User Score
8.4

Universal acclaim- based on 359 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 30 out of 359

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Feb 1, 2011
    10
    The greatest epiphany? That the monolith represents the film screen itself, with its black rectangular appearance. And that the monolith is also depicted as the catalyst for change only encourages the notion that we actually evolve as we watch ourselves on the screen, and furthermore, BECOME what we see. And that's what 2001 is ultimately about; becoming. Constant becoming. Constant becoming through endless mediation. What will become of you when the credits finally roll? I, for one, became a pretentious film critic. Expand
  2. Oct 9, 2010
    10
    This is movie as art in its fullest and most stunning format. How Kubrick made this look so futuristic in the year of 1968 it beyond me and probably most people on this planet. How much is covered in the short span of this film. It might just be the only film that seems to cover the whole history of the universe in a film. Michelangelo, Shakespeare, Oscar Wilde, KUBRICK.
  3. Oct 6, 2011
    8
    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.
  4. Nov 23, 2011
    1
    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
  5. Nov 27, 2010
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. A random, slow movie with no definite plot, the twenty minute screensaver at the end was, and is, not a necessary part of any movie. I don't want to insult anyone's love for sci-fi movies, but it was a terrible movie. The only positive thing was the science behind spinning to create gravity with several other scientific ideas and the digital animation for it's period. Expand
  6. Mar 1, 2011
    4
    It is way to long and drawn out. I suggest you read the book. There is no reason to sit through the process when you can curl up with a good read. It actually is like watching paint dry.
  7. Sep 1, 2010
    7
    Stanley 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
  8. Apr 14, 2012
    5
    Honestly, I couldn't handle this movie at all. I only watched about 15 minutes of it, and after the second time I couldn't handle it. It just seemed very very boring. All I saw were monkeys going abe sh*t because there's a giant black...I don't know. A Bar? A Box? I don't know and I don't care. If this whole movie is gonna be quiet and weird than I don't think this is the movie for me. I'm just amazed that this was critically the best movie by Stanley Kubrick. I've seen some of his weird movies that I don't get and understand how people would actually like it. Like 'A Clockwork Orange' and 'The Shining'. The only movie I found very decent was Full Metal Jacket. I'm just gonna give this movie half credit for the popularity for the viewers and reviewers. Expand
  9. Oct 10, 2012
    9
    2001: A Space Odyssey is an amazing science fiction film with astonishing, timeless effects. The movie manages to be quite terrifying without the use of action sequences or monsters (as is the want of modern sci-fi). Fear and wonder of the unknown makes for quite the potent mix. I love the fact that the ending is so inscrutable. It leaves you startled and uneasy with a total lack of understanding. But that's the way the universe is; totally beyond our understanding. Expand
  10. Aug 4, 2011
    10
    I had the good fortune of seeing 2001 in its first release at a fully decked-out cinerama theater when I was 11 years old --really the perfect age of wonder for such an imagination inspiring movie. It blew my mind along with everyone else's, and even at that young age I knew that with this film everything about motion picture storytelling had suddenly changed. Amazingly, the movie still holds up, particularly visually. It doesn't suffer the fate of most science fiction films --2001 will never be seen as "retro". Expand
  11. Fan
    Jul 17, 2011
    10
    I would just like to comment on the amount of dumbasses out there. I just watched this movie tonight which was made in 1968 by the way, and I am so blown away by this movie, that I am just really in awe of the amount of people that gave bad reviews. They just dont get it. Its probably not the best movie made in terms of effects but the message,captivation, the perspective , and intrigue of this movie by the best director who has ever lived (in my opinion) is so awesome, that Im still crapping my pants about it. To all of you idiots out there open your freaking eyes! Thanks Stanley.. Expand
