Rating: 
Summary: Universe is a cold and frightening place indeed!
Review: Stanley Kubrick didn't like much to talk about this movie because, as he put it, "this is an effort to communicate with the subconscient and with sensations rather than with the intellect". In fact 2001 is about the need the mankind has to transcend his limited thinking and move to greater dimensions, it's a transcendental experience, and by transcendental experience we mean something that cannot be expressed by words: what is our significance in the universe, how intelligent are we, how old or how young is our childish civilization, what is our role and our destiny in the universe, what is the extraterrestrian intelligence? All the question raised by 2001 come naturally as we pass from the rational to myth. The first is fundamental: the ape raising his bone like a weapon, transforming into a giant spaceship. That bone is a weapon as one of the apes had just used it to kill an enemy. In that transformation, Kubrick recaps the entire human history and - mark it well - the history of mankind is synthetized in a gesture of death, as a dead thing, the bone, serves as a lethal arm. The dawn of man ends right in the moment when the alien signal reaches him. Only then man reaches the adult phase...the scientists gather around the monolith they have found on the moon exactly the way the apes did millions of years before them... One of the best scenes of the movie is the one just before and during HAL's disconnection; HAL, the computer - to many viewers one of the few human figures of the movie - is accused by the ground control of making a mistake about a malfunctionning object aboard the ship and the astronauts secretly decide to disconnect him, but he discovers it. HAL's disconnection is one of the few moving sequences in Kubrick movies ( together with little Bryan's death in "Barry Lyndon" ). Much has been said and writen about what it means: we, as human beings, we'd better not rely too much on technology, inevitable conflict between man and machines, men feel intimidated by the machine's capabilities and intelligence and they seem useless and superfluous compared to the computers...I don't know...it seems that Kubrick movies are destined to raise many questions and finding the right answers is never easy, but I gues it means that once we're on the brink of the unknown, there where the unknown mysterious presences that put the monolith on the moon are waiting for us, the word - the reason - must leave it's place to something else: word cannot describe the undescribable, as Bowman travels through a wormhole towards...what?..I don't have the pretention to say I know it, but let's say towards another dimension, towards the unexplored and the unimaginable. This movie set the standarts for the decades to come: I just can't believe it was shot in 1968 - it's so contemporaneous, so intelligent, contemplative and self-discovering, a two and a half hours movie with only forty minutes of dialogue. Actually I've never seen a movie where silence is much more meaningful than any dialogues. The ape raising his bone, HAL's eye, the giant space wheel spinning round, the black monolith, the star-child looking enigmatically towards the earth and all this accompanied by some fantastically psychedelic sounds and colors, not to talk about the "Blue Danube" and "Also sprach Zarathustra". In order to put man's memory at ease the aliens recreated the '700, the century during which the Reason prevailed over Obscurantism, though greed and violence that man has always had inside him weren't conquered.
Rating:
Summary: Universe is a cold and frightening place indeed!
Review: Stanley Kubrick didn't like much to talk about this movie because, as he put it, "this is an effort to communicate with the subconscient and with sensations rather than with the intellect". In fact 2001 is about the need the mankind has to transcend his limited thinking and move to greater dimensions, it's a transcendental experience, and by transcendental experience we mean something that cannot be expressed by words: what is our significance in the universe, how intelligent are we, how old or how young is our childish civilization, what is our role and our destiny in the universe, what is the extraterrestrian intelligence? [...] Much has been said and writen about what it means: we, as human beings, we'd better not rely too much on technology, inevitable conflict between man and machines, men feel intimidated by the machine's capabilities and intelligence and they seem useless and superfluous compared to the computers...I don't know...it seems that Kubrick movies are destined to raise many questions and finding the right answers is never easy, but I gues it means that once we're on the brink of the unknown, there where the unknown mysterious presences that put the monolith on the moon are waiting for us, the word - the reason - must leave it's place to something else: word cannot describe the undescribable, as Bowman travels through a wormhole towards...what?..I don't have the pretention to say I know it, but let's say towards another dimension, towards the unexplored and the unimaginable. This movie set the standarts for the decades to come: I just can't believe it was shot in 1968 - it's so contemporaneous, so intelligent, contemplative and self-discovering, a two and a half hours movie with only forty minutes of dialogue. Actually I've never seen a movie where silence is much more meaningful than any dialogues. The ape raising his bone, HAL's eye, the giant space wheel spinning round, the black monolith, the star-child looking enigmatically towards the earth and all this accompanied by some fantastically psychedelic sounds and colors, not to talk about the "Blue Danube" and "Also sprach Zarathustra". [...]
Rating:
Summary: Great Movie
Review: I don't think I have much to add for the movie, its a buetifull piece of art, and (despite what others say) it does have a plot that makes sense (excluding the last 15 minuets, which I didn't get but I thought it was buetiful). The DVD comes without many extras. I was forced to choose between the limited edition for 51$ and this for 20$. Since I don't have that much money, I went with this. It's a great quality picture and sound, but the only extra is the trailer (which I think is kind of a bad trailer, but that's just an opinion), but if you just want the movie, and aren't in desperate need of special features, this DVD is definitly the right one.
Rating:
Summary: Perfection
Review: This isn't a movie you would see at 8 on the CBC halfway through and say,"I'll just watch this."This is a movie you must set aside 2 hours and 30 minutes for.You have to set the speakers and sound system just right,turn out all of the lights,find a nice space on the couch,and get ready.The picture is Kubric's second best-movie(Dr. Strangelove will never be beaten)in my opinion,and the plot leaves questions wide open. The sound quality of the DVD is amazing,and hearing when the Monolith come on Dolby 5.1 is an expierience.The picture quality is superb.
