2010: Year We Make Contact [Blu-ray]

 

 

Create your own review

What can I say? The book is always better than the movie. However, the movie does not have to be worse than the book. It can be different. This is the case with this movie. 2001 was a watershed in many ways in terms of science fiction both in book and film form. Either movie can stand on its own merits and terms. If you are a fan, watch both of them back to back. I don't know if anyone has the energy or desire to do it, but it would be fantastic if the rest of the books were turned into movies as well as the story does not end with 2010. Buy the books that continue the story to its conclusion and for that matter, buy the whole set and read them. They are well worth it. Arthur C. Clarke is one of my favourite authors.

The Promise To Explain 2001 Fails Miserably March 23, 2003
Roy Scheider leaves the hunting of sharks for a moment and joins a Russian crew en route to Jupiter. There in the orbit of Europa, one of the planet's moon, they park along-side Discovery, the now shut down spaceship that once was reigned by HAL 9000, the sinister yet pleasantly wacky computer that killed off the crew in 2001: Space Oddysey.

Here, with the typical cold war bravado, this mix of Americo-Russian scientists promised the viewer to explain the Stan Kubrick's open-ended sequences from 2001 in which Dave keeps turning from an old man into a large embryo and back and, of course, the meaning of the mysterious black monolith slab.

But no such promise is kept. On the contrary, the original quandary is further compounded. First, by the cameo appearance of the old Dave and his regaling Roy Scheider with his embryo-turning tricks. Then, by a sudden and a rather strange viral-like multiplication of these odd monoliths on the surface of Europa. Before anything is solved, understood, or explained the crew zips off back to Earth. Only a threat from Dave follows their speeding ship warning the mankind from ever attempting to land on Europa. This amalgamation of furthered confusion and the ever so apparent desperate try to match the cinematic surrealism of the 2001 film, is whipped into a frenzy in the last few frames of this flop by giving the Earth yet a second sun. But it appears that Roy Scheider enjoys the quicker tan the two suns offer him.

You too best heed Dave's warning and never attempt to watch this flick.
R. Friedman,
Bellvue, WA

Was there ever a film that needed a sequel less than 2001: A Space Odyssey? If any movie had ever defied sequel making, it was the original 2001. It is impossible to talk about 2010 without mentioning Stanley Kubrick and the groundbreaking film that started it all. With that in mind, 2010 is still an excellent science fiction film, intelligent and exciting, while feeling miles away from the original.

Dr. Heywood Floyd (the late Roy Scheider) has taken the fall for the disasters in 2001. The supercomputer H.A.L. 9000 (Douglas Rain) has failed and Dr. David Bowman (Keir Dullea) has disappeared and is presumed dead. Four astronauts have been killed by H.A.L. and nobody knows why. The Discovery is in orbit around Jupiter and the Americans plan on sending a team there to find out just what happened. Problem: The orbit is mysteriously decaying, and the Russians will get there first. Floyd has been offered a ride on the Russian ship, the Alexei Leonov, to help in their mission.

The premise itself shows us that the universe has changed. Politics were inconsequential in the first film, but by 2010 the Soviets are deep into a cold war with the Americans, and the war threatens to go nuclear at any time. The president's finger is literally on the button. Dr. Floyd, however, needs to go to Discovery and find out just what happened for his own sake. Along for the ride are Dr. Chandra (Bob Balaban), the creator of H.A.L., and Curnow (John Lithgow), the man who built Discovery and can reactivate it. The Russian crew, portrayed excellently by mostly Russian actors for authenticity, are distrustful of the Americans. Their commander, played by Helen Mirren, is also an officer of the Russian air force and finds her loyalties tested when Dr. Floyd tells her that they must leave Jupiter in just two days.

In a haunting turn of events, David Bowman has returned, or at least something that refers to itself as having once been David Bowman. Keir Dullea, not looking a day older even though nearly 20 years have passed, is eerie in his portrayal of Bowman. It is he that has given Dr. Floyd the warning that they must leave in two days, but with no explanation other than "something is going to happen. Something wonderful."

