Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM) | Release Date: April 2, 1968
8.2
USER SCORE
Universal acclaim based on 1276 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
1,050
Mixed:
76
Negative:
150
Watch Now
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
10
LanceRomanceFeb 1, 2011
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 weThe 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
38 of 47 users found this helpful389
All this user's reviews
10
JordanH.Dec 20, 2008
This movie is in a league of it's own. No movie throughout the history of film can come close to this. By far the most intense drama ever. A movie that comments on evolution, technology, time and space. Oh yeah, after 40 years, still as This movie is in a league of it's own. No movie throughout the history of film can come close to this. By far the most intense drama ever. A movie that comments on evolution, technology, time and space. Oh yeah, after 40 years, still as fresh as the day it was released. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful
9
RobertR.Dec 9, 2006
This movie is probably the only of its kind. It is the kind of movie that combines wacky ideas with serious and realistic scenes. An incredible picture. Nobody could have done this better than Stanley Kubrick. One of the things I liked best This movie is probably the only of its kind. It is the kind of movie that combines wacky ideas with serious and realistic scenes. An incredible picture. Nobody could have done this better than Stanley Kubrick. One of the things I liked best was the slowness, and how there were 5-minute scenes just of a space pod departing from the ship. Kubrick is able to realistically portray outer space, and to create a beautiful film. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful
10
MarcWNov 11, 2009
Watched 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 Watched 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
2 of 2 users found this helpful
10
DavidR.Nov 26, 2007
This is the greatest film ever made. Kubrick's masterpiece and one of the great works of art of the 20th century. A phenomenal testament to creative genius.
2 of 2 users found this helpful
6
AtomicjackMay 16, 2018
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This film is... interesting. i personally can not argue with the impact this movie had and its heavy symbolism (most of which i do not understand) but this film was over hyped for me as people called it the best film of all time. And do not even get me started on the acid trip sequence near the end of the film, i got a splitting head ache from watching it. overall its fine but way too over hyped and personally confusing. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
4
jonslowDec 15, 2018
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.
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
10
ManolisS.Oct 1, 2006
I think this is the first and last time that cinema escaped the theater and became part of our mythological collective unconscious.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
10
ChudG.May 9, 2008
Aside from a couple nagging technical things, the tech and atmosphere depicted in the film is among the best in any movie ever. Extremely deep, enjoyable and uplifting. 11/10.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
5
lagendofdoomFeb 6, 2020
I have a really mixed feelings about the movie,
on one had the visuals and the shots are simply outstanding very impressive and mind blowing, the carefully planned shots, the way the characters move in the spaceship the composition and mise
I have a really mixed feelings about the movie,
on one had the visuals and the shots are simply outstanding very impressive and mind blowing, the carefully planned shots, the way the characters move in the spaceship the composition and mise en scene is just phenomenal.
On the other hand the characters are forgetful, the story in the beginning and the ending is nonexistent, nothing makes sense, you can try and interpret it however you want which is something that is both positive and negative I took it the negative way for the simple reason that I laughed at those scenes of how it doesn't make any sense.
The worst of all is the pacing oh god the pacing... you could shorten the movie by 1 hour and it still would be the same.
Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
10
spielbrick90Oct 21, 2011
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.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
LaskeudeungJan 28, 2017
Ya film ini dari awal sampai akhir nonjolin satu aspek doang, artisitik. Kenapa jadi lagendari ? Dikeluarin tahun 1968 tapi teknologi nyatanya baru kita temuin di abad 22. Jenius , tapi ya sekali lagi film artistik yang penonton blockbustersYa film ini dari awal sampai akhir nonjolin satu aspek doang, artisitik. Kenapa jadi lagendari ? Dikeluarin tahun 1968 tapi teknologi nyatanya baru kita temuin di abad 22. Jenius , tapi ya sekali lagi film artistik yang penonton blockbusters 100% bilang "aneh". Legend Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
5
ahmedaiman9999Jun 7, 2018
To be honest, I hate 2001, because I think it tells its relies so heavily on its message that there's almost no story to tell. It keeps repeating its messages, that we have already recognized from the get-go, throughout its running time.To be honest, I hate 2001, because I think it tells its relies so heavily on its message that there's almost no story to tell. It keeps repeating its messages, that we have already recognized from the get-go, throughout its running time. Adding insult to injury, it tries to be riveting by showing how wonderful the camera work is,how mesmerizing the cinematography is, how fascinating the production design is, how masterful the editing is, etc. While all these technical points made this movie the most beautiful movie I've ever seen, instead of relying on the technical aspect, I think it should have engaged us with the use of narrative elements, such as a dramatic plot, well-wrought and fleshed-out characters, or in a worst-case scenario, a mysterious event or even character. Also, this movie is the most boring movie I've ever watched.

(5.5/10)
Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
beeanadouAug 31, 2019
The beginning was great, music was fine but really not get getting what the ending is about.....
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
10
Louw_BurgerApr 4, 2020
One of the most influential of all sci-fi films -- and one of the most controversial -- Stanley Kubrick's 2001 is a delicate, poetic meditation on the ingenuity -- and folly -- of mankind.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
10
NickTheCritickMar 28, 2022
One of those masterpieces that you can hardly explain in words. Any word spoke to describe this movie may just be superfluous. This film is light years ahead of its time, still modern today and, in hindsight, frighteningly predictive. One ofOne of those masterpieces that you can hardly explain in words. Any word spoke to describe this movie may just be superfluous. This film is light years ahead of its time, still modern today and, in hindsight, frighteningly predictive. One of the greatest films ever shot by one of the greatest directors ever. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
0
alex_gkoumas7Oct 21, 2018
Probably the worst movie I ever seen. There is absolutely no story to tell just some random dialogue between the tragical performances of the cast. Each scene is 5min just spinning arround.. And some people dare compare this movie withProbably the worst movie I ever seen. There is absolutely no story to tell just some random dialogue between the tragical performances of the cast. Each scene is 5min just spinning arround.. And some people dare compare this movie with Nolan's masterpiece Interstellar. Pathetic! Expand
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
10
KennyH.Sep 18, 2006
Timeless masterpiece!
3 of 4 users found this helpful
10
Bob_LoblawApr 26, 2014
This film is surely the greatest accomplishment in the history of cinema both on a technical level and a storytelling level from the hands down the greatest filmmaker that America has ever produced. A film that demands to be seen on theThis film is surely the greatest accomplishment in the history of cinema both on a technical level and a storytelling level from the hands down the greatest filmmaker that America has ever produced. A film that demands to be seen on the biggest screen possible. Kubrick has practically destroyed the entire science fiction genre. Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
10
nickvader7Aug 13, 2014
Absolutely a classic of film. The rich story does not give what it is about. It symbolizes that us humans are still evolving and that in order to achieve greater things, we must overcome what we know and keep dreaming. A movie that everyoneAbsolutely a classic of film. The rich story does not give what it is about. It symbolizes that us humans are still evolving and that in order to achieve greater things, we must overcome what we know and keep dreaming. A movie that everyone one should see. Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
8
grandpajoe6191Oct 6, 2011
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 movieAcclaimed 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
5 of 7 users found this helpful52
All this user's reviews
6
TheApplegnomeAug 14, 2015
A spectacular and metaphorically masterpiece. But unfortunately slow and boring.

