Talk:Interpretations of 2001: A Space Odyssey
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] "Kubrick's 2001?"
I was fairly skeptical when I read the author's description of his thesis. Probably most of all is how he seems to mostly ignore Clarke's role in writing it - I think he refers to the book in passing as "Clarke's novelization" and criticizes it for getting stuff wrong. I don't think you can have the movie without the book. He also seems to claim that the use of Thus Spoke Zarathustra (the music) was fully intentional - I was under the impression that he only decided to use the classical music after hearing it in place of the planned original score, like the later story of Kirby's creation.
Plus there's the purely personal note, where he effectively pronounced that everyone else was wrong and he had The Facts®. (I think you can see what I mean from the quote in the article.) That sort of thing seeeriously grates my nerves. But that's obviously POV. --Shay Guy 01:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Weird Anagrams, Etc.
TMA-ONE = NO MEAT = WOOD = The Trojan Horse? That's almost as much a trip as the ending of the movie. 18.252.5.164 13:23, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- I agree. Since when does NO MEAT = WOOD? Those should be removed. Andy120290 17:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
