During the course of the shutdown, in between our gradual pursuits of Farscape and Deep Space Nine, my oldest daughter and I have been watching some classic genre movies together. In the last week, we’ve watched both 2001 and 2010.
It’s hard not to compare, and it’s hard for me to leave the books out of things when we do.
We differ on which is the better movie. Though not by much.
2001 is a clear masterpiece of cinematic art. Technically amazing, stark and beautiful, filled with big ideas and a vision of the future that still resonates fifty years and more later. But it’s also sterile and, frankly glacial.
2010 has engaging characters and those big ideas expand with human and political conflicts in the background and foreground driving but a some of the cinematics techniques and edits are clumsy or clunky.
On balance, I like 2010 better. Clunky devices aside, it’s a better, more cohesive story. Even after I’m not sure how many viewings over my life, 2001 still sometimes leaves me with the feeling of, “Just get on with it already”, much as I enjoy the cinematography and percolation of ideas. And, if we haven’t established a previously, I’ll forgive a lot in terms of other parts of a movie given a good story.
Which you’ll already have guessed means that my daughter has a preference for 2001. She admits that 2010 is a good movie, it doesn’t stack up to the beauty and of 2001 in her mind.
And that’s fair. It’s never been my intent to raise clones and my kids have always freely expressed opinions. While my oldest daughter has viewing habits that are the closest to mine of the three kids at the moment, she definitely doesn’t look at them the same way I do. How could she? There’s a thirty-year age difference between the two of us and we don’t see the world the same way.
I’m kind of glad they didn’t turn the third book into a movie, actually.
Which of us do you agree with?
Stay safe and be well, everyone.
P.S. The Alien vs Aliens debate wasn’t, though. We found agreement there, and basically for story reasons.by