Why is "2001: A Space Odyssey" considered such a good movie?

[-D-]

Special effects are not sufficient to prop up a bad movie.

Why is it Stanley Kubrick is hailed as a genius for using special effects to hide bad storytelling, but when Michael Bay does it he gets lambasted for it?

Kubrick uses great cinematography and meticulous attention to details.

Michael Bay uses explosions.

Other than that, I agree. Kubrick films often fail as stories, but are held by stronger visual/aural side. Odyssey 2001 makes no sense unless you know story before hand.