Cameos by Arthur C. Clarke and (sort of) Kubrick himself act as a nod and a wink to fans. Also look for the late Natasha Schneider from Queens Of The Stone Age and Eleven when she was young.

Arthur C. Clarke's novel, an essential companion piece, includes much more detail, but this film as directed by Peter Hyams is a suitable sequel for the sci-fi fan. Such science as "aerobraking" is shown on screen, and the possibility of life on Europa is explored. All this is done with the unfortunate use of space sound effects, a cliche which the first film avoided studiously. Also dropped from the first film is the soundtrack of classical music, replaced by a film score. And, finally, we get to see what life on Earth in 2010 actually looks like! (Not quite like the real thing, sadly!)

In an effort to "explain" all the mysteries of 2001, 2010 succeeds by leaving enough to the imagination. The monoliths and the beings behind them are never fully explained. There are many questions left behind, thus far only explored in the pages of Clarke's novels. (Tom Hanks once wanted to make a film version of 3001: Final Odyssey but that idea, thankfully, is dead.) This movie could have been a disaster in many ways, but fortunately was not. While nothing can ever equal or top 2001, or come even close to breaking the ground that it did, this film serves as a satisfying coda and it is good to watch them both together.

DVD contains a decent documentary called "2010: The Odyssey Continues".

4 stars. If this were any other sci-fi film franchise, it would have been 5. But when comparing to the original, nothing could be equal to it.

Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review

› See all 87 customer reviews on Amazon.ca

 

4.0 out of 5 stars 2010
this is the first and only stanley kubrik film sequel.some other dude did it .basicly,another space crew is sent up to space to find out what went wrong with the space mission... Read more

Published on July 19 2004 by abe

4.0 out of 5 stars More comprehensible than the first...
While the first movie was o.k., it is not a good movie to watch on Saturday night with a few friends. Read more

Published on May 18 2004 by Kyle Stewart

5.0 out of 5 stars An excellent film...
In the outset of 2010: The Year We Make Contact, the Soviet Union is preparing to send its spaceship, the Alexei Leonov, to Jupiter in order to investigate the phenomenon... Read more

Published on May 2 2004 by Malachi Martin

3.0 out of 5 stars Not 2001, but interesting and enjoyable
This is not on the same level as 2001... but it is a good film for those who were mystified by 2001, since it answers some of the questions posed by the first film very nicely... Read more

Published on Mar 28 2004 by classicmoviefan

3.0 out of 5 stars A Daring Space Journey to Find Answers
=====>

This two-hour 1984 movie is intended to be a sequel to Stanley Kubrick's 1968 masterpiece "2001: A Space Odyssey" (which I've seen). Read more

Published on Mar 26 2004 by Stephen Pletko

4.0 out of 5 stars No classic, but still very good
Obviously, this movie does not compare to 2001: A Space Odyssey. But I still greatly enjoyed it. It is better than the average movie. Read more

Published on Feb 5 2004 by JKlein190

3.0 out of 5 stars A Decent Movie
2010: THE YEAR WE MAKE CONTACT is the long awaited sequel to 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY. Now, the pressure of crafting a sequel to match the masterpiece which was Kubrick's original... Read more

Published on Jan 11 2004 by Sumonet

3.0 out of 5 stars Good, better than the original.
'2010' has something that '2001' does not have; living, breathing human beings we actually care about. Read more

Published on Jan 3 2004 by Dhaval Vyas

4.0 out of 5 stars So you wonder, what are this freakin monolits anyway?!
If you had asked yourself that question when you finished watching 2001, I'm sure you'll get a slight more enlightening answer after watching this movie. Read more

Published on Dec 9 2003 by thom99

3.0 out of 5 stars Pretty Good Sequel
This is a crowd pleaser, not a groundbreaking film like 2001. But somehow it seems like a good idea. Read more

Published on Nov 19 2003 by M. Olson

Search Customer Reviews
Only search this product's reviews

› See all 87 customer reviews on Amazon.ca

Search Listmania!