My Apology on Contemporary Philosophical Criticism

Rating: 8/10 (26 April 2016)

Throughout its entirety, the film offers a perfect balance of 'eye- candy' and musical superstructure. I have always admired the director's inert photography, though, in later works, he gradually abstracts from this signature camera work. Unfortunately, just like 'Interstellar' disappointed me in the ending (which was much more blunt and hand-guiding, even transforming from Sci-Fi to Fantasy), so did '2001: A Space Odyssey'.
As the title of this review suggests, I will offer something that I couldn't find while searching for what I'd consider proper criticism. My offense will construct on a single point of the movie -- the apparent definition of 'god'. It is not a typo; there is a difference between 'God' and 'god'. What the movie suggests is that man shall rise in its evolution to a point of 'god', after it emerges as a 'God'. In the ending, we have a 'Star-child' which I can compare to 'Dr. Manhattan'. I'm not a big fan of superhero movies or of this character, but I think it's the best comparison I can make so you can understand. So, the Star- child's a being capable of manipulating reality beyond anyone's imagination, and yet, it isn't perfect.
And now for my final statement against Kubrick's theory -- man's evolution is limited. To be clear, I'm not religious, but I'm not a fan of contemporary science either, because, like religion, it claims something that it doesn't offer. 'God' is a term that explains a being that seems to have a cheat-book, essentially different from the term 'god', which IS existence and perfection itself. The specimen of a creature that evolves can never become 'god', because it is a subject, an individual, a finite, fatal creature. To be one with all and all as one is a matter of objectivity, an eternal, all-knowing, infinite state. I admit that my philosophical theory(not really mine, just something I'm offering) is sweeping the chalk board, but it is, with great confidence, a legitimate criticism. Man cannot evolve to become god, because god is not a creature. In the latest take on thermodynamics, energy is depleting and destructible. If that is so, a state of metaphysical nihilism awaits existence. This piece is made long before these claims, so I can't really blame anyone involved in the film for claiming otherwise. Space is infinite, time is infinite and we... we are the opposite. That is why we even exist; because if we were gods we would be impossible.