Anyway, enough beating around the bush. Stanley Kubricks 1968 film is the gold standard against which all later philosophical sci-fi films have been compared. Thats why Nolan was a little foolish to acknowledge its influence so publicly; Interstellar cant really hold a candle to it. How could it possibly manage to do so, with 2001: A Space Odyssey being the monolith that inspired all that came after it? A film that spans the earliest moment in humanitys evolution before jumping forward to, presumably, the next big leap in our level of consciousness and understanding of the universe, Kubricks adaptation of Arthur C Clarkes novel - which was actually being written concurrently with the film production - is a lot more open to interpretation that the source material. Look, its even got a whole Wikipedia page dedicated to different readings of the film, from the infuriatingly literal to the slightly bonkers claim its a retelling of Frankenstein. 2001 is a philosophical puzzle that, even half a century later, audiences have been unable to crack.
Tom Baker is the Comics Editor at WhatCulture! He's heard all the Doctor Who jokes, but not many about Randall and Hopkirk. He also blogs at http://communibearsilostate.wordpress.com/