The first thing you notice while watching 2001: A Space Odyssey are the incredible visuals, that's so incredible. This movie is from the 60s, and I'm stunned
A spectacular and metaphorically masterpiece. But unfortunately slow and boring.

The first thing you notice while watching 2001: A Space Odyssey are the incredible visuals, that's so incredible. This movie is from the 60s, and I'm stunned by how awesome they made the film. We see astronauts in zero-gravity, spinning space ships and a lot more that I didn't think was possible in the 1960s. It's a deep and meaningful movie, that gives the audience a lot to think of, that's worth a lot! That, in combination with a mysterious feeling and much metaphorical scenes that means a lot makes this movie really unique. Those are the most important aspects of the film, but there are also many bad things. The worst thing is the second act, where nothing really happens and I was overall very bored. The space scenes in the second act are great but they're just too slow. It's the same with the characters, they are a bit vague and the conversations are boring. Even though the film is in my taste a bit too boring, is every scene important if you want to understand the bigger picture.

In fact, I do like this movie, but everyone knows that a boring and slow film might not work with every individual. Especially not with me. The opening scene is fantastic, but it's too slow, but interesting. The best parts of the film is actually the beginning and the ending, they are both spectacular and fascinating. They should on the other hand have laid much more focus on the middle of the movie, it's to slow there. Of course, imagine seeing this film in the 60s, a time when most people haven't seen our Earth from above, it must have been something extraordinary! Well; it's a new generation now, and we want more action, but I bet I would have loved this Kubrick-movie it in the 70s! The best aspect of the film I forgot to mention is the soundtrack, so incredible! The sad thing is that it disappeared in the second act.

2001: A Space Odyssey is overall a great film, but the boring scenes are just too much for me. I recommend everyone to see this film twice, because there're many fundamental aspects of the film that you don't perceive the first time. The boring scenes does unfortunately lower my rating considerably.

6.8/10
Expand
5 of 7 users found this helpful52
All this user's reviews
10
DaveSMay 1, 2009
A beautiful and mesmerizing film. I'm surprised by the two comments suggesting it's outdated. 40 years after release the special effects and settings hold up better then most newer films and certainly better then any of it's A beautiful and mesmerizing film. I'm surprised by the two comments suggesting it's outdated. 40 years after release the special effects and settings hold up better then most newer films and certainly better then any of it's contemporaries. It's biggest failures were not predicting the demise of Ma Bell and Pan Am and believing that landing on the moon actually was just a "small step". Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful
7
clydeDec 28, 2009
This movie was good.. anyone who thinks otherwise does not know a good movie.I think if you watched it at the time it should of gotten a 8 but for the modern generation i will be giving it a 7.
2 of 3 users found this helpful
8
tonyGreenJul 15, 2011
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
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
6
WalkingDead5640Apr 2, 2014
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 ofA 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
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
10
DuckNationMay 25, 2014
Arguably Stanley Kubrick best film I have found that when it comes to 2001: A Space Odyssey people either love it or hate it I am on the side that loves it. If out of all the movies I haved watched in my life this film seems more like artArguably Stanley Kubrick best film I have found that when it comes to 2001: A Space Odyssey people either love it or hate it I am on the side that loves it. If out of all the movies I haved watched in my life this film seems more like art then a movie. It has a beautiful soundtrack that sets the tone of the movie the ambient space tones are raw and chilling and it touted amazing visual effects for its time. The Story is a mind boggling adventure that leaves you dumbfounded.

Of course like many others I was young when I first watched this film now back then it was hard to even watch a 2 hour film id either fall asleep or just get bored of it. This movie though had another effect on me I was engulfed with awe and wonder id say it was the film that made me become the sci-fi junkie a am today. Stanley Kubrick's cinematography was simplistic yet masterful having long drawn out scene letting you embrace the full meaning of it was artistic.

For the people that don't like this film I call them "weak minded" this film takes quite a lot of thought to understand it and seeing how stupid most people are nowadays i can see why teenagers and young adults can't wrap their head around this film and films like it unless it has guns, explosions and hot chicks. Even now the film still leaves me wondering about the black monoliths.

Overall I give it a solid 10 This is Stanley Kubrick masterpiece and for good reason even today this film still holds its ground as the best sci-fi movie ever made and I think it will be sometime before a film will surpass it.
Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
10
MichMartApr 6, 2014
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 infinityThe 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
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
6
SmagsFeb 23, 2014
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 aStanley 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
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
10
simon_desJan 25, 2014
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.
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
9
EnricoDandoloMar 23, 2014
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 musicBeautiful, 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. Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
10
Crusty_CowboyJun 11, 2014
After watching this movie for the first time, i was mesmerized. It's a very simple movie, yet very in depth, some may say it's boring. From start to finish you will see art at it's finest. In 1991, this film was deemed "culturally,After watching this movie for the first time, i was mesmerized. It's a very simple movie, yet very in depth, some may say it's boring. From start to finish you will see art at it's finest. In 1991, this film was deemed "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant" by the United States Library of Congress and selected for preservation in the National Film Registry Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
0
AKMindsAug 18, 2020
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I just wasted over 2 hours watching this guff.

