2010: Still Holds Up...Mostly?

Okay, so, I just rewatched '2010: The Year We Make Contact' after, like, forever. I remember seeing it in the theater as a kid, probably dragged along by my dad who was obsessed with '2001: A Space Odyssey.' And, honestly, it's not that bad. Not a Kubrick level classic, obviously, but it's a decent sci-fi flick. I think Peter Hyams did a respectable job trying to follow up the GOAT of space movies, which is tough in itself. What's always bugged me, though, is how...earthbound it feels at times. Like, all the Cold War tension stuff with the Americans and Russians – I get it, that was the era, but it feels so...on the nose compared to the philosophical ambiguity of '2001.' And HAL 9000's 'redemption' arc felt a bit rushed? Don't get me wrong, Lithgow is great, and I loved seeing Heywood Floyd back in action, but it just didn't have the same oomph as the original. The visuals were still pretty impressive for '84, though. That Jupiter sequence and the monolith multiplying...creepy stuff. So, I gotta ask, does anyone else feel like '2010' is unfairly judged? I mean, it's trying to be its own thing while still giving fans a little more of the '2001' universe. Does it succeed? Or is it just a case of trying to improve on perfection and inevitably falling a bit flat? And one more thing - that bit near the end where Bowman (or whatever he is now) makes an apperance - cheesey or cool with you all? I want to know what others thought!