  12. Oct 8, 2011
    10
    This film is one of the cinema masterpieces. The soundtrack is sublime and besides the plot has a significance that few films have. Good special effects too.
  13. Oct 7, 2012
    9
    It doesnt make any sense!!!! It's hard to understand the story, and it's too long and it has some unnecessary parts, therefore it looks like they prefer the worst scenes. I just gave it a 9 becuase this is not a movie, it is a psychdelic experience, a outrageous epiphany. It must be aprecciated with patience and open-mind.
  14. Jun 18, 2012
    10
    A brilliant sci-fi epic about the evolution and devolution of mankind, 2001: A Space Odyssey is filled with haunting imagery, nuanced performances, and a profound agenda wrapped around the ambiguity of space and the unknown.
  15. Nov 8, 2012
    2
    This movie is very slow, and two hours of ships docking, apes and about 4 minutes of the monoliths that the movie is about. If I hadn't read the book first, I wouldn't know what the hell was happening. Read the book, not the movie.
  16. Jan 11, 2013
    10
    I give this film the highest rating, but I am still not sure if I like it. This film is intriguing, visually spectacular, and one of the most ambiguous I have seen. Its lack of dialogue can make a viewer seem disconnected, and some sequences with humans are disturbing in their lack of emotion, but maybe that was a point Kubrick was attempting to make. In the film, humankind is shown to have essentially taken the place, emotionally, of their machines, who seem to be more human than they. Maybe, in conclusion, the philosophy of this film is that man cannot improve himself, but only bestow higher qualities on its creations, which they can never achieve. If this holds true, perhaps those who made the monoliths were conscious of this, and tried to elevate themselves by elevating man. Hard to like, but fantastic nonetheless (if that makes any sense). Expand
  17. Sep 25, 2013
    10
    Totally took me surprise this movie. It's so different from any movie you've seen. The pacing is slow make no mistake but for me at least it was so interesting.
  18. Aug 16, 2010
    10
    An amazing film, a masterpiece, and easily the best science-fiction film of alltime. Kubrick never did any better than this unbelievable film, which does a rare thing; it looks as if it was made yesterday, but it challenges you intellectually like the rarest films from the distant past. This is my personal favorite film of alltime, and I would argue that it might be THE greatest film of alltime.
  19. Aug 17, 2010
    1
    This movie is so bad I can't even explain it, I was shocked when I saw it, people told me it was a masterpiece but it's one of the most overrated movies ever because it's just terrible, there is nothing in this movie that actually makes it a movie. The monkeys scene is the most epic fail scene in the history of cinematography.
  20. Jul 15, 2011
    8
    A film way ahead of it's time, it's scarcely beleivable it was made in 1968. The pace is slow and there is an excess of kubrickian unease, but for originality and visual impact this is a winner. There is a lot of thought-povoking material here
  21. Jul 13, 2011
    10
    Kubrick is undoubtedly one of the masters who made cinema with this classic film. The professionalism of the special effects note that what was used in 1968 could make something seem amateur even in 2011 (note that is a long 43 years after). Anyone who does not like this movie truly has an attention span so high that it could, alone, make them seem ridiculously immature. It is also worth noting that the film was so scientifically accurate. This is still an amazing film today, one of the best of all time. But it could still be very modern. If someone even had seen portions of this film before they knew the title, he/she would predict its initial release as probably somewhat recent because of how advanced every detail in it is. Genius. Collapse
  22. Dec 31, 2010
    10
    2001: A Space Odyssey is a 1968 science fiction film by Stanley Kubrick (who happens to be my favourite director as well). Being my favorite film, I have recommended this it to almost everyone I know. This review is more like an answer to those who found this film slow-paced, and for those yet to watch it, you may continue to read this as a disclaimer to the film-

