Great confusion

Rating: Null/10 (29 April 2001)

This classical film makes some people move so deeply because of the, some say, open questions it spawns. Others hate it because of the mentioned reason. What a shame!!! The problem is, in my humble opinion, that this was Kubrick's purpose. In order to make the film controversial, he left the story with many questions unanswered. I have to say I was one of the latter. But still, being a sci-fi buff as I am, I had some strange attraction towards the movie. And then, one day, I made one of the wisest decisions I could have done. I bought Arthur C. Clarke's novel based on the screenplay he and the late Kubrick wrote. And then, it was as if a light had touched upon me. I found an astonishing tale of epic proportions with a coherent storyline and that made me smile in awe!!! I could see what story 2001 tried to tell, but Kubrick thought, no doubt, that , as I said before, it would be better to left the most important issues open. Well, in that aspect he succeeded. Nowadays, in the real 2001, the movie is still discussed, but I think that it would have been better if Kubrick would have chosen to tell a story as the one portrayed in Clarke's novel. The film would have been still a wonder and as misterious but with a more coherent and understandable quality to it. I would have love to see the things the novel says, regarding Bowman's travel trough space, and not those stupid colors, some associate with the 60's. 2010 show us how wonderful 2001 could have been, if Kubrick wouldn´t have tried to be so pretentious. Also as a side note, I don't understand why it´s remembered by one of it's subplots (HAL's psycho behaviour) when the story is about mankind's evolution (as superbly portrayed in the apes's prologue with Richard Strauss' Thus spoke Zarathustra) Nevertheless, I recommend to watch it, but READ THE NOVEL FIRST!! (It would make the experience much more fascinating , I promise you)