2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY - Does the sequel 2010 THE YEAR WE MAKE CONTACT explain it all? 

I've always had a soft spot for "2010" - I think it's a vastly underrated picture, but why would anybody need the ending of "2001" explained? The ambiguity is what captures the imagination.

Great bits of memorabilia there John. I think 2010 is a great movie, although radically different to 2001, which is a standalone masterpiece, but then 2010 didn’t try to be anything other than a great sci-fi drama, and it was well shot by Hyams.

Absolutely excellent review. 2001 is my favorite film of all time. I’ve seen it over 50 times and still sit in rapt amazement each time I see it. Your analysis makes good sense even though as you say the ending needs no explanation as the film is more art than sci-fi.

Great review, sir. Makes me want to watch both films back-to-back.

2010 is very much a film that has to sit in the shadow of an all-time classic. But it's an intelligent, well-made film that adapts the 2010 book well. As you say, it caters to the audience more than 2001 did... arguably no bad thing. It grounds the story for the audience and gives you characters to care about. The characters in 2001 are virtually non-existent... except for HAL.

Thanks for another quality episode! I think it is a good idea to make episodes from slightly different perspectives, as you have done: 4k reviews, film analyses, personal movie enthusiast history, trivia behind films, discussing your personal collection etc. Your presentation is well-thought and calm, and your episodes are always enjoyable. Do keep up the good work! I would like to see a long tour of your cinema room, equipment and collection in one of your future episodes. (Edit: oh, I found you already have a video tour of your cinema room, great)

I was lucky to meet both Keir and Gary a few years ago and got them both to sign a 2001 poster, as a long time fan it was a special day indeed. I have always loved both movies for various reasons. Hopefully 2010 receaves a great 4k.

Hi John, Very thorough, in depth video there, I just find it reassuring that through 2001 and 2010 cinema can be so much more than just an easy to understand blockbuster.

Great review. In fact I've just watched 2010 via my projector and it does in some small way replicate that wonderful felling that I got from watching it on opening night at the superb Empire Leicester Square. Just wish we had a 4K version. Fingers crossed!

Roy Scheider is one of my favorite actors. He deserves more credit. So many great movies. Have you seen “Sorcerer?”

Great video John! I would love to see some more videos like this from time to time 👍

Just read a few of the comments and saw you are getting your new home theatre ready! Finally using that amazing 10 ft screen at last. Very exited to see the final result! Have a great day, John!

2001 is one of my fav films and yet I never knew it had a sequel!

I always look forward to your reviews John, my favourite RU-vid Channel. Never stop! 😀

Cheers John. Just watched 2010, a couple of weeks back. Hadn't seen it since the 80's. A solid follow up to 2001.

Excellent analysis, John. I need to catch up on your wonderful videos; Seems I've missed the last few due to a more busy post-lockdown lifestyle. Best - Andrew

I watched 2010 before 2001 as a kid. It had me intrigued what came before. I was sadly disappointed to find no one had said "my god its full of stars.."

This review so good John, really enjoyed it, so informative.

Hey John, Watch this when you out a couple weeks ago interesting insight always fascinated by both these films anyways haven’t heard from you hope all is well looking forward to the next video.

I was lucky to see an exhibit at The Museum of the Moving Image that had many of the props and costumes from 2001. The ones I enjoyed the most seeing were Kubrick's Oscar for 2001, one of the primate costumes, and the star child prop used in the film.

I screened 2010 at our Cinema in 1985 and I was really impressed with it. I also visited the Very Large Array (New Mexico) in 2010 and talked to some of the staff there who actually remembered Roy Scheider and the other cast members during filming onsite, during production of the film. Unfortunately some of Clarke's later books were ghost written and didn't continue with the same themes as Clarke's original novels.

I've never seen 2001 or 2010, Johns Jedi Mind trick has me looking for both movies right now.

Great Review John 👍👍

Some really interesting information regarding the movies and the films conclusion. Many thanks.

Great video John! I still haven’t seen 2010 the year we make contact, but I’m sure they will release a 4K one day. Have a great day, John!