  23. Jul 31, 2011
    10
    Stanley has proved that no other director can stand next to him by this movie.The greatest epiphany? That the monolith represents the film screen itself, with its black rectangular appearance. And that the monolith is also depicted as the catalyst for change only encourages the notion that we actually evolve as we watch ourselves on the screen, and furthermore, BECOME what we see. And that's what 2001 is ultimately about; becoming. Constant becoming. Expand
  24. Jul 10, 2011
    10
    A masterpiece unlike any other movie. The multiple stories and themes combine to make an experience that really does feel like an odyssey. This is a movie about evolution, progression and existence, although it may fly over some viewers heads. The beginning and ending sequences were particularly impressive due to the reliance on imagery to tell the story in the absence of dialogue. The brilliant cinematography beautifully captures the grace and majesty of traveling in space but also of the vast nothingness that fills it. Anyone with even a vague interest in cinema should see this movie. Expand
  25. Apr 9, 2014
    9
    The grandaddy of sci-fi, an incomparable experience of sense and of mind. Best to approach the revelationary details of the book afterwards, allowing Kubrick's sense of style and majesty to pervade the inner mind.
  26. Apr 29, 2011
    10
    Kubrics epic masterpiece is one of the Greatest films of all time. It examines humanity's insignificance in the vastness of the universe. If you haven't seen this film, do so immediately. My advise? watch it in a dark room, on a big screen, with the volume up loud.
  27. Jan 11, 2014
    4
    I like to think that I'm pretty open minded when it comes to different film genre's but 2001: A Space Odyssey is one of those critically acclaimed films that has just never connected with me. Yes, I understand that there is hiding depth and meaning behind the (especially at the time) beautifully crafted scenes but the slow pace, and running time of over two and a half hours, made it a chore to sit through. I'm all for cinema that does something different but I watch movies to be entertained and in that regard 2001: A Space Odyssey just doesn't work for me. Expand
  28. Jul 2, 2011
    10
    Best philosophical sci-fi movie ever ! It's amazing how it isn't outdated yet (except from some cloth-designs and haircuts); the slowness of the film is perfectly justified here (the pace of it reminds me of "Moon" ), and not a trick to mask the complete lack of ideas like in "Monsters" for instance..I saw it when I was 17, and was blasted away, and I still am.
  29. May 21, 2011
    0
    This movie is simply an excuse to play Blue Danube in full, twice. The beginning and ending are utter tripe - just because something is confusing, that doesn't mean it's a masterpiece. It more likely is nonsense. Kubrick has done much better.
  30. Jul 3, 2011
    10
    Very much one of the best Sci-Fi movies of the past decades. Amazing film and mind boggling ending. Definitely a must see film for every self-proclaimed film lover.
  31. Jun 18, 2011
    10
    This is by far, the greatest film ever created. It is not even a film as much as it is a work of art. It is the classic Sc-Fi masterpiece. Far superior to other films said to have started Sci-Fi such as Star Wars, 2001 actually did it. Timeless, and great, 2001 is a masterpiece. It is like the Mona Lisa of movies.
  32. Jul 16, 2012
    10
    The film works as a transcendent of genre. It is a true art film! Space Odyssey attempts to give us a sense of awe through it's great audio visual experience. To quote Ebert loosely it works in a similar way as music!
  33. Jul 30, 2011
    7
    Its tempting to consider 2001 a companion piece to Arthur C. Clarke's novel only, as its visual narrative can be hard to grasp for many. Is it boring? Yes, but will it blow your mind? Probably.
  34. Oct 21, 2011
    10
    A cool film that I very much enjoyed watching. Exeptional directing from Stanley Kubrick and also exellent acting from Kier Dullela. It is very real considering in the scenes in space it is completely silent and the spacesuits are brilliant.
  35. Sep 22, 2011
    8
    Such a Interesting idea, Jupiter and the infinite, and the mission and all those segments, unfortunately, when this was passed to a movie, it got a little bit boring and without action, I mean don't get me wrong i liked the movie, for that time, this was a very big step into the industry, but it should have been more interesting, like not only showing a lot of images and stuff, but like a little bit more action . I though the dialogues between Bowman & Hal were very well written, the idea of a automatically computer was awesome and very well structured. So once again Stanley Kubrick did a very good job, and this time he did the whole thing, not only the writing and the directing, but also the special effects, like wow. Expand
  36. Sep 7, 2011
    10
    kubrick's 2001 is a film that when i first saw it, i hated it. i think it's the kind of film that you have to... speak it's language to understand what the hell is going on. having said that, watching the film now i have to say it's one of my favorite films. it's utterly hypnotic and that tremendous sense of everything that is unfathomable is all through the film. i really liked hal, the artificial intelligence and found it profoundly disturbing when they "killed" him. as far as the ending goes, i have my own interpretation of it, but a definite answer as to what it "means", i have no idea. but i'm not sure i want to know. it's as mysterious as the universe. Expand
  37. Sep 28, 2011
