Roland,
The explanation of the end of 2001 is quite simple!
What is shows is the inter-relationship of the bionic part of man's
ambition with the surrealist factor of his most inner thoughts of
life. This is,of course, played to a background of the inevitability of
science taking a more fundamental role in the abstract part of the
universe. Couple this with an absolute base regard for the actions of a
distressed and logic provoking inner examination and you have the kernel of
the endeavour. Specifically, one must remove any pre-digested patterns of
symbiosis particularly when it is considered in light of the pseudo
machinations of the creator despite any reference to anything that may be
understood with any degree of clarity.
Now send me the end of the Prisoner !!!!!!
At 08:12 AM 12/10/01 -0800, Roland Dudley wrote:
>Tell you what Steve, you explain the ending of "2001" to me (the movie,
>that is, not the year- though I'm not so sure I understand the ending of
>the year either), and I'll explain the ending of "The Prisoner" to you.
>
>Roland
>
>
> > Roland,
> >
> > While I have not seen the set on sale, I have seen the whole series when
> > new, and three re-runs.
> >
> > Loved the series, but despite having seen the final conclusion episode
> > three times, I still do not understand it. If you do, please explain it
> > to a frustrated fan.
> >
> > BTW: BOTH of those Lotus's ended up in Los Angeles area. The everyday
> > working one had the Ford engine, and the other had the Coventry. One of
> > my friends at work got the working model Ford version. Patrick McGoohan
> > brought the "real one" over himself, when he became an expatriate living
> > in Santa Monica (by the sea).
> >
> > Steve
> > --
> > Steve Laifman
> > Editor
> > http://www.TigersUnited.com
Regards
Barrie
Barrie Robinson - barrier@bconnex.net
|