No, it's not. My argument is that just because you don't like 2001 doesn't mean it's stupid and bad. I think it's a great film. So do most people educated in film who have a broader understanding of the medium.

You are conflating general audience exceptions of a conventional hollywood narrative as some form of universal merit. As if there aren't audiences outside of that mold. As if art film doesn't or shouldn't exist.

Harmon writes for general audiences. I'm well aware of him and his work. His biggest fans are people who think they are smarter than everyone else and that Rick and Morty and Community are genius level works of art... because they are very referential and self-referential, but they are ultimately neat and tidy and comforting and built on familiar tropes. They are not designed to be challenging or interested and don't demand much of the viewer. Nothing about his story telling is complex or open ended. And that's fine, but it's not the only kind story structure or film/show that exists.

Dude, you just hate open ended stories. Just say that. I have watched Dan Harmon stuff and it's funny, and enjoyable, but I also find it trite and nihilistic. It's superficially enjoyable, but 2001 is a lot more enjoyable on deeper levels and a work of art. Dan Harmon doesn't make art, he makes entertainment.