As I said I didn’t care. Huge gulf between qaulity of both films but I was a fan of Clarke’s sci fi writing before I was a fan of Kubrick’s. The sentinel is still a fine short story as is Clarke’s early work. If he made a few quid of three subsequent books I couldn’t care.
In fairness it’s more the film than the books I have an issue with. But either way I think it should have been left alone. I wonder what Kubrick thought of it?
I don’t know actually, probably not much! And to be honest I have more of emotional attachment to that film because I remember watching it with my dad in the 80’s when it was shown on tv and it’s one of the happier memories I have of him. Though I wouldn’t be surprised if he gave out about it saying it was crap compared to 2001!
Had a quick Google on Kubrick’s and 2010
In other news , there’s a sequel of sorts on the way for The Shining .
I only watched 2010 after you mentioned it here a while back . Thought it was grand , far easier to digest than 2001 , almost a dumbed down version , not to take anything away from it .
I think I’ve watched 2001 once & its not something I’ll bother watching again . But if 2010 was on I’d watch it again .
The book isn’t bad and you can understand King revisiting it. A lot of his books have interconnections. But it’s no Shining. And the film won’t be either.
I could watch 2001 no problems yeah it’s slow moving but still a master piece.
Roy Schneider and Bob balaban where excellent in 2010. It was ambitious to make after 2001.
Clarke released two novels after 2010 2065 was fairly bland though I did enjoy 3001 about Frank Poole. If you ever could lay yer hands on Clarke’s collected short story’s. Great reading.
Yeah , i might do , some very interesting stuff .
Just read a little about Nine Billion Names of God .That could have been a decent movie adaptation , possibly change the ending .
Deep impact was based on the hammer of God.
You liked yeh? Have to catch that, love ML’s stuff, but still haven’t caught up on all of it.
It’s very good but a bit heavy.