The first 5 minutes was LITERALLY nothing. A black screen with some noises. We're already off to a great start if I'm having to fast forward through the intro.

The movie begins with some apes having a fight, finding a big Tetris piece and then freaking out. This part went on for far too long! 20 minutes into the film and we finally get to the space part. VERY slow shots of ships passing and spinning, once again nothing at all happening. And then some characters have a meeting, it's all very boring... Then they go to the moon 45 minutes in and see the Tetris piece from the ape bit before with slightly different context... I say slightly different as there's NO CONTEXT FOR EITHER! It's just Tetris block as ape or Tetris block as human. The humans try to take a photo of it and then it makes an awful racket and suddenly everything that had happened for the last hour did not matter in the slightest!

We're at the part even people who know nothing about the movie know. HAL, this part had so much potential but it wasn't related to anything that came before it and it ended before it had the chance to explore it's full potential and make the plot work. Instead of being a big villain, HAL is beaten is about 4 minutes with no real fight or struggle, the entire time the movie is driving me insane with it's poor use of sound effects and strobe lighting. The movie gave me a migraine and that's no exaggeration. The lights on screen flashing, the repetitive noises were over the top and made this movie a nightmare for me.

Oh by the way, when we're introduced to HAL and Dave and the other bloke we're completely taken away from the other cast. No one sticks around, it's like having a James Bond film where 45 minutes in James Bond is just not heard from again and we have to follow a bunch of other people instead and they're not having a Martini shaken not stirred and finding the bad guy, they're instead playing table tennis and we're expected to continue watching like everything is fine.

Anyway, after this part the film flashed up an INTERMISSION screen for a very long time, I was debating whether or not to get myself a choc-ice at this point... And then we resume and after the HAL stuff happened the main guy gets attacked by more RGB lights than every Instagram post combined and then the film goes so far up it's own arse it becomes pretentious. The film explains nothing, says screw you and just ends with the main guy getting old and dying but becoming some reborn alien baby. WHAT!? I don't even have words for this, it's utter nonsense.

The film has some incredible visuals for 1968 but the extremely slow pace, shots that just don't end, interesting plot points that don't get explored enough and pacing I could only describe as Grandma who's memory is degrading explaining something she once experienced, focusing in on every little detail for the points that don't matter and aren't interesting but anything with potential and excitement squandered away.

This movie is a disaster, it's not a case of me not getting it and anyone who comes at me saying this cannot accept criticism. This is not a masterpiece, this is just a pretentious wankfest for pompous media students who think they're above everyone else for watching a film that was trying to have "meaning."

0/10 - If you've heard about this film being iconic and want to give it a try, DON'T!
Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
3
Everybody-Jun 9, 2020
Probably out of all the well known mainstream films this is the slowest, it's also very cryptic and the final "star child" sequence is excruciatingly boring, torture to sit through. It has one redeeming factor HAL 9000, who is a great villainProbably out of all the well known mainstream films this is the slowest, it's also very cryptic and the final "star child" sequence is excruciatingly boring, torture to sit through. It has one redeeming factor HAL 9000, who is a great villain and if this movie had of had an easier to follow plot (or any plot at all) then maybe it could have utilised him to his full potential, the voice of HAL is just perfect, it has a real smug condescending sense of superiority to it and he has a great look, that red eye.

