In the distant future, a police marshal stationed at a remote mining colony on the Jupiter moon of Io uncovers a drug-smuggling conspiracy, and gets no help from the populace when he later finds himself marked for murder.
This promotional short for 2010 (1984) shows moviegoers how some of the film's visual effects were created. This includes makeup for Keir Dullea's character, how the astronauts float in ... See full summary »
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 <firstname.lastname@example.org>
When the derelict Discovery is first seen, it's tumbling dramatically end-over-end - this from the rotating crew deck's momentum having long since been conferred to the entire vessel. However, the ship is turning about the wrong axis. The crew deck, able to fit only in the rear half of the front sphere, can only then spin along the long axis of the craft. Thus, if that rotation is frozen, the ship must turn on that very same axis too... like a top. It would also spin very slowly, as the relatively small amount of rotational energy in the crew deck's mass would have been distributed over the enormity of the whole ship. That's similar to a figure skater, tucked tight in a fast spin, moving her arms out, proportionately slowing her speed. See more »
If you fail to hear the Russian word for "four" in the countdown spoken by Tanya Kirbuk (Helen Mirren), the reason is that the word was deleted in versions later than the theatrical release and the early VHS versions because of Mirren's mispronunciation of "chih-TEE-reh" as "chee-TYE-ree". See more »
Watch this movie if you want to understand the previous one a little bit better
I never knew a sequel was made of "2001: A space odyssey" until a few months ago. When I finally had watched this film, I understood why. "2010" is anything but a bad movie, but it doesn't offer the same remarkable innovation its predecessor did. Nevertheless, this film has some great special effects which are, just like "2001", way ahead of its time. Watching this film, it's hard to believe that it's already more than 15 years old! Because this film sets off immediately where the previous one ended, you're involved the second you start watching! As a result of this, "2010" sheds some serious light on many unanswered questions of "2001: A space odyssey". This alone makes the story of "2010" very appealing, because one wants to know the true meaning behind the mysterious monolith.
The only let down of the film is that the characters are quite thin and the acting isn't always very convincing. Add to that one or two scenes that can be a bit monotonous and you know why I think "2010" is not as good as "2001".
Even so "2010" is worth-watching thanks to breathtaking special effects and a storyline that'll make the previous movie a little bit more understandable.
77 of 97 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?