Rating: 
Summary: The Emperor Has No Clothes . . .
Review: I really wanted to like this movie--I had thoroughly enjoyed Kubrick's "Dr. Strangelove" and had heard how "influential" and "moving" this movie was. However, I was *deeply* disappointed by the movie's monotony, absence of plot, and heavy symbolism that doesn't really make any sense. I have read reviews elsewhere that *tried* to explain what exactly this movie means, but the only things I came across was how the movie was to be "experienced" and its beautiful mind-numbing effects. In other words, no one really knows what the film is about, but want to appear smart by saying they enjoy "2001." The scenes with HAL are perhaps the film's most famous and perhaps the most influential. Nevertheless, HAL really does not have anything to do with the overall "plot" (if you could call it that) of the movie. The scenes with HAL are merely a long, 1-hour sideshow that is repetitive and extremely slow. Do yourself a favor: If you really want to watch this movie, rent it at your nearest Blockbuster. If you can stay awake throughout the whole movie and you truly, truly enjoyed it, then by all means purchase the DVD. However, I am going to call the movie for what it is: a confusing and *boring* sequences of scenes (for there is no "story" in this movie). It is my hope that people who watch this movie and have an instinctual feeling of irritation and boredom afterwards will not replace this opinion with hogwash from "sophisticated" film-junkies who rave about this movie that makes no sense.
Rating: 
Summary: True Film - Impossible at Home
Review: 2001 is one of the few, perhaps the only film that is a true artwork, impossible to conceive of in any other medium or time. Star Trek is for gearheads and Star Wars for fantasy freaks. 2001 is for true dreamers, those who feel the connection to everything. Alas, you will never know 2001 from within the safety of your home. It can only be experienced within a large, darkened movie theater where the final sequence surrounds you and bears you away. Why bother with anything else? Go into the mountains instead, and look up at the stars. Or come to San Francisco where 2001 is being re-released this winter!
Rating:
Summary: See the Re-Release in widescreen for the full effect
Review: OK Folks - Catch it on the big screen while you can (Dec 2001 apparently - restored to its full glory!!??). I grew up in New York City, and went to high school in Manhatten. While "2001" had a big press buildup of course, in NYC large, oversized posters appeared *everywhere* in the subways - not just the typical one of the space station, but the moon base and others as well. Remember, this was the era of Star Trek (original series) as the height of Sci-Fi (which it was when compared to such TV-land competition as "Lost in Space" and "Land of the Lost"). Much of what we take for granted today in terms of special effects just didn't exist, or were quite 60's in form (think Barbarella). "2001" also came out during the whole space race buildup to manned moon landings. I just had to see it! I went one day after class, to a 4:00PM "twilight" show - only about 10 of us in the audience of a big theater on 34th St., east of the Empire State Building. Hey, I was a kid; how was I to know this was the *only way* to watch this movie? It was the 70mm release, with 6-track sound - like big screens and THX so common today, but this was the late 60's!! It was just AWESOME -even years later, when I watched "Star Wars IV - a New Hope" (aka the first movie), it didn't top "2001". Years later I saw "2001" on a smaller movie screen w/o great sound, and was sorely dissapointed. I have it on DVD, but it's so hard to watch that way. I read a "NY Times" article on the upcoming re-release, and it gave some detail about the original release that comfirmed what I knew personally - when originally released on widescreen, it was a big hit, but when put into smaller theaters, the attendance dropped off, and they had to go back to bigger screens. (Article appeared in the Sunday Times Section 2 - "Entertainment" in November of 2001). On the big screen, the full effect of being emersed in the image (along with the use of the music) is what gives this movie its real power. Yes, I am going - and if you have any interest in this film but have never seen it in its first-run form, you should think seriously about going also.
Rating:
Summary: The Meaning of the Universe According to Kubrick
Review: The Monolith represents Knowledge, Reason, or Evil if not all.
Rating:
Summary: one of the greatest movies ever made
Review: This movie is fabulous.It is one of my favorite movies of all time.Buy it.It worths every dollar.
Rating:
Summary: Influential, But....
Review: There's no question that 2001 is one of the most influential films in history. And in many mays it deserves its hallowed reputation. It is one of the few sci-fi films that is filled with genuinely astounding visuals. It features a great villian in the computer HAL, the only three-dimensional character present in the film. And the use of classical music instead of a full-blown film score is a stroke of genius. Can you hear "Thus Spark Zarathustra" without thinking of the Star-Child? Didn't think so! And yet, I have to admit, watching this movie in its entirety is like watching paint dry. And, in some cases, I'd prefer the paint. Kubrick, while a true cinematic giant, spends way too much time focusing on unnecessary details. For instance, every door knob that Dave opens on the scapeship is shown in full detail. Why? I guess to iritate the viewer, since it certainly doesn't advance the plot at all. And somes parts are just laughibly pretentious. The apes featured in the first sequence, for example, are distractingly dated. That would be okay if Kubrick didn't present them with such pomp and circumstance. But because of this, it's hard to take them at all seriously. Let's not even mention the snail-like pacing. Stanley Kubrick is a genius, but I prefer the Kubrick of "Dr. Strangelove" and "The Shining" to the overblown Kubrick presented here. That Kubrick was scathingly satirical and and highly entertaining. This Kubrick is seriously unfunny and way too stone-faced. Yes, this film is worth seeing and it was (and still is) a groundbreaking piece of work. But then again, so is War and Peace!
| 
