Rating: 
Summary: A Truly Spiritual Film
Review: Stanley Kubrick meant 2001 to hit viewers in the subconscious. Don't come to it expecting conventional narrative--there's less than 30 minutes of actual dialogue; the story is told through images. It's slow, patient, and deliberate, giving viewers time to think about the meaning behind what they are seeing. Dissatisfied with the then-current state of sci-fi cinema, Kubrick designed the special effects for this film by himself, from scratch...And 2001 is the only movie set in space wherein an strict attention to the laws of physics is applied. There is no sound.
But 2001 is more than just a film--it's a philosophical argument about the human race's relation to Higher Power. On one reading, the human race gets an evolutionary kick-start by an unknown, ostensibly extraterrestrial force; for others, the monolith is symbolic of the Mystery--God. Either way, this genesis involves humans' use of tools (as McLuhan said, who was very big at the time, they are extensions of man...) But what does Kubrick choose as the first tool humans used? A bone. And what does it produce? Two depicted deaths--the slaughter a tapir for food, and the first murder, of another proto-human. Thus man's ability is double-natured from the start. Flash forward half a million years...In HAL, we get an extension of the nervous system--the pinnacle of man's tool-making ability, the nervous system of a spaceship. HAL has been programmed all too well--given conflicting orders, and instructed to lie to the crew about the true purpose of their mission, he becomes rightfully paranoid when the astronauts threaten to disconnect him. His natural drive to self-preservation leads him to kill or be killed (one of the most brilliant murder scenes in cinema--the three hibernating astronauts whose deaths are presented as mere information about their life functions). Man's greatest achievement has failed. Humans are doomed.
But are they? In the last moments of the remaining astronaut's life, he recognizes the power which has made him what he is--and with all humility recognizes it (another brilliant moment--Bowman reaching out to the monolith, a quote from Michaelangelo's Sistine Chapel?) and is transformed again. A stupendously moving ending.
Rating:
Summary: It's not what they tell you, but what they don't tell you
Review: If you were looking for one word to sum up this film, mystical would do pretty well. We're used to filmmakers explaining their intentions; with this movie Stanley Kubrick shows us that the lack of an explanation will linger in your memory far, far longer. Consider the black monument that appears several times throughout the movie. We know it is essential to all that is humanity, for evolution takes amazing turns shortly after meeting it. But what in the name of God is it? We have no idea. It could be the work of absolutely anything; all we see is a seamless rectangle that is, apparently, the single most important object in the universe. And that's why 2001: A Space Odyssey is a movie that will leave you in stitches long after you watch it--provided you make the effort to understand it.
If you're completely baffled by this movie, keep in mind that there is one overriding message. I can't give it away, for it would spoil everything. But it has something to do with what Arthur C. Clarke would call "the tyranny of matter." And, as a last note, I didn't find this movie boring. At all. Things do happen very slowly in space; everybody who's been there says it's a place both of beauty and leisure. So I think the relaxed pace of this movie, together with the music of the Blue Danube waltz, actually captures the essence of space travel very well.
Rating:
Summary: 2001: a space odyssey
Review: First, this movie is not for everyone. Second, there are a number of layers this movie should be critique. Being made in 1968 and considering the technology of the time, this movie is a masterpiece of visual effects which broke new ground. The beauty and emptiness of space/technology is truly captured in a realistic matter that stands to today's computer graphics. It is truly a masterpiece of sound, visuals, and optimistic role of man's exploration into space and his purpose/evolution in the universe. But dare I say the movie is not perfect. Kubrick loses ground into the importance of drama, plot,acting, and character development. Areas which made 2010 a much better film in getting the audience involved with man's purpose in the universe. Kubrick leaves too much of an interpretation in the film so that to him and the purist is what makes the film a classic, into which I believe is its major weakness. There are also some areas of the film which seem rather commercial and trite, like when the good doctor spends 5 minutes talking to his daughter....a plug for Bell telephone? Overall, it is a film that has truly stood the test of time and one that should be appreciated for its beauty, groundbreaking visuals, and style despite its aformentioned shortcomings. It is truly not a film for the masses.
