Rating: 
Summary: Awesome finale
Review: I don't understand the critics. It was simply a great read, and maybe those fanatic religious should consider mr. Clarke's points about the matter.
Rating: 
Summary: Disappointing finale
Review: Bringing Frank Poole back from the dead was a good idea, but I wish Clarke had developed his character better (or at all, for that matter). Since character is not his strong point, he'd better have some damn interesting ideas, but unfortunately those are not present either. Much of the plot consists of Poole wandering from point A to point B and talking with various individuals about various subjects; this gives Clarke an opportunity to vent on selected topics, but doesn't make for interesting reading. I could forgive a slow beginning if the end came through, but Clarke inexplicably elects to reprint chapters from previous books. I didn't expect this last book to live up to the previous ones, but what a disappointment.
Rating: 
Summary: A rebuttal from another "insane" religious "lunatic"
Review: I'm relatively new to the ACC bandwagon, and, for the most part I've been thoroughly impressed (Childhood's End & the Odyssey books, thus far) with the writer who can make hard-core sci-fi interesting to people who are not interested in sci-fi.However, this one just doesn't cut it. Obviously, 1,000 years in the future would call for a time of incredible technological advancement, but the re-creation of dinosaurs ("they make wonderful babysitters!") mixed in with the woman on the flying dragon seemed a little bit on the absurd side. Unless, I read it incorrectly, 2061 (DON'T READ THIS IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW THE ENDING OF 2061) ended with Heywood Floyd's "spirit" (is that the right word?) joining the ranks with Dave and Hal. So, how come Dr. Floyd wasn't in 3001? Also the merging of Dave and Hal seemed cheesy and totally unnecessary. It should be no secret to anyone who is even remotely familiar with ACC that he strongly adheres to the theories (*THEORIES* - which means unproven) of evolution. And to base these 4 bestselling books (and only die-hard ACC fans know how many others) on the theory (again, which means it's unproven) of evolution, one would have to conclude that he is a man of much faith. So, if someone who believes that God created the universe out of nothing is "insane", as Mr. Clarke so tactfully put it, then how much more someone who believes that the universe evolved from nothing! And for all his anti-religious arguments, if he was so eager to convince his "insane" readers that all religions are nothing more than childish superstitions, then what would it have hurt to have a character who argued Dr. Kahn's points in the book? Is it that Mr. Clarke fears honest, intelligent debate on such matters? The reader is left with no other choice. To conclude this book did have a few (very few) interesting points to it, but overall I found the Afterword, Acknowledgements, and Valediction to be 10 times more interesting than the novel itself.
Rating:
Summary: There's no heart here.
Review: What I hated about this book was that it had Frank Poole as a protaganist, a character we barely remember. 2001 was the best book in the series. It explaiend things better than the movie, but not so much that ruined it. 2061 was the most boring and this book is tyed with 2010. I also hated how the characters on Earth and Ganymede were able to figure out what happened to Bowman. I liked it better when it was big mystery. This book is also self contradicting. During the prolouge at the begining it says the firstborn came years ago and left never planning to come back but leaving their monoliths to do the rest. But in the epilouge they say they plan to come back at the end of time. Without a doubt 2001 was the best.
Rating:
Summary: Oh brother...
Review: After reading 2061, I had a nagging feeling that AC Clarke was going insane. Well, 3001 confims it beyond a doubt. It's sad to see an author slowly lose his skill and interest. If this were submitted for publication by a lesser-known author, it would have gone straight into the trash.
Rating: 
Summary: Loved the view of 3000
Review: I became completely enveloped in the world created in this book and the technological advances presented within. What I liked even better, however, was the listing in the back of the actual facts/ideas that provide the basis for the technology. It's amazing simply to read that and discover the amazing possibilities/capactities. Please note that I have not not read 2001 nor have I seen the adapted movie. I delved into this book completely blind, not knowing what to expect. I also went into it without the high expectations other posters seemed to have and enjoyed it quite a bit!
Rating:
Summary: Competent, but for Clarke less than expected.
Review: Much of Clarke's work has made that indefinable leap into spellbinding mystical flight woven with the science of the world. This book is well crafted, but lacks mystery and never took flight from that spark of genius in the depths which Clarke has displayed in other books. Good as sci-fi goes, but way below the original 2001, "Childhood's End" or "The Deep Range", or "The City and the Stars". Some interesting ideas there. ZPF physics (which predicate the possibility of faster than light travel BTW), but the book felt kind of flat to me. It seems that Clarke's ideas have been shaped by his experience with the somewhat religiously based civil war there where he has lived.
Rating:
Summary: Not good Clarke
Review: I havnt disliked a Clarke book untill now. I was truly dissappointed by the brush off of the environmental and social problems of the 20th C in a single line. Everything was just too plastic, clean and lifeless.
Rating:
Summary: Full of Sound and Fury; Signifying Nothing
Review: I feel like I've walked into the final quarter of a pretty lacklustre basketball game: sort of glad I hadn't wasted my time with the first part. I haven't read the previous stories; relying on synopses and the original movie for my background. As a self-contained work, it does pretty well. It doesn't demand an 'in-crowd'. The gadgets are great - i disagree that they're not far-fetched enough: we sometimes flatter ourselves with our technological and philosophical 'progress'. I could forgive the religious 'soliloquies' if they had some integration with the storyline (Maybe the monoliths could have had a 'spiritual significance' which could justify the rants) but they come across as the ravings of a bitter old man (sorry, but my mental pictures kept shifting from 3001 to Clarke's writing desk any time someone started carping on about the '20th/21st century'). It reeks of Industrial Light and Magic (the little journey through Jupiter's atmosphere should give the team a little homework), moviedom and money. That's never so evident as in the final 'credits' where he devotes a goodly portion of his dedications to the manager of the hotel in which he stayed while writing the book. Pah; I'm not going to bather with the other books.
Rating:
Summary: Not on par with 2001, but then again, nothing is.
Review: Don't go into this novel expecting another 2001, cause that's just about impossible. Instead, read this as an independant novel based on that universe, and you'll love it. Some of the outcomes contradict the teasers at the ends of the other odysseys, but so what? Just a side thought of my own, though: considering humanity as a whole has changed more in the last hundred years than we had in the previous two thousand years before that, I can tell you that in reality, by the real year 3001, I doubt humanity will be recognizable.
| 