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I recently rewatched 2001 to reassess it. Give it another fair shake. It's still just... not good. The pace is still excruciatingly slow, and that 15-20 minute MP3 visualizer sequence still looks dumb. You can tell that by the end, they aren't even trying anymore, and just started showing footage of the Grand Canyon with loopy colors. The monkey sequence at the beginning's probably the best part of the film, it's not quite as bad. It's not quite as slow and dull. The makeup work they did on those apesuits was great, you can stand back a bit from the television and if you didn't know it was a film, you might actually think it was documentary footage. I've read all four 2001 novels by Arthur C. Clarke. The 2001 novel's great. The story's very well told in that book. But Kubrick's storytelling just kills this story. Just kills it. It's an epic journey, a literal Space Odyssey. I just don't think Kubrick's storytelling conveys that in a satisfying manner. And again, nobody needs to sit in a theater and stare at a visualizer sequence for 15 minutes. That's just torture. It was just aimless, tedious and boring. Whereas I think a human being traveling through a stargate and observing the wonders of the universe, stars being birthed, supernovas exploding, interstellar exchange systems, etc, would be awed and amazed. I was not awed and amazed by what they showed me. It did not look like the wonders of the universe while traveling at a high speed. It looked like colorful garbage. Followed by some footage of the Grand Canyon and an ocean with color substitution. That's not the majesty of the universe. Wearing the audience down with tedious rubbish is not the same as wearing Bowman down with amazing galactic sights. The latter is what's supposed to be going on in the story. Some might argue that the rubbish is supposed to be rubbish because what Bowman is going through can't actually be processed, his mind won't accept it, and so it has to be shown as a jumble of rubbish. Well, that's just not good film-making. You can't just throw up your arms and declare it unfilmable, and show us a lot of **** onscreen. Film is a visual medium, we need to see stuff. That stuff should generally be interesting to watch. Showing us really awful visuals and declaring it to be the point and that it's supposed to be really awful visuals, well... that might be the intent, but it doesn't change the fact that the viewer has just seen really awful visuals. That's not fair to the audience. If your whole concept is to have something that's unimaginable and incomprehensible and unknowable, just stop right there. Don't make the **** film, at all. There's nothing to be done with that, just don't go on the endeavor. Expand
  38. Sep 26, 2011
    10
    This movie is a real piece of art, every movie director should watch this movie and realize that, make a movie is more than special effects or great actors
  39. Dec 13, 2011
    10
    What I found wrong with this film? Absolutely nothing. Everything was very well produced. The acting, directing, writing they where all perfect. I rarely give a film a perfect five star rating. This film deserves the stars and maybe even more. I fell in love with HAL 9000. He(it) had a rather dull feel to his personality. The film did mention that HAL 9000 had feelings. Which was perfect for building up the plot. Did anyone else notice that technology was predicted in this film? Technology such as video phone, and ipads. The whole time I was viewing this film I was confused. I should have read the book. But after watching the film I did some reading online. I was like, now I get it. Genius pure genius. The monolith made me think very hard, especially at the end. My favorite part had to be the colors at the end, very artistic. With a very slow paced plot and no flaws I recommend this to anyone that is a movie literate. Expand
  40. Dec 16, 2011
    8
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Some parts were extremely interesting, some were hard to sit through. The color sequence that lasted ten minutes and the long first stage of evolution with the primates were definitely both my favorite parts of the film. The ending was confusing and awful, in my opinion. It left me wondering why they would end a film with that much potential like a premature fetus. Expand
  41. Jan 11, 2013
    10
    Its greatness lies in the fact that it raises many questions, but never answers any of them. The best dialogues in the film come in the form of silence - the sheer volumes they speak. 2001 is not meant to be understood. It's meant to be felt.
  42. Jan 2, 2013
    8
    An amazing cinematic experience that engages the viewer with its visuals. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
  43. Apr 4, 2012
    10
    Beautiful, mesmerising, dazzling, astonshing, there really aren't enough adjectives in the world with which to successfully describe Kubrick's Sci-Fi masterpiece. Few films, if any, take the viewer on a trip like this one; it is less like watching a story unfold than like having part in a strange and beautiful experience, a journey into the unknowable. Simply put, I have never seen a film that had such a profound, emotional effect on me, and it is, quite possibly, the greatest movie ever made. Expand
  44. Sep 18, 2013
    10
    Don't kid yourself. It isn't for everybody. Kubrick wasn't interested in mass appeal by any stretch of the imagination. He wanted to explore the depths of mans technological capacity, which meant highlighting his inherent flaws. In essence, this is a film about error, about questions. And, in the end, it leaves us bewildered.
  45. Nov 9, 2012
    10
    2001 is the best science fiction film ever made, because rather than showing us the typical sound and light show, it instead pulls us into a world of wonder and imagination and aspires our awe.
  46. Jan 6, 2014
    10
    Clássico máximo da ficção científica, um dos filmes mais emblemáticos do cinema.
  47. Nov 14, 2013
    7
    Despite its sluggish pace, Kubrick's sci-fi epic "2001: A Spacey Odyssey" is still powerful, thought-provoking, chock full of "how-the-hell-did-they-do-that" shots, and a must-watch.
  48. Dec 7, 2013
    10
    2001 is a visual and audio marvel. The visual effects and the set design were decades ahead of its time, and still look exquisite in the twenty-first century. Many of its techniques were imitated, and a greater number were inspired by it.

