An otherworldly, beautiful female android travels in time while scientists try to understand her enigmatic secrets exploiting the occasions of her mysterious, rare appearances. Until she decides the right time to share her vision has come.
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 HAL; the Discovery's AI computer. Based on a novel written by Arthur C. Clarke.Written by
Keith Loh <email@example.com>
Helen Mirren's character Kirbuk, is essentially Kubrick spelled backwards, omitting the letter C. See more »
No pods should be in the pod bay in 2010. The original film showed 3 pods. All were lost. The first was lost with Poole's body. The second was lost when Bowman blew the exploding bolts to enter the airlock. The third transported Bowman into the worm hole/monolith. When the crew enters the pod bay in 2010, one pod is is still sitting in it's storage area. (Although ignored in the movie, this is explained in the book (section4, chapter 24). Dave Bowman is supposed to have retrieved pod #3 on remote while preparing his departure.) See more »
The first movie in the series, 2001, was a very artistic piece that had only moments of dialogue in its more than two hours of film. 2010 appears nearly apologetic in comparison, explicating somewhat excruciatingly every nuance of the plot through the main character's supposed messages back to planet earth. All of the blurry details of 2001 are made crystal clear in this fashion. It is a very wordy movie.
Nevertheless, 2010 has images that can captivate audiences just as well as they did in 1984. Today's movie goers will notice slight glitches in the special effects as well as a couple of discontinuities. The movie also dates itself because the plot includes a lot of tension between the Americans and Russians.
Because 2001 was such a great movie, 2010 tends to pale in comparison. However, it is still a very good science fiction movie and it is worth viewing (but probably not buying).
52 of 69 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this