Rating: 
Summary: Great film, terrible DVD.
Review: A classic film, but the digital artifacting on the blacks in this film is a disgrace. This transfer was apparently done from the same source as the notoriously bad 1993 MGM 25th Anniversary laserdisc. The best release of this film on home video is the Criterion laserdisc, either CAV or CLV version. As it stands, this DVD desparately needs a remaster. However, the Arthur C. Clarke talk is very good.
Rating: 
Summary: The Landmark Sci-Fi Movie of our Century
Review: Arthur C. Clarke's vision masterfully interpreted by Stanley Kubrick, this film details the possibility of mankind's evolution as prompted by Extra-Terrestrial enlightenment. Travel through time from the Dawn of Man to the manifestation of the Star Child. Timeless and timely, see Clarke's eerie prediction of our present Y2K woes as illustrated by the psychosomatic HAL 9000 Computer. The special effects set the benchmark for which all Science Fiction Films must necessarily be judged. John Lennon remarked "they should build a temple and show this film 24 hours a day." With the approach of 2001 upon us, what better time to revisit the film of the new Millenia....
Rating: 
Summary: Great sound, annoying picture defects
Review: I was quite disappointed to see numerous spots and other blemishes leftover in the film transfer to DVD. Why weren't these defects digitally corrected?! Especially irritating in the opening sequences. Still, the content remains compelling after all these years ...
Rating:
Summary: Inspirational
Review: I found this movie to be awe-inspiring. The images took my breath away, especially the gape-worthy stargate scene. I'm one of those kids who wasn't born when it was released so I was hoping that there would be 30th anniversary rerelease last year. They could do "Star Wars", they could do "Grease", they could do "The Big Chill" and "Dirty Dancing", but they couldn't do this? Horrors!
Rating:
Summary: daring film that might bore more than one
Review: I admire this film for its ambition. I have mixed feelings about it though. I loved the special effects. one of the things that made me watch it was its intention of presenting a cold visual experience. Something that wasn`t inteded to appeal to my feelings but that just wanted to amaze me visually and perhaps make me think a little bit. Thats why I forgive the slow tedious way everything moved most of the time. I guess this was important for Stanley Kubricks's intentions but i confess that in the middle of the film I fell asleep. i dont get bored very easily so i assume a lot of people will be snorting even sooner during the film. I am glad though that I woke up just in time when the astronaut was traveling. The film after that becomes very interesting. When I reached the dinning room scene it was the complete opposite of when I fell asleep. I liked the film but I recommend taking a brief nap in the middle and not even thinking about using the slow motion button.
Rating:
Summary: Stanley Kubricks Masterpiece Belongs In Theaters
Review: I own a copy of this film on videotape, however this film begs to be viewed in the original 70MM version. The video does not do this film justice. In March of 1997 I had the opprotunity to view this film at a IMAX theater in Chicago, and it was awe inspiring. I hope that this film is re-relased in this format, the film holds so much more detail that viewing this on TV. I had watched this film several times on videotape prior to seeing it in this format. After viewing it in its widescreen glory, I have not watched the film on videotape scince. I know the good folks here at Amozon.com want to sell the video, but for the film to take its full effect, I urge you to watch this film in a theater, then purchase the video. Enjoy! Thanks Mr. Kubrick.
Rating: 
Summary: why do I need to look at a guy in a monkey suit for an hour.
Review: Alright this is a good plot, with the evolution and the mans destruction by technology. But the director absolutley screwed up. Can somebody say cut. I looked at this guy in a cheap monkey suit for 20 minutes. Nobody should have to do that. the nazis went easier on the jews.
Rating:
Summary: "Waiting For Godot" in Space
Review: Think about it: if Samuel Beckett had written Star Wars, it might come out a little something like this movie. Not that that's the sort of thinking that initially fascinated me with this film back when it first came out (in Cinerama!) in 1969 when I was about nine years old. Then, I didn't understand it at all, yet was gripped. It's been called "the thinking person's sci-fi film," and there's plenty of room for philosophical debate about what the movie "means", but it's at this near-sublimal, pre-intellectual level that film tries hardest to succeed, I think. It's certainly a visual feast--the scene design and special effects are models of elegant simplicity, nearly hypnotic. And, as the digital DVD sound remainds us, it's also a sonic delight. Some people find this film too long. I think that's a way of saying that not enough happens (as if the birth, life and transcendence of the human race wasn't "enough"), or that what does happen unwinds too slowly. I think Kubrick's deliberate pace serves several worthy causes--it shows us the monotony of space and how blasted long it takes to do anything. I find a lot of Kubrick's signature deep-black humor in the film (much more subtle here than in either "Dr. Strangelove" or "Clockwork Orange"), much of it based in the dull routine, the awkward silences and petty politleness that make up these people's lives. But the real story here isn't about character--it's the splendid visual effects that seldom leave center stage. Think of all the "wrong" things this movie does in terms of plotting, creating character (or sense of place),telling a story--and how little it matters to the film's success. In discarding the usual vocabulary of filmmaking, Kubrick hits on a perfect parellel to his theme of alternate modes of being. A visionary classic, destined to be discussed as long as movies are, and probably the high point of Kubrick's career, following "Strangelove" and preceeding "Clockwork"--darn few directors (maybe only Hitchcock) can boast of a 1-2-3 punch like that!
Rating:
Summary: It's a great movie
Review: Harlan Ellison wrote the best review of this movie that I've read yet. In it, he stated, "The first part of this movie is boring, but not uninteresting." HA! If you're looking for a plot, go somewhere else. This movie overwhelmed me the first time I saw it; my only regret is that I've never seen it on the big screen. I can't say that everyone who watches this film will love it, but if you do, it will be on your "Top 10" list for life.
Rating:
Summary: One of the best ten films in my lifetime
Review: In sixty years of watching movies, one must choose well if one wants to mention favorite ones. 2001 is certainly one of the 10 best in my lifetime. So much has been written about Kubrick's masterpiece that I will only add one thought: What is symbolized by the monolith? All kinds of suggestions have been presented. It might be a symbol for a force in the universe that guides the evolutionary process of humankind.
|