    The movie starts around the time humans came into being. Two tribes of apes clash over a pond of water. One is driven away. They discover something
    that perhaps gives them intelligence, which they use to defeat their rivals. The plot jumps into the future where a similar object, which might have been left behind by intelligent beings some four million years earlier, is discovered on the moon. A team is sent to Jupiter to further investigate the matter.

    A number of themes are explored in the movie, the chief among them is our curiosity to find beings who are at the same level of intelligence, if not more, than us. In that pursuit, the humans of this future world have invented a supercomputer to assist in the voyage to the distant planet, but which eventually malfunctions and is prone to consider its logic superior. This is an early example of technological singularity depicted on the big screen.

    The technology of the future world (which we still have not arrived at more than a decade after the year 2001) is dominated in outer space by the Americans and the Russians. The spacecraft carry passengers to and fro from space stations where research is being carried on.

    All this mystery would have created a sense of urgency, but Kubrick downplays it and concentrates on the narrative instead of resorting to cheap tricks. This movie is not about tension and drama. It is quite clear that Kubrick, by deliberately keeping the pacing in check, wants us to have a look around the world he has created and reflect. The images are original but the music is classical, and they blend so well I couldn't help feel engrossed in the narrative.

    In the genre of science fiction, there is no parallel, chiefly because other movies have concerned itself with complex ideas, and though they may have succeeded, can only be watched a limited number of times. But 2001 is such a basic sci-fi flick that it never aged. Even after more than forty years since it came out, 2001 still manages to hold its own against other films in the genre in the departments of visual effects and art direction. By keeping the story simple, Kubrick has ensured that its ideas do not become outdated, and succeeded in bestowing a timeless quality upon the movie.

    He said somewhere along the lines that everyone will take its own meaning from the movie, and has made no attempt to explain the ending. This is the same approach he later applied with another movie of his, The Shining, but which in my opinion suffered because I could not see the coherence in it. But here, by keeping his ambition in check, and showing only what is necessary to the onward flow of the narrative, he has excelled. 2001: A Space Odyssey is my favourite Stanley Kubrick film.
    Expand
  49. Apr 14, 2013
    8
    This truly is the fantastic film everyone says it is... almost. Yes it was ahead of it's time, yes it was groundbreaking in many areas and yes it is memorable. It is the brilliant film people say it is.

    It is not perfect however. It is slow, has little dialogue, and is cryptic. But these gripes of mine are offset my great cinematography and a powerful soundtrack.

