Talk:2001: A Space Odyssey

Again Dr. Nick, this should not exist as an article, unless it's mostly a comparison of similarities between the two works. Of course, on the front of here you did say that you did have in mind to put up pictures about each; so please get those up quickly ^_^ --V 11:17, 31 July 2007 (EDT)

Also, 2001 (the film) did NOT contain artificial evolution and alien progenitors. While Clarke's book did, Kubrick made it very clear that we were not to know exactly what the Monoliths were or did (if anything). The most obvious link I find between the two are with the monoliths. A screen shot of both should be easy to upload.--Eva Yojimbo 07:53, 18 August 2007 (EDT)

Actually, on other pages like this Dr.Nick has explained that they will be devoted to comparisons with NGE; I don't really see a big difference if the book or movie of 2001 mentioned it or not, when I think "2001" I think "Progenitor Aliens like the FAR doing stuff". --V 13:02, 19 August 2007 (EDT)

I'm a bit of an expert on this, so trust me when I say that Kubrick went out of his way to NOT follow the book when it came to exactly what the monolith was and did. He left it unexplained so people would look at the monolith in a symbolic light rather than as a literal narrative device. This means that we can not attribute "Progenitor Aliens" to anything in the 2001 film because there's little there to suggest it, and nothing to prove it. --Eva Yojimbo 13:12, 19 August 2007 (EDT)