Rating: 
Summary: Dull and uniteresting
Review: Most people who [do not like] this movie would usually state that they didn't get it. I am not one of them. The thing is I understood the the movie completely, but I also saw how this movie could have been much, much better. The story of "2001" is quite possibly one of the most origional stories ever written (no. 1 would probobly be the Bible). Unfortunatly this is all the movie has going for it. One can make a magnificent, thought provoking movie without making it so horribly boring. the scenes last far to long to keep the audiences attention (well mine). the timing is totally off. a knowledgable director knows that s scene needs to keep going just long enough so the audience can tell what is happening and what the director is trying to say. But "2001" is as if Kubric is repeating his adea over and over to me each time i stop and think of how long ive been watching it. after a while i begin to daydream. I've been spoiled with "The Godfather", "Citizen Kane", and "The Shawshank Redemption", where even weeks after i see it i am still thinking back to it's genious and it's power and could possibly watch those films over an over again for a long time. If Kubric could have done it right it would be widely accepted as cinematic genious, (not just by "think-they know-it-all" critics and others who are easily pleased) but bottom line it's slow, nonsencical, and boring.
Rating:
Summary: No Extras
Review: If you are hoping to see some Directors cut extras...there aren't any!
Rating:
Summary: A spacey movie in more ways than one--for some people
Review: I'm a big sci-fi fan, so of course this movie is one of my all-time favorites. But one thing I wanted to mention that amused me about the flick was how well it played among the psychedelic crowd back then. When this movie came out, the headtrippers among my friends and acquaintances, thinking that it would be great to merge the exploration of inner space with the exploration of outer space, perhaps, would get high on LSD and then go see this movie. They especially liked the part with the colorful special effects where Bowen is going through the Star Gate with the equally trippy, dissonant sound track by Gyorgi Ligeti, in the background. I found this pretty amusing, since they were usually too stoned or tripped out to really try to follow the flick or figure anything out about the movie, and many of them weren't really sci- fi fans, anyway. They were just there for the spectacular visual effects, and this movie had what was state of the art at the time. Most of these people eventually got over their fascination with recreational chemicals, but at the time, 2001 and a 20-microgram dose of bathtub LSD was about the coolest scene around for these people. Anyway, I just thought that was sort of funny, since they probably missed the point of the whole movie, if there was one. Well there was, but you really needed to read the book to find that out. The tune in, turn on, and drop out aspect of the movie aside, it's certainly one of the great classics, and possibly Kubrick's greatest flick, also.
Rating:
Summary: Probably the best movie ever made!
Review: This is a profound movie. Keep in mind that in 1968 there were no hand-held calculators, no push button telephones, no electric watches, no personal computers, no internet, no stereos, no cassettes but eight-track players, no UHF or VHF television, no word processors, few electric typewriters, virtually no color TV, (Star Trek was watched in black & white), no films of the earth from orbit, no G.P.S., 'transisters' were high-tech!, and man had not yet landed on the moon. The only science fiction movie being played at the time was 'Planet of the Apes' in drive-ins, and also in walk-in theaters with the big 60' x 60' square screens covered with curtains: and the gorilla suits of 'Planet' being the 1968 movie state-of-the-art special effects. So it was in this climate on Sunday April 14th, 1968 at 7:30 pm (I still have my ticket stub) that I walked into the Boston Cinerama on Washington Street, and saw the long, bare, narrow wrap-around screen with the edges coming off the wall. This unique theater contributed to the feeling of depth and mystery. Instead of seeing a pretty good sci-fi movie, I was present at a historical event! The movie: '2001: A Space Odyssey' (1968) by Stanley Kubrick, was the most awe-inspiring and staggering revolutionary movie ever to be produced. The audience sat entranced at both the shattering (and a little frightening) special effects and the unfathomable cryptic plot of this cosmic saga. The movie was demonstrating technology that had not yet entered society, and the next day college professors ran out and began teaching courses on this film. The film was obviously many years ahead of its time! Stanley Kubrick invented a special lens just for this movie, helped to invent some of the special effects, he made this masterpiece without any CGI or private effects companies to draw upon, and in the process, demonstrated that he was a rennaisance man. In Boston, nobody walked out of this film, and in 1968 the entire audience sat in stunned silence as the unprecedented titanic feats of technology, color, form, and philosophy melded with the hypnotic combination of movement and music. The dazzling special effects succeeded in promoting a vehicle to carry the deep philosophical message regarding man's relationship to the universe and only Stanley Kubrick was able to pull it off with such elegance. In all truth '2001: A Space Odyssey' is no science fiction movie but a philosophical statement. Nothing before or since has ever been like it in movie history. Everything else compared to '2001' is merely a footnote to Stanley Kubrick's accomplishment. Yet 2001: A Space Odyssey does lose something when viewed on the small screen, and a released version had twelve minutes chopped from it (which is equally inane as chopping off twelve inches from around the 'Mona Lisa', or defacing any other masterpiece, to make it fit a smaller frame). The movie: '2001: A Space Odyssey' must be viewed within the context of its 1968 premeire to be fully appreciated as the greatest film ever produced.