This movie seems to be more appreciated for it's effects than it's plot (if it even has a plot) which is fine if people enjoy it good for them but personally I am after something different, I want a great story in my films not a great sleeping pill. 3 out of 10 for HAL and one scene involving him in particular.
Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
10
nboley08Aug 16, 2010
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 intellectuallyAn 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. Expand
3 of 5 users found this helpful32
All this user's reviews
4
drlowdonJan 11, 2014
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 andI 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
3 of 5 users found this helpful32
All this user's reviews
2
Krond2010Nov 8, 2012
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.
12 of 21 users found this helpful129
All this user's reviews
10
PaxsterOct 9, 2010
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 justThis 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. Expand
5 of 9 users found this helpful54
All this user's reviews
4
vikesh2206Nov 12, 2014
Too abstract to provide anything, Stanley Kubrick's "masterpiece" is an overlong, lifeless adventure with one dimensional characters and a terribly disjointed plot (if there is any).
5 of 9 users found this helpful54
All this user's reviews
5
billrullerApr 14, 2012
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...IHonestly, 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
3 of 6 users found this helpful33
All this user's reviews
10
FanJul 17, 2011
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 badI 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
3 of 6 users found this helpful33
All this user's reviews
7
ERG1008Sep 1, 2010
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 &
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
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
9
TokyochuchuOct 10, 2012
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 the2001: 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
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
10
konkJul 2, 2011
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 maskBest 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. Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
10
AndrewUltimateJul 13, 2011
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).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. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
EdwinApr 9, 2014
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.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
kellanjApr 29, 2011
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,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. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
ZiggyStardustJul 3, 2011
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.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
FIlmsareawesomeSep 22, 2011
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 thatSuch 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
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
RodrigoBGCSep 26, 2011
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
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
3
imthenoobJun 2, 2019
Visually stunning but that is about it. There is very little dialogue and you could honestly skip more than half the movie and not miss a beat. 2001 would have been much better as a short film than a feature.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
SpangleJul 9, 2014
This film is fantastic. Now, it is very, very slow and can be a tad dull for sure, but for the most part, it is wraps you up and refuses to let go. The imagery is immaculate and you can see Kubrick's trademark cinematography here and it isThis film is fantastic. Now, it is very, very slow and can be a tad dull for sure, but for the most part, it is wraps you up and refuses to let go. The imagery is immaculate and you can see Kubrick's trademark cinematography here and it is absolutely gorgeous. It was hard to pick my jaw up from the floor at times when seeing the beautiful images he managed to construct. In addition, the special effects are phenomenal. For 2014 they are great, let alone for 1968. Just absolutely stunning to watch. The sets are also brilliantly put together. In terms of sound, the soundtrack is phenomenal and is a great companion to the images. The acting here is solid, but that was all that was required, as there is not that much dialogue where acting is crucial, but they were competent and in the more dialogue carried sequences did well. This film is undoubtedly tough to grasp after watching it, but there is certainly more going on than meets the eye. However, what does meet the eye is the brilliant imagery and amazing "future" (past now) that Stanley Kubrick put on screen. Just truly a brilliant work of art. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
PersinJan 11, 2013
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 sequencesI 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
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
cameronmorewoodNov 9, 2012
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.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
4
BradySmithNov 8, 2015
I'm going to get a lot of flack for saying this, but 2001 is probably the most overrated movie of all time. Sure, the effects are serviceable in 2015, the camerawork is stunning, and there are a few moments of transcendent beauty, but thatI'm going to get a lot of flack for saying this, but 2001 is probably the most overrated movie of all time. Sure, the effects are serviceable in 2015, the camerawork is stunning, and there are a few moments of transcendent beauty, but that amounts to like 15 good minutes total if I'm being generous. The rest of the movie is a meticulously constructed boredom. There were times when I wanted to scream with boredom. Kubrick seems to think holding shots on absolutely nothing interesting happening makes him a master, and apparently everyone else thinks this too, but it doesn't. I had moral objections to a clockwork orange and the second half was pretty slow, but overall that was a movie that could entertain, shock and fascinate. I also thought The Shining was one of the creepiest movies ever made. But this? As artful and visionary as it occasionally is, I could barely stand to finish it. I know I'm in the minority, but I have to call out pretension when I see it. Interstellar may have taken much inspiration from this movie, but that one was awe inspiring, heartbreaking and exciting. Gravity was also 1000 times more engaging than this while still containing moments of jaw dropping beauty. I love atmosphere and when a film is drenched in it I encourage slow pacing, but 2001 only has glimpses of atmosphere. 2001 may not be the worst movie ever, but it's one of the most boring. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
GinaKJun 21, 2018
Definitely one of the best films ever made and certainly the best science fiction film made so far because it speculates not just about humans in space but about the universe itself. I have seen this film many times – and I finally appreciateDefinitely one of the best films ever made and certainly the best science fiction film made so far because it speculates not just about humans in space but about the universe itself. I have seen this film many times – and I finally appreciate Kubrick’s achievement. I have also seen many newer science fiction films, and I love many of them (for example, the Alien films), but this one is special because it goes beyond normal science fiction themes to speculate about the universe. And you need to see this film in a theater on the big screen and with a modern sound system even though it is not as spectacular as some contemporary films. It made me appreciate what an inspired director can do when he makes a great film, even when he doesn’t blow me away with spectacular special effects. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
bm2759Apr 14, 2013
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
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
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
5
Movie1997Jul 21, 2015
Stanley Kubrick really likes to throw us for a loop. However, it doesn't work like I would have hoped. First off, there is no denying that this movie is straight up beautiful. Absolutely gorgeous to look at. The effects still hold up to thisStanley Kubrick really likes to throw us for a loop. However, it doesn't work like I would have hoped. First off, there is no denying that this movie is straight up beautiful. Absolutely gorgeous to look at. The effects still hold up to this day. The musical score is also beautifully orchestrated and unforgettable. I doubt that anyone will deny that. But the biggest problem with "2001: A Space Odyssey" is that it is excruciatingly slow. It pains me to say it, but this is the first Kubrick movie that got me bored at parts. There are sections in this movie that drag on for so long. And in those moments they really rely on the visual spectacle and beautiful score to cover up the progression of the story (at least I thought). At one point near the end when it was suppose to be super intense, I was trying to keep my eyes open. This movie could have easily been cut 30-40 minutes shorter.And honestly, you don't care about the characters. They seem kind of emotionless. The character you care about is the HAL - 9000. It was such an interesting antagonist and it really is what carries the weight of the movie on its shoulders. This is a hard movie to understand on a first viewing. It's not really a fault of the movie, however with the slow pace, it can distract you from what's going on in the story. Overall, "2001: A Space Odyssey" is a masterpiece on a technical and orchestral level, but sadly nothing more than a painfully slow burn to endure with not so memorable characters. I give this a C! Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
theunholymesiahSep 25, 2013
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.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
joao1198pedroNov 20, 2013
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 greatsome 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. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
KristianBKAug 16, 2014
This is, hands down, one of the best sci-fi films ever, and a very beautiful one as well. Not for everyone, this slow paced, with little dialogue, but stunning visuals. Who would've thought that Strauss and flying satellites would go along soThis is, hands down, one of the best sci-fi films ever, and a very beautiful one as well. Not for everyone, this slow paced, with little dialogue, but stunning visuals. Who would've thought that Strauss and flying satellites would go along so well. Great performances, great screenplay, great soundtrack, marvelous cinematography, brilliant directing and a lot, a lot more. A masterpiece, a piece of art. Kubrick at his best. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
fracko333Apr 19, 2015
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 for the mind,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 for 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 a timeless masterpiece. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
0
FranKenweenieApr 22, 2018
the most boring meaningless movie i have ever seen just an overrated director where is the freaking story charcters are just ****
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
Critic0Jul 2, 2014
How do I begin to describe this film? It's too good for words, and it always will be! Stanley Kubrick gives us this provocative and interesting film about who we are and where we're going. It truly shows us what it is like to actually beHow do I begin to describe this film? It's too good for words, and it always will be! Stanley Kubrick gives us this provocative and interesting film about who we are and where we're going. It truly shows us what it is like to actually be human, and the mistakes we make.

