

The ending is the best thing about the movie. It admits the ridiculousness of the standard science fiction themes and elements that you seem to find so necessary. Here's an anecdote from the Wikipedia page:

"Astronomer Carl Sagan wrote in his book The Cosmic Connection that Clarke and Kubrick asked his opinion on how to best depict extraterrestrial intelligence. Sagan, wryly acknowledging Kubrick's desire to use actors to portray humanoid aliens for convenience's sake, argued that alien life forms were unlikely to bear any resemblance to terrestrial life, and that to do so would introduce "at least an element of falseness" to the film. Sagan proposed that the film suggest, rather than depict, extraterrestrial superintelligence. Sagan attended the premiere and was "pleased to see that I had been of some help." Sagan related that many Soviet scientists regarded the film to be the best American movie they had seen."

>if you are going to make a book into a
>movie

A book was not made into a movie. Clarke and Kubrick wrote the screenplay together, adapted, very loosely, from several mutually unrelated stories. Clarke released a novel, later, to make a little more money, but it was essentially just a spinoff.

>with just basic and minimal requirements... I'm sorry,
>but it's not perfect, or nearly as good as you let others
>convince you it is. So please, grow your own personality, your
>own sense of self, and stop following everything.

How about you stop pretending that ridiculous naivite is a virtue, or a sign of individuality. You can be an individual without being an idiot.