Rating:
Summary: Patient Exploration of Our Spiritual Potential
Review: Remember - the leap from mannish apes apprehending the use of primitive tools, to "modern" man exploring outerspace using somewhat less primitive tools, occurs in the blink of an eye - a camera trick - in Kubrick's vision. This film explores - in poetic, awe-inspiring, achingly beautiful, visual detail - man's transition to the next level of physical, mental, and spiritual attainment. What, then, is HAL? HAL is a symbol of the outer limit - and limitations - of the material and of technology. The soulless HAL would not, could not, allow anything - or anyone - to interfere with his programmed mission. What is the monolith? It is a facilitator, a catalyst, a door. An opening of the mind and senses to an expanded reality - released from material limits and from time itself. One must be patient to experience what this wonderful film has to offer - such patience will pay off with a momentous realization of human potential.
Rating: 
Summary: Space Absurdity
Review: Those who have seen 2001 are firmly divided into two categories: those who vaguely understand it, or appreciate it for it's sophistication and patient beauty, thus those who like it; and those who are confounded by it, don't have the patience for it's painfully slow plot development and fail to get to grips with the sudden dash of events at the end. I am, sadly, in the second category.
The first thing people are likely to hate is the sheer lack of incident. The film is as follows: Some prehistoric apes discover a large black thing, and upon touching it become rather disagreeable; four million years later, some astronouts find the same thing on the moon, and upon touching it become rather gone; two guys go on a mission to find out what happened; their super-computer HAL goes insane, kills one of them, the other guy turns HAL off, and promptly goes to some distant part of the universe, ages in minutes, becomes a huge cosmic baby and all is over, shortly after seeing the black thing that apparently has something to do with everything. Er... what?
Of course these simple events take an age to happen, with nice-looking very musical space scenes, and Kubrick's trademark wide shots... but visuals and grand classical score aside, what is there to like? HAL is fantastic, a blank yet irresistable voice and a creepy, almost omnipresent eye-like red light. His final moments, drearily singing "daisy" are fascinating to watch.
But the film truly feels as though four million years has passed, and no attempt is made to explain anything, as neither the characters (or, therefore, us) finds anything out. How does Dave get where he ends up? Why does he age? Who/what is the cosmic baby, why is it there?
It all has too great a feel of randomness claiming to be brilliant because no-one can understand it. It feels like a semi-developed idea, a severely unfinished ending and an over-dependance on music to keep things in any way interesting. Once HAL's out of the picture, it all loses what little interest it had.
Basically, I think whoever claims to adore 2001 does so because all the critics have done, and because the inexplicable plot must therefore be too ingenius to work out - hence brilliant. This is, however, not necessarily the case. It's an odd film then, that feels like it needs to be heavily revised and re-done, and people need to form their own opinions rather than trusting the big director behind it and the legions of fans. Dawn of sci-fi? I think not.
Rating:
Summary: So boring you should show it to your kids at bedtime!
Review: I watched about 90 minutes of the begining of this movie and another 20 min of the end. Parts of it are interesting but each adn every scene drags on about 10 times longer than it should. There is no great plot for people to think about and the mysterious monolith is just something Kubrick put in to confuse you. This is nothing like the masterful Clockwork Orange. (the only other Kubrick movie i've seen) The only saving grace is a beautiful music score. Don't bother with this unless you have a sleeping disorder.
|