A flawless science fiction (or science fact) film so enigmatic and chilling, its legacy still impacts our world today. 2001: A Space Odyssey is the big bang of sci-fi and will always be the greatest of the genre.
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
horcrux2007Sep 2, 2014
"2001: A Space Odyssey" is a very complex film. The first segment is somewhat boring to watch until the monolith shows up. After that, it's actually a very entertaining and intriguing film... until the last segment. The film just goes"2001: A Space Odyssey" is a very complex film. The first segment is somewhat boring to watch until the monolith shows up. After that, it's actually a very entertaining and intriguing film... until the last segment. The film just goes completely overboard and overly complicated when it really didn't need to be, and the Star Gate sequence, well, it's difficult to say how drawn out that part was. If the film was about 20 minutes shorter, cutting out the more boring parts of the beginning and making the Star Gate sequence shorter, it would have been a perfect experience. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
NaTenBoxNov 4, 2014
The best movie that I've ever seen.

The cinematography is beautiful, HAL 9000 is the best sci-if villain that I've seen in ages, the meanings are well told, and everything about it is just.....amazing.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
CineFilesApr 29, 2015
Perhaps it takes the passage of time to gain the perspective to call some films great. Certain movies, despite being ridiculed upon their initial release, have been "re-discovered" years later and labeled as forgotten classics. It's aPerhaps it takes the passage of time to gain the perspective to call some films great. Certain movies, despite being ridiculed upon their initial release, have been "re-discovered" years later and labeled as forgotten classics. It's a universal truth that art isn't always immediately recognized as such - this is why so many revered painters, authors, and composers have died in poverty and relative obscurity. Filmmakers face some of the same challenges - in a business climate, courage is the number one characteristic needed by anyone with the goal of fashioning a work that is deliberately thought-provoking but lacking in mass appeal. Such idealistic intentions won't inflate any director's bank account, but they may make an enduring statement. That brings us to the subject of this review: Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. Despite gaining additional adherents and growing more respected with each passing day, 2001 would likely be a failure if shown to a typical, MTV-weaned group of multiplex patrons. Watching this film demands two qualities that are sadly lacking in all but the most mature and sophisticated audiences: patience and a willingness to ponder the meaning of what's transpiring on screen. 2001 is awe inspiring, but it is most definitely not a "thrill ride." It is art, it is a statement, and it is indisputably a cinematic classic.

I was around in 1968 when 2001 was first released, but I wasn't old enough to be concerned with anything more substantive than bottles and sleep. However, in the intervening years, I have spoken to several individuals who attended premieres of the film. The level of anticipation surrounding 2001 was as high as that to accompany any cinematic event before or after. Not only had Kubrick developed the project in complete secrecy, but, with the space race in its final laps, the world was ready to inhale any whiff of science fiction. But 2001 did not satisfy everyone. In fact, the initial reaction could charitably be called mixed. While a minority of those in early audiences recognized that they had witnessed the birth of a masterpiece, many movie-goers were nonplused and confused. Several influential mainstream publications panned the film, and, while it was successful at the box office, it was not the blockbuster some had expected it to be. Yet 2001 did not die. Instead, its reputation grew, and, by the mid-'70s, it had become a Goliath.

It's questionable which element of 2001 stands out the most clearly: the pacing, the music, or the visuals. In truth, the three are inseparable. Like a skilled chef, Kubrick blended them together to form a dish of incomparable excellence. They are unique ingredients, yet, once mixed, they can no longer be reconstituted into their original forms. For most movies, this is not the case, but that's one of many areas in which 2001 is an exception. Listening to a soundtrack of this film provokes an avalanche of images in the mind's eye. Can anyone who has seen 2001 listen to the Johann Strauss' "Blue Danube Waltz" and not think of the shuttle docking at the space station? And Richard Strauss' rousing, unforgettable "Also Spoke Zarathustra" has become synonymous with this picture. (In fact, "Zaruathustra" is often referred to as the "Theme from 2001".)

As is true of every Kubrick film, the meticulous attention to detail is evident. Working in close concert with co-screenwriter Arthur C. Clarke and other scientific advisors, Kubrick made sure that every aspect of the film conformed to known scientific fact. His vision is eerily accurate, and, even though we have not attained Clarke's prophesied advancements, we are on the same track. Additionally, there isn't a moment in 2001 that seems dated. The film could just as easily have been made in the '90s as in the '60s.

The Academy Award-winning special effects represent some of the most impressive model work ever committed to screen. They are at least the equal, if not superior to, George Lucas' efforts in Star Wars. Today, visual effects are all about pushing the digital envelope, but there are times when it's worth looking back to how things were done in a simpler era, when technological limitations demanded greater creativity. Douglas Trumbull's accomplishments in 2001 represent an innovative pinnacle.

2001 needs to be experienced to be appreciated. It loses something on a TV screen; even the best home video setup can't replicate what it's like to see the movie in a theater. 2001 does not build bonds between the viewers and the characters or set up a straightforward, linear storyline. Instead, it challenges the audience and inspires wonder. Proponents argue that this is Kubrick's best film; regardless of whether or not that is true, there's no doubting that this movie represents the product of a great director at the height of his powers. 32 years after its release, 2001 has lost none of the qualities that make it an acknowledged masterwork.
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
4
RobertOBrienJul 9, 2015
With it's tediously long shots of people floating around space, obnoxious music, distracting intermissions, lack of flowing narrative, little character development, and the conflict of the story only appearing in the last 35 minutes and theWith it's tediously long shots of people floating around space, obnoxious music, distracting intermissions, lack of flowing narrative, little character development, and the conflict of the story only appearing in the last 35 minutes and the ending being a severe case of too much, too late, I simply did not enjoy this film.

But with it's groundbreaking special effects, beautiful cinematography and genuinely disturbing antagonist, I get why the film is remembered.

