RealityChuck wrote: And 2001 is hardly Kubrick's best, either. It suffers because Kubrick painted himself into a corner, then gave up, using a flashy psychedelic light show instead of resolving their problem. It was the triumph of bright, shiny objects over plot and characterizations and is ultimately responsible for all the empty films that are special effects and nothing else. I did enjoy it when I saw it (in a UFO class in college), but I enjoyed the three subsequent books much more. I know they made a 2010 movie but I haven't seen it. But I think having read the books and the explanations contained within has probably colored my opinion of the movie in retrospect. I think it probably could've done with out the starchild and flashy bits at the end. leaving the ambiguity to why Hal, a presumably perfect computer, did what he did. but maybe not. The movie is iconic at this point, the sound track too. I don't know if it's cultural impact makes it a 'top ten' or not though. I do remember reading somewhere on the "life imitating art" front that one of the astronauts going to the moon noted similarities to something in the movie. I should watch more Kubrick movies, and also, read more Clark novels.