Syfy, Ridley Scott tread on sacred ground: 3001 miniseries

Hailing frequencies open… Forums Science Fiction Sci-Fi On The Screen Syfy, Ridley Scott tread on sacred ground: 3001 miniseries

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
  • #1473
    • Offline

    These guys have balls as big as the monolith. [LINK]

    A sequel miniseries to Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey is in the works, and Ridley Scott is on board as executive producer. The new series, 3001: The Final Odyssey, will be based on classic sci-fi author Arthur C. Clarke’s novel of the same name, and will reportedly see release sometime in 2015.

    According to SlashFilm, 3001 will be adapted for the screen by Pirates of the Caribbean scribe Stuart Beattie. The series will most likely follow astronaut Frank Poole who, after being thrown into deep space by HAL-9000 in 2001, is reawakened 1000 years into Earth’s future.

    This better be “something wonderful” or someone’s career is gonna go the way of Peter Hyams’. (Hyams adapted and directed 2010 for the big screen in 1984. Don’t hear much about him these days, do you?)

    Steve WSteve W
    • Offline

    There was nothing wrong with 2010 the movie, it just didn’t take the metaphysical approach that Kubrick took it in. It was a nice little hard science fiction flick, not as brain-melting as the original.

    • Offline

    2001 was an Art film. 2010 was not. Two movies that could not be more diametrically opposed visually, thematically, etc. 2010 was bound to fail in the eyes of the critics and many in the audience.

    Overall I liked 2010 but I had a couple issues. The biggest issue has to do with the message HAL sent before Jupiter lights up and consumes Discovery:


    The message is clear: leave the native species on Europa alone. Period.

    In the movie they add these two lines:


    I groaned when I saw that. Cheesy. Tainted the whole movie for me.

    In the book Clarke made it clear that the Black obelisk aliens don’t care if humans blow themselves up. They gave humans their chance: uplifted them and hoped they would prosper. If humans destroy themselves, too bad, so sad. The aliens are all about promoting intelligence but they will only go so far. Putting out a cheesy message that asks people to just get along violates the spirit of the book. Obviously I read the book before the movie and those two lines jarred me and took me completely out of the movie. Ugh.

    I mean, I get it, those lines were completely consistent with the rest of the movie. Hyams was pitching anti-cold war rhetoric throughout the film but he should have been a lot more subtle about it.

    Anyway. 3001. Major problem with the book: the computer viruses killing the Obelisks. Really Clarke? Were you THAT ignorant about computers? It’s the kind of shock that made me want to re-evaluate the science of his other works. Arthur took great pride in the scientific accuracy of his works (the whole point of his novel “The Songs of Distant Earth” was to prove as a counter point to the space opera of Star Wars and other Sci-Fi of that period) and then he pulls a major faux pas on this novel. He did NOT do his homework on this one.

    So they need to do a major rethink about that in the miniseries. If they do a “Independence Day” shtick by having a Goldblum-like character write computer code for a computer he’s never seen the opcodes for, I’m out.

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.