It tries to be more of an experience than a story, but my personal music and film preferences kept me from enjoying it. The film just constantly felt like a pat on the back followed by a slap in the face. Recommended, but only because I'm sure lots of people will like it, even though I don't.
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
5
JanKrevatinAug 13, 2015
Great philosophy inside the movie itself,. I wouldn`t reccomend it to people that cannot stand a movie without tension happening all the time. There is approximately 25 minutes of two and a half hour film that are really tense. Yet I`m notGreat philosophy inside the movie itself,. I wouldn`t reccomend it to people that cannot stand a movie without tension happening all the time. There is approximately 25 minutes of two and a half hour film that are really tense. Yet I`m not that kind of person but I still found that movie way too long. The movie portrays bunch of interesting topics such as technology, time, space, human evolution, human behaviour which is pretty cool and presented in a good way. But the thing missing were the characters. After the movie was finished I didn`t know almost nothing about persons in the movie. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
4
CinemassacreMar 13, 2016
When Stanley Kubrick and sci-fi specialist Arthur C. Clarke first conceived the idea of making a Cinerama film, neither had any idea that it would run into a project of several years. Shooting actually began late December, 1965, in EnglandWhen Stanley Kubrick and sci-fi specialist Arthur C. Clarke first conceived the idea of making a Cinerama film, neither had any idea that it would run into a project of several years. Shooting actually began late December, 1965, in England and continued, if one counts added footage and retakes, until early this year. Much of the lengthy shooting time, of course, is attributable to the detailed special effects the story made necessary. Keir Dullea, for instance, completed another film (“The Fox”) and did a Broadway play (“Dr Cook’s Garden”) between completion of his role in “2001” and its current release.

Was all this painstaking research and work worthwhile? There will be many filmgoers, fortunately for Metro, who’ll think it was; there’ll be others who won’t see this in the finished handiwork of Kubrick and his staff. A major achievement in cinematography and special effects, “2001” lacks dramatic appeal to a large degree and only conveys suspense after the halfway mark. Despite the enormous technical staff involved in making the film, it is almost entirely one man’s conception and Kubrick must receive all the praise – and take all the blame.

The plot, so-called, uses up almost two hours in exposition of scientific advances in space travel and communications, before anything happens. The surprisingly dull prolog deals with the “advancement of man,” centering on a group of apes (the makeup is amateurish compared to that in “Planet of the Apes”). An important prop is also introduced but so sketchily that many viewers will scarcely note, and promptly forget it–a huge black monolith is shown briefly (to reappear light years later as the key to possible life on planets other than Earth).

The little humor is provided by introducing well-known commercial names which are presumably still operational during the space age: the Orbiter Hilton hotel, refreshments by Howard Johnson, picture phones by Bell, and Pan Am space ships (although one shown is carrying only a single passenger). A computer named Hal that can talk is, initially, good for a laugh but when it turns out to be the villain, this attitude quickly changes. Hal (voiced by Douglas Rain, although originally done by Martin Balsam) is one of the film’s best effects and surprisingly acceptable, considering reaction to it is based on the use of a voice.

Dullea and Gary Lockwood, as the two principal astronauts, are not introduced until well along in the film. Their complete lack of emotion becomes rather implausible during scenes where they discover, and discuss, the villainy of the computer. Except for William Sylvester, as the scientist who reveals the project to investigate possibility of life on another planet, the other human roles are little more than walkons.

Kubrick and Clarke have kept dialog to a minimum, frequently inserting lengthy passages where everything is told visually. One inside joke is the remark by a femme Russian scientist that her husband is busy elsewhere doing underwater exploration (Clarke’s real-life hobby). Scientific advances appear much further along than would seem possible for the 33 intervening years until 2001. The only earth shots shown are interiors transmitted over picture phones or closed-circuit TV but, incongruously, Earth citizens are shown dressed and acting 1968 while the scientists (even in their casual attire) wear stylized space-age garb.

Film ends on a confused note, never really tackling the “other life” situation and evidently leaving interpretation up to the individual viewer. To many this will smack of indecision or hasty scripting. Dullea, after being subjected to a wild celestial ride through a series of galaxies that create a psychedelic effort on both him and the audience, finds himself in a room decorated in a style familiar to Earth although the implication is that he’s on Jupiter. After confronting himself in various advance stages of age, he finally succumbs to the power generated by the black monolith (still unexplained) which has reappeared. The ending shot blends a planet with an orb-shaped view of an embryo, possibly suggesting the rebirth of civilization in another universe.

Ray Lovejoy’s editing, generally good, too often holds views to the point of losing interest while other scenes are chopped abruptly, sometimes with no explanation. This suggests some wholesale and rather hasty cutting decisions on the part of Kubrick. The 160-minute running time, still over­long, could be shortened sufficiently by some slicing in the lengthy introduction to make the intermission unnecessary.

But “2001” is not a cinematic landmark. It compares with, but does not best, previous efforts at science fiction; lacking the humanity of “Forbidden Planet,” the imagination of “Things to Come” and the simplicity of “Of Stars and Men,” it actually belongs to the technically-slick group previously dominated by George Pal and the Japanese.
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
4
DoctorFilmMar 31, 2016
Stanley Kubrick is alive and well and living in Outer Space. Those filmgoers who have wondered what happened to the man who gave screen birth to "Lolita" and "Dr. Strangelove" can stop worrying. He's taken up a new hobby--science-fiction--andStanley Kubrick is alive and well and living in Outer Space. Those filmgoers who have wondered what happened to the man who gave screen birth to "Lolita" and "Dr. Strangelove" can stop worrying. He's taken up a new hobby--science-fiction--and his first effort comes close to running away with itself. One criticism that will be raised is that film cost too much for so "personal" (i.e. Kubrick) a film.

When Stanley Kubrick and sci-fi specialist Arthur C. Clarke first conceived the idea of making a Cinerama film, neither had any idea that it would run into a project of several years. Shooting actually began late December, 1965, in England and continued, if one counts added footage and retakes, until early this year. Much of the lengthy shooting time, of course, is attributable to the detailed special effects the story made necessary. Keir Dullea, for instance, completed another film (“The Fox”) and did a Broadway play (“Dr Cook’s Garden”) between completion of his role in “2001” and its current release.

Was all this painstaking research and work worthwhile? There will be many filmgoers, fortunately for Metro, who’ll think it was; there’ll be others who won’t see this in the finished handiwork of Kubrick and his staff. A major achievement in cinematography and special effects, “2001” lacks dramatic appeal to a large degree and only conveys suspense after the halfway mark. Despite the enormous technical staff involved in making the film, it is almost entirely one man’s conception and Kubrick must receive all the praise – and take all the blame.