    I'm glad to have
    finally seen it and recommend this defining film. Just be aware it is not going to be what you expect as it is unique. Expand
  50. Feb 23, 2014
    10
    Outstanding use of everything that has to do with film. Cinematography, scenery, direction, pace, dialectics, score and especially narrative. The most fascinating and thought provoking film I have ever seen. Way past 10/10
  51. Apr 2, 2014
    6
    A well crafted piece of art. Incredibly unusual last act! From "Open the pod bay doors, HAL" unleash the thrills and mystery of an influential, mind blowing adventure unlike any other, from prehistoric ape-ancestry into uncharted realms of space. Personally, I loved the middle, HAL was terrifying and unpredictable villain. Not everyones type of movie. The film ends leaving more questions than answers. Expand
  52. Apr 30, 2013
    0
    When a film "requires" you to always wonder, it has failed. A good movie should be able to stand on its own and not require one to interpret more than the bear meaning of it's content. The more a movie needs to be analyzed apart from its self, the more it becomes a subjective object in the mind of the viewer. Why would I need to watch 2001 and ponder about life and the universe when I can ponder about the subject at anytime, anywhere?

    Write something, or find a new profession.
    Expand
  53. Oct 13, 2013
    10
    My favourite Science-Fiction movie of all time, Stanley Kubrick began making something that would change the face of the movie going experience, and represent a growth in the industry that only comes once in a lifetime

    It's obvious to say nothing looked like this before in 1968, the moon landing was still a year away and no one knew what the earth looked like from up there. That model
    space station circling that painting of the earth is burned into my brain and perfectly transcends beyond the scope of any average Hollywood movie

    The First 20 mins alone is a silent masterpiece, When at a time the world was growing so rapidly, Kubrick rewound time and showed you something so prehistoric that I also don't think there has been anything else quite like it, suddenly you're shot thousands of years into space and it's obvious that this movie really is just an accompany piece to some incredibly large scale music pieces (if that wasn't so obvious from the title sequence). The Monolith is so Arthur C. Clarke, to this day it's identity is still shrouded in mystery, does it grant knowledge or just appear at pivotal events? regardless the mystery has endured the objects charm and legacy.

    Towards the final act, astronaut David Bowman fights for control over the spaceship against the HAL 9000, in a harrowing display of humanity's reliance in computers, symmetrical rooms unnerving silence all eventually builds towards the trippy Jupiter and Beyond sequence, I very much recommended Pink Floyd's "Echoes" for something truly mind blowing.

    Despised on release but later praised by so many critics this film will probably never be fully understood, but whatever the hell it's suppose to be it is something truly mysterious and beautiful much like the idea of space exploration itself, it's so obvious the film is built to accompany a series of classical music pieces than it is storytelling, watching 2001 is proof respect can be brought to the science fiction genre with staggering results, dare I say science eventuality?

    Final Verdict: Beautiful music, Stunning visuals and a story set throughout the years and stars themselves... Only Kubrick could have pulled this off.
    Expand
  54. Jul 23, 2013
    6
    First thing first, this is not a movie; this is a piece of art completely focused on realism, logics and detailing of complicated space science of expected future. Additionally some imaginations are also added in the movie to give philosophical and dramatic touch.
    Overall this is a combination of Failure and success and both are so much mixed up with each other that one can’t classify
    them.
    Still elements of success and failure are as under:-

    SUCCESS POINTS
    • Most detailed and realistic picturization of outer space and technology.
    • Realistic acting.
    • No attempt to create any kind of thrill, a completely different approach for a Sci-Fi movie.
    • Beautiful use of Music.

    FAILURES POINTS

    • Lack of connectivity through entire movie between the different phases.
    • Lack of conclusiveness. (Either thrill or conclusiveness, one is must).
    • Poor ending.
    Expand
  55. Aug 16, 2013
    7
    This film expects the viewer to be a philosopher in order to understand the enigmatic allegory Kubrick is trying to convey. Despite the excruciatingly slow pace, parts that feel irrelevant and/or drag on too long, and the extremely pretentious message, 2001: A Space Odyssey remains an avant-garde experience that deserves a watch/interpretation from everyone.
  56. Oct 25, 2013
    10
    Forgive me for being corny, but the movie is cinematically flawless, it's effects are shocking for 1968. The first authentic sci-fi about the physics of space. Stanley Kubrick imagined and eventually created a masterpiece of cinema, with a very well-thought out HAL character. The idea of a computer being ironic and being able to beg for it's life is brilliant and unfathomable. It is the archetype of the modern science fiction film. Expand
  57. Apr 6, 2014
    9
    The first time I've seen this movie, I was boored and disappointed, because I had false expectations, but after awhile I understood the idea behind it: This movie tells a story of the development of mankind and shows the beauty and infinity of space. When you watch it, then you must absorb the atmosphere.

    This movie shows Hollywood, that a really good space movie should have an
    experience, which makes you speechless, when you think about it!

    Apart from some scenes, which are a bit too long for me, this movie is wonderful. When it came out, this technology revolutionized the filmmaking!
    Expand
  58. Nov 20, 2013
    10
    some people nowadays would say that this movie is really boring and slow,i just say then because this movie is the best film that happens in the space of all time(and i guess it will stay in this post for a long time),it's just a great classic that influencesses this generation.
  59. Nov 18, 2013
    0
    I have no idea which movie you seen, but obviously I did not watch one. What I did watch, however, was a 2 hour long visual escapade of the void.

    Character motivation; never established (or horribly rushed),
    Character development; non-existent,
    Character depth; non-existent (2D personality; not even a shred of emotion, and with some astonishingly stupid characters. And yes, even Hal),

    The plot; never fully established,
    Scene transition (like from ancient times to post-modern times); non-existent, it is being cut so quickly it makes it seem like every single scene shouts "Retcon!"
    Visual effects: The entire focus, this movie is just a mish-mash of visual effects. Just call it a demo-reel and be done with it. This is no movie. The way the effects blend in don't even make any sense.
    The music score: The entire focus as well, but just like the visuals; no effort to connect the music to the scenes was taken. Apparently they just hoped it will work itself out, and they were so proud of the music they even allowed the final track to keep on playing for an extra 3 minutes after the credits had already disappeared just to fully use every single shred of dime they wasted on this film.

    When you have to put all of your energies in order to save a movie, instead of being showered with content by the movie; you obviously put way too much into the medium. Just read a book, people.
    Expand
  60. Feb 23, 2014
    6
    Stanley Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey" is often claimed to be the greatest and most influential Sci-Fi classic of all-time. Cases have been made for and against it, mainly whether the film is brilliant or boring. Which is it? Is it a brilliant, sacred jewel of cinema, or is it a dull, lifeless bore? In this case, it's not a matter of OR, but rather, a case of AND. "2001: A Space Odyssey" is both brilliant and boing, however not necessarily at the same time.

    Before an examination of both sides, a few points must be made Crystal clear. There are two absolutely essential qualities that must be exhibited to attain enjoyment: A persistent patience, and a clear, conscious open mind. If neither of these two factors are present upon viewing, the film will come off as an instant failure, thus remaining as a frail, distant memory.

    As I conclude this introduction, it must be noted that this movie is not any way, shape, or form a "bad" movie. There are spurts and shines of both brilliance and bore; however, it is up to the viewer to decide where and how these victories and faults outweigh the other. Now, onward to the actual review. Let's take a look at the cons first.

    CONS:

    Pace. Pace. Pace. Paint drying on a wall is faster than the pace that is demonstrated in this film. The momentum is excrutionally painful and abysmally slow, which serves as the prime reason for its downgrades. For those who require a constant, accelerated speed for pace, this would be an ill-suited movie. For those who don't mind a slower progressing, trance inducing plot, this is the quintessential film.

    No emotional connection with any of the characters. At no point throughout the course of the film does the viewer feel any sort of liking, disliking, sympathy, suspicion, or annoyance for any character. They are all bland, with no exceptional quality. Kubrick should've known this, and it's an unfortunate shame that a movie as potentially great as this has this undeniable flaw.

    PROS:

    Excellency of 'Style over Substance': Despite the cons, "2001: A Space Odyssey" is a beautifully and wonderfully constructed movie. It is the pinnacle of movies that was able to escape the grasp of the basic fundamental concept of substance over style. Where it lacks in substance, it makes up for - plus more - in style. The effects? To say these effects were way past its time would be an understatement.

    The Famous Match-Cut: This, in my purest opinion, is the strongest suit for this movie's credentials. If unclear on what a Match-Cut is, Wikipedia defines it as "a cut in film editing between either two different objects, spaces, or compositions in which an object in the two shots graphically match" (this is often done to link a strong parallel between the two objects). Although the effects are seen by the general public as the film's greatest accolade, this Match-Cut can't be denied as the best in cinema history. The appraisal this sequence could receive should be endless, an even that wouldn't be enough. Starting with the opening of "The Dawn of Man" (literally), the segment spirals through the events of a tribe of apes being ruled by another, discovering the use of bones, and overcoming the tribe through the use of those bones. As the leader of the victorious tribe throws the bone in the air, it rotates in a clockwise rotation. Upon its coming down, the scene shifts from the falling bone to a satellite in outer space, 4 million years later. The scene that transpires is one that truly can not be put into words. The segment, along with the music implemented, unquestionably makes this one of the most appraised and memorable segments in all of cinema. Just that 5 minute work of art will make every viewer indulge deeply in thought to realize how far the human race has truly come.

    Cinematography: Time and time again, Stanley Kubrick is able to achieve perfection when it comes to cinematography. Every shot and every angle is executed perfectly without any sort of fault. What else should we expect? There's a reason why he's often labeled as a perfectionist.

    These are the pros and cons of the movie as I saw fit. This movie will not be viewed as awe-inspiring by all, but is definitely a journey that everyone must experience. As stated in the beginning of this review, "2001: A Space Odyssey" will be remembered either as a life-changing endeavor, or a time-wasting, disappointing tease of what could have been. 6.25/10
    Expand
  61. Dec 2, 2013
    10
    2001 (not to be confused with the year) is a mind-blowing motion picture that blows the stars outer space with it's artistic production
    ..............
  62. Jan 25, 2014
    10
    Absolutely astonishing. Fantastic film, despite being over 40 years old, albeit a tad slow. Very few films can stand at the level of sci-fi greatness that this films achieves.
  63. Feb 7, 2014
    1
    I must say I don't get the hype of this movie. I could not even see the whole thing in one sitting because i was having trouble staying awake. I will say though that it looks fantastic the special effects definetly still hold up today and the directing was good. I would say see it for yourself because obviously a lot of people do not agree with me but I'm not sure I could sit through it again. I honestly think now that people just say it's great because they don't want to be the one that says they don't get it. Expand
  64. Feb 10, 2014
    10
    In my opinion the greatest achievement in film-making, as even today it remains a standout in terms of its cinematography. "2001: A Space Odyssey" embarks you on a journey not only pleasing to the eye but equally stimulating to the mind, engaging it with philosophical questions regarding our existence, evolution and progress towards the future. A pioneer in the sci-fi genre, it remains unique in content and unmatched in visual effects, making it the ultimate masterpiece. Expand
  65. Mar 23, 2014
    9
    Beautiful, deep and mind-blowing, "2001: A Space Odyssey" is definitely a film that needs reconsideration before blind criticism over its plot. The story is not linear and simple, but piled with lots of metaphors and symbols. The use of music is absolutely fantastic. I recommend it to everyone who loves to argue about philosophical topics and to everyone who just really like movies.
Metascore
86

Universal acclaim - based on 14 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 11 out of 14
  2. Negative: 1 out of 14
  1. This is the way this ground-breaking monument was meant to be seen: in mind-boggling 70mm.
  2. Its special effects are used so seamlessly as part of an overall artistic strategy that, as critic Annette Michelson has pointed out, they don't even register as such, and thus are almost impossible to trivialize, a feat unmatched in movies.
  3. 100
    Only 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.