In this sequel to 2001: A Space Odyssey, a joint American- Soviet expedition is sent to Jupiter to discover what went wrong with the U.S.S. Discovery against a backdrop of growing global tensions. Among the mysteries the expedition must explain are the appearance of a huge black monolith in Jupiter's orbit and the fate of H.A.L., the Discovery's sentient computer. Based on a novel written by Arthur C. Clarke. Written by
Keith Loh <email@example.com>
Some of the products, organizations, and locations in the film no longer exist at the time of the film's events. For example, as of the events of 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) (let alone 2010 (1984)) Pan Am Airlines had gone out of business. The Soviet Union, and along with it, the Soviet Air Force, of which Kirbuk was a member, and the Communist version of Pravda magazine had all ceased to exist by 1991. Also, by 2008, The Houston Astrodome and the original Yankee Stadium, both referenced for their stadium hot dogs, no longer hosted sporting events. See more »
During the lunch in the Floyd's house, his wife Caroline is talking with him about a conference. At the beginning Floyd appears bowed and with the left hand under his chin, but when the camera changes and makes a front face on him, Floyd isn't bowed and his left hand is over his lips. See more »
The reactions to this film sum up a problem of perception that many film buffs seem to have. To such people, Kubrick was a genius. Kubrick made 2001. 2001 is a *Kubrick* story. Therefore 2010 is by definition a presumptuous attempt to explain what Kubrick deliberately left unsaid. etc. etc.
Sorry, 2001 is an *Arthur C Clarke* story. He wrote a sequel to his own story, called it "2010" and *he* explained what Kubrick left unsaid. I'd say he had a right. Then someone buys the film rights and produces a fine movie from it.
And it *is* a fine movie. Intelligence far in excess of the usual Hollywood SciFi garbage (Independence Day or Starship Troopers anyone?).
The scenes with Keir Dullea were far more chilling than anything in the original.
Arteur theory is still alive and well, I see.
107 of 153 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?