It seems to me that you are simply picking on this film because it did not turn out to be what you wanted it to. That is, a piece of cinema that entertained you all throughout. Now, as in disappointment you willfully ignore the films impact on the western culture as well as its own stand in it. Yes, star wars happened because of 2001. You can't simply say the film had no meaning or narrative when you can't see it yourself. My dear, deal with the fact that you didn't see 2001. What you saw was lingering images across the screen. You mearly browsed the film. You did not read it. Yes it is dreadfully slow, however in the greater image of the narrative, the slow pace is dilibrate, Kubrick wasn't stupid. The rest of his filmography before and after 2001 is proof. Every frame of that film had a reason to be there. The film was never crafted to a source of quick enjoyment or a thrill ride, it was designed to better understand humanity as a whole. It is of course a philosophical work. Discussing in its poetic narrative the essence of a singular creator, and our place among the vastness of reality. And perhaps how small and insignificant we may be. It is perfectly fine for you to debate a work of art, but you cannot do it in complete ignorance. This will only make you be whiny. The details you picked out are details. The meaning is behing the narrative which is given more importance. The same way a painting is painted is realism while in composition it talks of other elements. 2001 is a beautiful discourse on culture, on life, death, and creation. This even if you didn't like the work you cannot ignore. Yes I too found it to be painfully slow and I actually fell asleep on my first viewing of it. Anyway details are details, my phone's dying out now so have to go, but let me know what else confused you, I'll love to talk to you. Merry Christmas buddy!
PS: sorry for bad spelling!