Rating: 
Summary: Without a doubt, greatest sci-fi book of all time.
Review: The perfect SF book for all. Has mystery, some suspense, and the right amount of weirdness. This quartet of books [2001,2010,2061,3001] are my four absolute favorite books
Rating:
Summary: One of the best Science Fiction books ever written
Review: Perhaps the best advice I can give for anyone considering reading this book is that this is the first serious book I remember reading and have read thousands of others since, This is the book that got me hooked on reading and realizing that there was a whole world out there just for the takin
Rating:
Summary: Great book!
Review: This is probably one of the greatest books I have ever read! This book, and the rest of the 2001 books, will give you a whole new way to look at life, and how it all began. It'll leave you thinking.
This is a MUST read
Rating:
Summary: One of the best idea of the Century
Review: 2001 is about the creation of the universe, the position of the man in that Universe, that fantastic universe and that book/novel gives the right feelings, the true feelings about it.
2001 is imaginative and gives the possibility to the reader to dream, to hope of a better universe, a better world. 2001 is for now and for the years to come, one of the greatest adventure of all time and I hope that, as long as Humans will exist, they will remember 2001 because it's a masterpiece, an immortal masterpiece
Rating:
Summary: Possibly the Great American science fiction novel.
Review: This is the novel released simultaneously with the film, and it stands with Clarke's most seminal works. A deep examination of the book is beyond the purview of this review, but let me say this: this novel and the film it inspired may bring tears to your eyes, but they will certainly bring a quizzical look to your face and a leap to your heart. Inarguably one of the most philosophically deep SF novels I've ever read. A hearty recommendation to the great Mr. Clarke and this magnificent novel.
The only caveat is the apparent lack of major action sequences: if you're accustomed to less cerebral work, you may have to stay away from this. But the problems it poses (Is HAL insane, for instance?) will trouble your mind for long hours after you've completed the book. The rest of the saga also makes for great reading, but this is the must-read.
Quite simply one of the landmarks of science fiction.
Rating:
Summary: Point Of View
Review: This book is subject to many interpretations, and that alone makes it a great story while it also tends to send people off arguing their own points. I'll try to stick to just one in this review, the one I believe is central to enjoying this book. 2001 (book) reveals more of the details of the story than the movie and that there are some differences (going to Saturn in the book, Jupiter in the film, as an example). This doesn't effect the overall read, but I thought it important to point out that the two (book/film) are different enough to be confusing. Many people have seen the film, or parts of it, and that can bring some to seek out the book and others to wonder why they would bother. The story is of Biblical proportions not only in the sense of the widest timeline in a movie (over 3 million years) but that it covers mankind's history without resorting to a long narrative, but by book ending history or in essence - their is no middle story. Man's destiny is outlined in rather 'dry' terms with little detail. Our ancestral relatives are mysteriously guided by the first monolith and we assume this leads us to our intellectual evolution as the 'bone weapon' becomes a space ship (that's from the movie). No time is wasted explaining the change, you just have to accept it. The second monolith, buried on the moon as a marker for us to discover, assuming we did evolve, sets off the two major parts of the story - Mankinds' curiousity vs. his need for secrecy, which is portrayed by the ignorance of the astronauts to their 'real' mission and the hidden knowledge of the on-board computer entity the HAL 9000. The characters are very flat, as is HAL, and that partly distracts the reader from realizing that technology itself is the central theme. This story is a warning about the inhuman direction that mankind is making with technology. Why wouldn't the actors be dull? We are diluting the individualism of mankind even now. I'll dare say that Kubrick intended to expand on the dryness of Clarke's stories (The Sentinel, for one) so as to remind us of mankinds' foolish dependence on the technology we surround ourselves with. I mention the movie here as it reveals how the collaberation with Clarke had influenced the book. Clarke wrote this novel in tandem with his input on the movie screenplay and besides, Clarke is well known for taking on big issues instead of filling out characters. Back to the story. The malfunctioning of HAL leads to the final shedding of any human element in the story by simply discarding all but one of them. From here on, you experience the story through David Bowman. Victorious over HAL, Bowman has no one to share his final life experience with. The huge monolith, orbiting Saturn, leaves Bowman with a final mission - before he dies, find out what he can. Curiousity wiining out over survival, which seems impossible. This leads to a trip through 'unknown space', a place so 'alien' that Bowman cannot interpret what is going around him. Being nearly driven mad, he is left to viewing some last remnants of his race before he is transformed. Here the book better explains, without revealing any reason or purpose. Bowman is left, in a form he can get his mind around - an infant in space - to contemplate mankind's future. A not so subtle reference is made to the elimination of nuclear weapons. So, the end of the book, which in itself can be interpreted many ways, shows that a superior presence may yet guide us to a better future. This is only one, of many, interpretations I have had of this book/movie since I first read/viewed it, back in '68. The title is, or course, very dated, but it still harks of a future yet untraveled. I found the trip through this book even more 'mind-expanding' than the visual ride through the Jupiter monolith in the movie. So, it is because this story has so open an interpretation that it excels and also tends to baffle some readers and disgust others. It is in the 'not answering' the questions that I give this book 5 Stars. If Clarke had succumbed to giving the reader his own interpretation it would have poisoned the very 'mystery' the book had built. After all, how can you describe something that could be God or a future human species, or anything else in between? Much less give a reason for their actions that would make sense to us mere humans. 2001 is a great read that will leave you thinking the ultimate thought - your very existence. The fun is in the trip, not the destination.
Rating:
Summary: 2001
Review: 2001: A space Odyssey by Aurthur C Clarke. Sadly not having read any previous literature by Arthur C. Clarke I will not be able to tell you if 2001 is one of his better works or not but as far as science fiction it is definitely high on my list. The book starts off with the main character being Moon watcher, an ape man in pre historic times. It follows a story line depicting how it was possible for this creature and his tribe to evolve into humans. You as the reader are only made to see the very beginnings of this and are promptly whizzed away to the future (approximately 1999 A.D.) where the rest of the story of man continues. The dialogue in this book I found to be somewhat few and far between, which I happen to like. The author does not have his characters drone on and on towards each other but rather carries the story on a narrative. The descriptions in this novel are wondrous to the point that no movie could possibly portray. Overall I would strongly recommend this book to nearly anyone I could get to read it. I also would like to point out that those of you who have seen the movie should definitely read this book, I myself saw the movie first and was surprised to se how differently this story was originally intended.
Rating: 
Summary: The novel version of "2001" is a poor cousin of the film.
Review: The movie "2001 A Space Odyssey" doesn't play out like any ordinary film. The unique ideas of the story are told almost completely visually. The birth of intelligence in the apes, the vast emptiness of space, Bowman's bizarre journey, and the connection between the monoliths are shown to us, never narrated. No one tells us what is going on, the dialogue is merely an extra in the story. How then, does Arthur C. Clarke wish to put this into words? He defeated the whole idea. The best thing about the movie was Stanley Kubrick's unusual style. Besides giving Kubrick "The Sentinel" (which, by the way, is a fantastic story) and helping with scientific facts, Clarke should have left Kubrick's work alone.I haven't even gotten into some of the absurd parts of the book where, on more than one occasion, Clarke gives too much of the mystery away. The novel is no better than a companion piece to the movie. Only read it if you've seen the film and understand and appreciate the story.
Rating:
Summary: an inferior effort for a great writer, but it is a film book
Review: Clarke is one of the true greats, but this book is written after - and not as an inspiration for - the film that was conceived by Clarke and Kubrick. It does make certain things more clear, such as the purpose of the obelisk, but that takes away from the delight at imagining and interpreting the film. This takes away from the experience, at least in my reading.
As a stand-alone scifi novel, this is not a distingushed effort. Sure, the concepts are there, but its execution - the sense of life that is part of every great scifi novel - is strangely lacking.
This is a dud. Not recommended, except if you want to get a vantage point on one of the greatest scifi films of all time.
Rating:
Summary: Standout sci-fi
Review: An excellent book, which really had an impact on me when I first read it. I had of course seen the movie and loved it. Reading the book though, was a completely different experience - much less frustrating than the film.
The ideas raised by Clarke concerning our own evolution are fascinating and brilliantly presented. The way he mixes these big questions with an eery yet tense sci-fi plot is truly expert. I can't understand how anyone could find this boring.
Another reviewer stated the book came after the film. Not entirely true. The story was actually based on a number of short stories by Arthur C. Clarke, the most notable being 'The Sentinel' written in 1951. Kubrick approached Clarke to collaborate on a screenplay for the film out of which came this novel.
|
