- Starring: Gary Lockwood, Keir Dullea
- Summary: 2001: A Space Odyssey is a countdown to tomorrow, a road map to human destiny, a quest for the infinite. To begin his voyage into the future, Kubrick visits our prehistoric ape-ancestry past, then leaps millenia (via one of the most mind-blowing jump cuts ever conceived) into colonized space, and ultimately whisks astronaut Bowman (Dullea) into uncharted realms of space, perhaps even into immortality. "Open the pod bay doors, HAL." Let the awe and mystery of a journey unlike any other begin. (Warner Bros.)… Expand
- Director: Stanley Kubrick
- Genre(s): Adventure, Sci-Fi, Mystery
- More Details and Credits »
100Only a few films are transcendent, and work upon our minds and imaginations like music or prayer or a vast belittling landscape...Alone among science-fiction movies, 2001 is not concerned with thrilling us, but with inspiring our awe.
100A masterpiece that can still leave you dizzy with wonder. As much as any movie ever made, this visionary science-fiction tale of space travel and first contact with extraterrestrial life is a spellbinding experience.
MarcW10Watched it as a young kid, obviously thought it was just about the most tedious thing I'd ever sat through (ok I only got a third of the way through)......watched it again when I was 24, and haven't looked back since. Simply put it's one of those movies you almost feel obliged to pay homage to once a year. You hunker down in your armchair with a cup of tea, sandwiches, crisps a choco bar or two (it is a long film), dim the lights, lock the door and just devour the imagery. Its a wonderful movie, but I completely understand those who claim it's more like watching a screen saver than a movie, but that's what the cup of tea's for. There are moments when you just feel so completely at ease watching what is essentially artwork, others when you're provoked into thought's like no other movie can provide. It's a journey, sorry to be melodramatic, not a movie watching experience. And one everyone should make, it's not dated, despite it being, what? 40+ years old.… Expand
Acclaimed director Stanley Kubrick's SF masterpiece "2001: A Space Odyssey" is a conservative movie, asking the audience not to be amazed by the extraordinary visuals but the maturity and growth of a universal subject. The climax of the movie speeds up consistently and precisely with the breath taking cinematography of silence,and in the end....the movie itself becomes the universal subject.… Expand
7Stanley Kubrick's epic sci-fi tale involving monkeys, space, monoliths & a Russian Leonard Rossiter.
The first two hours of the film are fine, yes it does drag a little here & there, but builds the story up nicely.
The parts with HAL & Dave & Frank are, for me, just fantastic.
You get a great sense of claustrophobia with the space suit scenes & the breathing being the only soundtrack. There's also something very sinister about HAL singing Daisy Daisy, with his voice getting lower & lower.
Then the last half hour. I watched it again just to make sure I hadn't missed anything. Looking at some of the other reviews, it seems I'm not alone in missing the point of it. Total nonsense.
Anyway, aside from that, it is still a good film which has stood the test of time 40 years on. Great visuals, brilliant soundtrack & very influential in the way sci-fi films were made afterwards.… Expand
To **** JamesB - "I must have seen a different 2001: A Space Odyssey than everyone else. Mine was a two hour long screen saver". Well, JamesB, you'll be happy to know the one I watched, was also a two hour long **** screensaver. I cannot fathom the amount of positive reviews this thing gets. This is not a film; it is either a two hour long screen saver, or a special effects demo reel. It lacks so many basic elements that films are held to - plot, story threads, characters, dialogue. This is the only film I know of - bar No Country For Old Men - that has managed to use style over substance, and gotten away with it among the vast majority of professional critics and directors. The editing in this movie is non existent, the pace is excruciatingly slow. If you just play the film's important parts, where we get characters, dialogue and explanations of what the hell is happening, you get a 20 minute ok science fiction film. If you play through the whole thing, you get a 2 hour tranquiliser, that is guaranteed to send you off. Honestly, half of the **** scenes in this film we do not need to watch. Did we really need to watch monkeys for 16 minutes? No. Did we need to watch a space station above Earth for 4 minutes? No. The first 40 minutes of this film, you could cut, and you would not miss anything important, as it is 40 minutes into the film where we FINALLY get to some sort of plot development. This film in fact, has no plot. I have been told time and again by fans of this movie that it is dependent on the audience's subjective interpretations, that its deep and meaningful because you can go and talk to someone else and have two completely differing viewpoints on what it means.
The truth is guys, the only reason that will happen is because this film is so empty and devoid of any kind of content, that anyone could come up with almost anything to explain this film, and it would be just as valid, because the film its self never actually makes any attempt to explain what is actually going on. And don't try and tell me "you just don't get it" or that I'm a mentally challenged lackie who only wants to watch 300 and Independence Day, or that this film is so open ended it makes you think, whereas other films don't, you just lap up what's on screen. Wrong again guys, the truth is, a film such as Blade Runner and Pan's Labyrinth have POINTS to think about, whereas this movie is just incoherent imagery dumped on screen to music, which is the most random and unguided of all thinking.
This movie is no different than if I were to give you a painting, which consisted of three lines on a white canvas, one black, one white, one orange, each of them jagged, but at different points and said "there's a meaning in there somewhere, figure it out for yourself. Aren't I a genius?" For those of you observant enough to notice three lines do not constitute a painting, well done. Two hours of special effects and ships docking does not constitute a film either. Star Trek: The Motion Picture and The Matrix Sequels tried to get away with exactly the same **** Kubrick did with this film; TMP in particular has excruciatingly long scenes of starships docking, of lots of colourful things on screen, and that film was the one that was slated?
The only positive thing I can say about this, is that it can be enjoyed on a level of special effects, but that is all.… Expand