The plot, so-called, uses up almost two hours in exposition of scientific advances in space travel and communications, before anything happens. The surprisingly dull prolog deals with the “advancement of man,” centering on a group of apes (the makeup is amateurish compared to that in “Planet of the Apes”). An important prop is also introduced but so sketchily that many viewers will scarcely note, and promptly forget it–a huge black monolith is shown briefly (to reappear light years later as the key to possible life on planets other than Earth).

The little humor is provided by introducing well-known commercial names which are presumably still operational during the space age: the Orbiter Hilton hotel, refreshments by Howard Johnson, picture phones by Bell, and Pan Am space ships (although one shown is carrying only a single passenger). A computer named Hal that can talk is, initially, good for a laugh but when it turns out to be the villain, this attitude quickly changes. Hal (voiced by Douglas Rain, although originally done by Martin Balsam) is one of the film’s best effects and surprisingly acceptable, considering reaction to it is based on the use of a voice.

Dullea and Gary Lockwood, as the two principal astronauts, are not introduced until well along in the film. Their complete lack of emotion becomes rather implausible during scenes where they discover, and discuss, the villainy of the computer. Except for William Sylvester, as the scientist who reveals the project to investigate possibility of life on another planet, the other human roles are little more than walkons.

Kubrick and Clarke have kept dialog to a minimum, frequently inserting lengthy passages where everything is told visually. One inside joke is the remark by a femme Russian scientist that her husband is busy elsewhere doing underwater exploration (Clarke’s real-life hobby). Scientific advances appear much further along than would seem possible for the 33 intervening years until 2001. The only earth shots shown are interiors transmitted over picture phones or closed-circuit TV but, incongruously, Earth citizens are shown dressed and acting 1968 while the scientists (even in their casual attire) wear stylized space-age garb.

Film ends on a confused note, never really tackling the “other life” situation and evidently leaving interpretation up to the individual viewer. To many this will smack of indecision or hasty scripting. Dullea, after being subjected to a wild celestial ride through a series of galaxies that create a psychedelic effort on both him and the audience, finds himself in a room decorated in a style familiar to Earth although the implication is that he’s on Jupiter. After confronting himself in various advance stages of age, he finally succumbs to the power generated by the black monolith (still unexplained) which has reappeared. The ending shot blends a planet with an orb-shaped view of an embryo, possibly suggesting the rebirth of civilization in another universe.

Ray Lovejoy’s editing, generally good, too often holds views to the point of losing interest while other scenes are chopped abruptly, sometimes with no explanation. This suggests some wholesale and rather hasty cutting decisions on the part of Kubrick. The 160-minute running time, still over­long, could be shortened sufficiently by some slicing in the lengthy introduction to make the intermission unnecessary.
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
The3AcademySinsJan 24, 2020
To this day, 2001: A Space Odyssey is one of the most inventive, original, and though provoking movies that has ever been made. The visual effects are mind-boggling, and the story is simple and open to interpretation. Whenever I watch thisTo this day, 2001: A Space Odyssey is one of the most inventive, original, and though provoking movies that has ever been made. The visual effects are mind-boggling, and the story is simple and open to interpretation. Whenever I watch this movie, I always wonder what the original audiences thought of it, and if they knew how pervasive and long lasting the piece of art that is this movie would persist? Definitely one of the best science fiction movies ever created. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
AkumaJackJun 6, 2018
2001: A space odyssey is the definition of Masterpiece. Although is a very slow paced movie it has one of the best directing i've ever seen. The Soundtrack is perfect and the whole "plot" is very meaningful. This film is so deep that will2001: A space odyssey is the definition of Masterpiece. Although is a very slow paced movie it has one of the best directing i've ever seen. The Soundtrack is perfect and the whole "plot" is very meaningful. This film is so deep that will tell you more about yourself that any other piece of art you'll ever experience. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
7
SilentTacticianFeb 21, 2018
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. A fantastic film but it wasn't able to keep me entertained. Lifeless characters and a dull plot. The best thing about this movie was the voice of Hal and its interaction with the pilots. Everything else is what brought this movie down for me. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
3
MacsMusicDec 30, 2017
This is one of the weirdest, and slowest movies that I've ever seen. Every scene was 5 minutes longer than it had to be, and watching this movie was a painful experience as a result. The plot is complete nonsense, with no real direction orThis is one of the weirdest, and slowest movies that I've ever seen. Every scene was 5 minutes longer than it had to be, and watching this movie was a painful experience as a result. The plot is complete nonsense, with no real direction or anything. The only redeeming factors are Hal, and the music. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
ScorsescockFeb 1, 2018
This film you might not get on the first watch but it all comes together it's truly amazing. it uses visual storytelling and little dialogue to show exactly what's happening and provide a deep hidden message about change both good and bad.This film you might not get on the first watch but it all comes together it's truly amazing. it uses visual storytelling and little dialogue to show exactly what's happening and provide a deep hidden message about change both good and bad. P.S. best special effects ever. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
JamedrisApr 10, 2019
One of those mind-blowing movie that left you amazed and you want to tell your friends about it as soon as possible, but you know that most of them will not appreciate it in the way you did. I had two or three approaches but I am more thanOne of those mind-blowing movie that left you amazed and you want to tell your friends about it as soon as possible, but you know that most of them will not appreciate it in the way you did. I had two or three approaches but I am more than glad that I did decide to watch it. Any cinema fan should see it, even despite for the classic-role of this title. Also, HAL = IBM -1 letter each, but y'all know this. :) +fav Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
5
ThejodjeremieOct 30, 2020
The movie has nice visuals and great acting for a movie that came out in 1968 but it's very slow and boring at times. I can kinda see how this movie is considered great but for me it just didn't work.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
0
MircojujubeApr 27, 2020
this is the most overrated movie in all cinema history and anydody who says they understood it is lying, it's just a gigantic show off of visual and special effects, if it were done today it would be destryed by critics but it's 50 years oldthis is the most overrated movie in all cinema history and anydody who says they understood it is lying, it's just a gigantic show off of visual and special effects, if it were done today it would be destryed by critics but it's 50 years old and made by kubrick so it has to be a masterpice... **** if you'd like to see a good kubrick movie watch shining or clockwork orange, if you want to watch a good space movie check out interstellar or the martian.



