No announcement yet.

Arthur C Clarke's 3001: The Final Odyssey'

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Arthur C Clarke's 3001: The Final Odyssey'

    This could be great, or an epic fail.
    I hope Syfy can do this justice and not stray too far from what's on the pages.

    Forty six years after the release of Stanley Kubrick’s groundbreaking 2001: A Space Odyssey, the final book in Arthur C. Clarke’s Odyssey series is getting a screen adaptation. Syfy has…

  • #2
    Originally posted by DaveNarn View Post
    This could be great, or an epic fail.
    I hope Syfy can do this justice and not stray too far from what's on the pages.
    Given that syfy is generally better at doing mini series than films, I am cautiously optimistic.
    Jan from Denmark

    My blog :

    "Our thoughts form the Universe - they *always* matter"


    • #3
      I posted a reasoned (and not-inflammatory) criticism of the Deadline article in the comments yesterday, and shockingly! it was not "approved" by moderation. This "article" (*cough* press release) erroneously implies that Arthur C. Clarke wrote an amazing series of novels, and then Stanley Kubrick came around and adapted one of them into a groundbreaking film. This misrepresentation intends to trick us into drawing a line from 2001's greatness to this miniseries, as if the two things have anything of merit in common. When in reality, 2001 is not a "film adaptation" of Clarke's novel, but a collaborative work between Kubrick and Clarke, loosely based on an old short story of Clarke's and heavily crafted by Kubrick's own vision. I would argue that it's more accurate to call Clarke's book a "novelization" of Kubrick's film than the other way around, but let's keep it 50/50 to be kind to Clarke.

      Regardless, the way SyFy and Deadline are spinning 3001 is ridiculous, as if it's part of some larger series of great works that hasn't yet been adapted into a film. The truth is that 2001 was a unique work of art, and then Clarke went back to the well 15 years later and wrote some other stories with varying levels of correlation to the original, inconsistencies between books, and little of the vision that made 2001 "groundbreaking". In the forewards to the books themselves, Clarke cautions the reader not to really treat them as "sequels" or a "series". They're variations on a theme, sci-fi ideas loosely connected to the original through the names of a character or two. Having read all of these when they came out, I recall 2010 being pretty good, 2061 being unrelated and terrible, and 3001 being related and beyond terrible. However, it's possible that I have the last two reversed and that 2061 is the one that was related and beyond terrible, while 3001 was related and terrible. Either way, one of them is terrible, and the other is beyond terrible. Add SyFy into the mix, and we might just have the next Sharknado on our hands.


      • #4
        I am surprised by Deadline, but I am never surprised when it comes to the lengths people in Marketing will go to. They would claim Kubrick directed this if they could. Funny thing is that my brain tunes out when I see SYFY is involved, with the exception of them admitting their mistakes.
        Susan Ivanova, "I'll be in the car."


        • #5
          Originally posted by Looney View Post
          Funny thing is that my brain tunes out when I see SYFY is involved, with the exception of them admitting their mistakes.
          On that topic, I recently read an article where SyFy was trying to position themselves as "admitting their mistakes" by claiming that they lost their focus a bit after BSG went off the air but are really getting back to their roots now! That just shows how tone deaf they are. That's like Darth Vader "admitting his mistakes" by claiming he kind of lost his way during construction of the second Death Star. SyFy (nee SciFi) lost their way when Bonnie Hammer lied to everyone about renewing Farscape, cancelled The Invisible Man and then refused to sell it to UPN to cover their butts, started airing wrestling and 10 different "reality" shows about hunting ghosts and "investigating" reincarnation, and began converting a channel once devoted to science fiction into a dumping ground for projects intended for the USA Network but not quite good enough to make it there.

          Do not be surprised if John Cena is cast as Frank Poole and they find some legal loophole to promote it as "Stanley Kubrick Presents 3001" ... y'know "with the blessing of his estate."


          • #6
            Most interesting, thanks sarthaz.

            Syfy also has a 6 hour mini-series starring Charles Dance in the works.

            Arthur C. Clarke's Childhood's End.


            • #7
              3001 is the one with the four tall buildings on the equator that go all the way up into orbit and how people get to space, they don't use rockets in the atmosphere anymore. Also, they guy frozen in 2001 is found and revived and he's the main character.

              2061 was about not going near Eurpoa but because of treachery a ship crash lands there. I think the Star Child or whatever intercedes to not have the monoliths beat up humanity for the incursion.

              I barely remember anything else, but maybe that will jog your memory.
              "And what kind of head of Security would I be if I let people like me know things that I'm not supposed to know? I mean, I know what I know because I have to know it. And if I don't have to know it, I don't tell me, and I don't let anyone else tell me either. " And I can give you reasonable assurances that the head of Security will not report you for doing so."
              "Because you won't tell yourself about it?"

              "I try never to get involved in my own life, too much trouble."