what do you think 'bout this book by Arthur C Clarke?? I't really changed the way I think...when I was a child...
2001 (the movie) was based on the short story 'the Sentinel'. The subsequent book of 2001 was a novelisation of the movie. During the production of the movie they ran out of money - hence the big enigmatic ending. It's still good though. Have you read the sequel, 2010? Cheers, Ron.
I like this site a lot. Good combi of estetics and thinking. (you must have about 15 min. to watch - preferably in the dark): <a href=http://www.kubrick2001.com/>2001 explained</a>
Didn't that also have a film, with Rob Schneider or something. About going to Jupiter or something, it was a while ago :bugeye:
I'm reading 2010 right now... But I've heard that the second follow-up, the "2061: Odissey three",was a complete letdown.
2063 was pretty cool. 3001 was amazing. 2010 was alright. Same goes for 2001. In spite of its length (which, if reduced, wouldn't be much more than a half an hour) the 2001 the movie is just awesome. 2010 sucked. I hope they keep making them, though, they might just get it right again...
I saw 2010 and I agree, it sucked. Liked 2001 the movie, and I'm reading the book right now. Well, when I can find the time.
I thought that 3001 was the most lacklustre of the lot, it promised a lot with resolving the story, and then it just ends all of a sudden without a proper ending. 2061 was ok, but the best ones have to be 2001 and 2010. The novel of 2010 was actually a sequel to the film version of 2001. In the novel of 2001, they fly all the way to Saturn, but they couldnt afford the effects for the movie or something, so they changed it to Jupiter. The novel of 2010, continues on from the movie, so the original 2001 novel exists in its own paralell universe seperate from the movie and the follow-ups. How bizarre?