disappointed
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
1
Longo12Feb 7, 2014
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 theI 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
6 of 13 users found this helpful67
All this user's reviews
0
SolipsistNov 18, 2013
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;
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
3 of 7 users found this helpful34
All this user's reviews
4
CritiqueGirlMar 1, 2011
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.
5 of 13 users found this helpful58
All this user's reviews
0
Trev29Nov 17, 2014
This movie did not impress me in the slightest. It is not as if the music is original. This "odyssey" is horribly incoherent and boring. I guess I just don't get it, nor do I want to.
5 of 13 users found this helpful58
All this user's reviews
0
MovieEnthusiastNov 12, 2014
I personally think Kubrick use obfuscation style so people get more curious to see the movie, the visual effect are awesome but definitely not his best work,
2 of 6 users found this helpful24
All this user's reviews
10
spacecaptainAug 4, 2011
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,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
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
10
TrantorOct 8, 2011
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.
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
10
nabozny4Jun 18, 2012
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.
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
7
Compi24Nov 14, 2013
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.
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
7
ragekoiAug 16, 2013
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 extremelyThis 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. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
10
cinemabonApr 8, 2018
Stanley Kubrick's masterpiece broke new ground and became the blueprint for all science fiction movies to follow.
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
5
finfroskDec 18, 2014
Technically and visually good, but boring and long.
Yeah, the visual effects are incredible considering the movie is soon to be 50 years old. The main character's acting is good, but you know what? The movie is incredibly long, and almost
Technically and visually good, but boring and long.
Yeah, the visual effects are incredible considering the movie is soon to be 50 years old. The main character's acting is good, but you know what? The movie is incredibly long, and almost nothing happens at all. Some of the scenes go on and on and on and on. And on. It is supposed to be very artistic, but I found it dull and boring. It's just ok. And don't get your panties in a bunch and say I can't appreciate art, because I can, I am an artist myself, so shush. Go watch The Shining, if you have to watch Kubrick.
Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
0
LachlanSNov 10, 2009
If you fast forward through all non-dialogue portions of this 130 minute movie, it distills down to a mediocre 20 minute sci-fi story. If you don't fast forward, you're guaranteed to fall asleep.
3 of 10 users found this helpful
2
History-DudeNov 27, 2010
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
11 of 38 users found this helpful1127
All this user's reviews
0
JamesB.Aug 21, 2007
I must have seen a different 2001: A Space Odyssey than everyone else. Mine was a two hours long screen saver. I watched it a week ago and I'm still furious about how mind-numbingly boring it was. Critics, if this was an elaborate I must have seen a different 2001: A Space Odyssey than everyone else. Mine was a two hours long screen saver. I watched it a week ago and I'm still furious about how mind-numbingly boring it was. Critics, if this was an elaborate practical joke, you win. Expand
4 of 14 users found this helpful
1
EthanRMay 28, 2009
Recently, I stayed at a hotel that had a very interesting art style. They had flatscreen TV's running nonstop with strange, enigmatic videos, as a sort of "moving art." This movie would fit perfectly on to one of those screens. Where it Recently, I stayed at a hotel that had a very interesting art style. They had flatscreen TV's running nonstop with strange, enigmatic videos, as a sort of "moving art." This movie would fit perfectly on to one of those screens. Where it does not fit is in a movie theater. As a movie, it is horrible. Immensely boring and repetitive, it lacks character development, relevance between scenes, and any respectable acting. It gives no explanation for any of its many random plot changes, leaving the interpretation up to the viewer, a cop-out way of passing off what was not even artistic as deep and meaningful. I give it a 1 because, for its time, the special effects are wholly impressive. But other than that, this movie is excruciating. Expand
3 of 11 users found this helpful
1
DemiourgosAug 17, 2010
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 aThis 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. Expand
5 of 19 users found this helpful514
All this user's reviews
2
StanleyK.Mar 9, 2009
Slowest movie ever made and of course its outdated, hence the title.
3 of 12 users found this helpful
0
csw12Nov 16, 2014
From one of the dumbest opening scenes to an ending that can be describe as one of the worst in history, a 2001: A Space Odyssey is nothing but a dull pretentious film that for almost it's 3 hour length, had less to offer than a blank whiteFrom one of the dumbest opening scenes to an ending that can be describe as one of the worst in history, a 2001: A Space Odyssey is nothing but a dull pretentious film that for almost it's 3 hour length, had less to offer than a blank white wall. This is the worst science fiction movie I've ever seen. Expand
3 of 12 users found this helpful39
All this user's reviews
0
KGBisCrazyApr 29, 2015
Do you want a resume of this film without spoilers ?
3 Hours of shots in space
so f*cking boring seriously, I like the Shining, I like A Orange Clockwork, So i can only think that Kubrick was very very very VERY drunk while making this
Do you want a resume of this film without spoilers ?
3 Hours of shots in space
so f*cking boring
seriously, I like the Shining, I like A Orange Clockwork, So i can only think that Kubrick was very very very VERY drunk while making this Movie, And several critics and movie goers thought "It can't be this bad, So It must mean something !!"
Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
0
ParithMay 23, 2015
Overrated and boring. An impersonation of greatness that people can't tell from the real thing. Dramatic music and scenes from different times convince the impressionable that the film is epic. Two completely unrelated things struggle to beOverrated and boring. An impersonation of greatness that people can't tell from the real thing. Dramatic music and scenes from different times convince the impressionable that the film is epic. Two completely unrelated things struggle to be the stars of this movie - the AI and the monolith. Why? Because the movie has no worthy story, just a heaping of mysterious omissions and dramatic slowness. But with two mysterious things you double the illusion that you are seeing something interesting. Legitimate mystery can be interesting, but this is story telling by omission. Where the author fills in a lack of vision and creativity with omissions that they try to sell as mysterious. This is a great fraud. And I've watched it a few times in search of it's alleged genius. I wonder how much of the praise of this film is people following the herd saying it's smart to seem smart since they think other people think it's smart (like you see in so many things - wine, food, art, literature). Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews