• Log In
  • Sign Up
    • clarke was a gifted science fiction writer (childhood's end was an amazing book) and an amazing futirist — yet that said I always tend to view 2010 as being more of a cash in attempt by clarke rather than being a legitamte creative work related to the film.

      2001 is really a complete story, so adding a follow up was missing the point. the genius of the film was what kubrick brought to the story. so 2010 is to me really bad fan fiction at best (it's also a good example of what hollywood does poorly).

      the best films are based on the average books (the godfather is a good example of this), and the genius of kubrick was his ability to rewrite and flesh out a script — so i see that film as more of his baby.

    • I drove an hour to see Apollo 11 at a great IMAX theater with huge screen and I will never forget it. They had incredible found 70mm footage that was lost for 50 years. The detail was amazing.

    • The original changed the way I looked at clouds forever. This, to me, is a sign of true art.

      The other thing I recall was Mad Magazine's brilliant satire of the monolith:

    • Great post and insight. If the theater and 70mm is not an option, the restored 70mm was made into a 4K release available at Amazon:

    • Yerp - The extra detail in the books joins a lot of the dots that the movie doesn't reach.

      Also check out an anthology of ACC's short stories if you haven't already done so.

      'The City And The Stars' is outstanding.