Another great review, John! 2010 is a fine movie that deserves more respect than it gets. Is it on par with 2001? No, how could it be? 2001 is a mysterious piece of art that continues to be analyzed to this day. And Kubrick was a genius who probably buried hidden meanings under other hidden meanings. Having said that, Peter Hyams delivered an excellent movie that feels authentic to its time. It's well written, beautifully filmed & directed and the acting is pretty much perfect all around. Roy Scheider delivers an excellent performance (as does the entire cast) lending the whole movie a shared humanity and authenticity. Even HAL is humanized, and his scenes with Balaban and Dullea are some of the best in the film. Great review, man!

Scintillating dissection and appraisal of Kubrick's second greatest film John (only Barry Lyndon is superior in the endlessly impressive pantheon and oeuvre of Kubrick masterworks). In fact i really don't think i've ever seen or heard a more magnificently coherent, brilliantly cohesive, and totally unpretentious explanation of BOTH movies, absolutely superb. I actually think 2010 is marginally the better of the the two movies simply because it is (as you said) a much more straightforward and entertaining piece of popular film-making by a director (Peter, 'THE RELIC', 'OUTLAND', 'END OF DAYS', Hyams) who has been very under-rated now for almost 50 years.

I recommend reading 3001, it explains a lot.

Hi John! My father took me to see 2001 sometime in the early 80s. They were replaying it at our local 'giant' screen theater. The theater was just 1 screen. It was maybe twice the size of a normal screen or larger...i do not recall. It was housed inside a large dome...so we lovingly called it the big 'dome' theater. Anyway, I was only around 11 or 12 at the time, but the movie always stuck with me. As I got older and rewatched it, I always interpreted the monolith as just an object that sparked the first curiosity in what would eventually become human beings. The ending with Dave, I like to think the monolith was showing him that space and time exist as one thing. There is no backwards or forwards, everything just exists at the same time. Infinite, no beginning and no end. Hence why he saw himself at different levels of aging in the same moment. Also maybe to let him know how small we are in the whole scheme of things and even though we have evolved and made great strides in learning and technology, we still have a long way to go. Just my humble interpretation. 2010 on the other hand, I have not seen since it came out. I dont seem to have bad memories of it but I dont believe it left quite the same impact as 2001. Honestly, I kind of forgot about it. So thanks to your review, I must revisit this movie and watch it again, with a wiser brain and older eyes! Take care my friend! Greg.

I consider myself a movie nut WRONG I’m a rank amateur. Great work . I love 2010 made me appreciate 2001 more

Another great video John, thank for your hard work. Possibly unrelated but if you havnt seen it the movie 'europa report' is pretty much a telling of the chinese 'tsien' part of the 2010 book that was left out of the movie, well recomended. Both 2001 and 2010 movies mean a great deal to me but feel like im in a minority that prefers the later. Would be great to see that get some 4k love, those 65mm effects shots are already superb on the blu so I imagine there is potential for something special there. Keep up the good work, always look forward to your new videos each weekend. Thanks again, regards Michael.

Great video 👍, I only had 2010 in my hand yesterday and was thinking about buying it, but read somewhere that the transfer wasn't great so put it back down...IV never seen this but will wait for a remaster to come out... Thanks for the content John 👍

I just purchased 2010 because I didn’t know it existed until your review. I have 2001 in 4k and watch it for the first time this year. I’m gunna watch 2010 this weekend and then Watch your review. No spoilers till I see it first! Can’t wait to watch your review! Keep up the great work

Clarke’s novel of 2001 explains a lot and as a 12 year old in 1985 when I read it, a great companion to the film. 2010 is a favourite of mine and I remember seeing it on release at my local cinema in Blackburn. One of the reason the film works so well it is so different to 2001. It would have been easy to TRY and make a similar toned film and fail miserably. I believe Kubrick has a large part to play as Peter Hyams asked him for permission/advice and Stanley said “make the film that you want to make”. The cast of 2010 makes is such a good film with Roy Scheider eclipsing William Sylvester’s slightly one dimensional portrayal as Floyd in 2001. I find Scheider as the conflicted family man to be a perfect backdrop to him feeling responsible for Discovery One. Will this ever be released in 4K? Who knows but I’m glad I have the Blu-Ray.

Hello John, I was fortunate to watch 2001 at a Sci Fi convention when I was about 14 or 15. I remember walking away from it confused by the ending and not liking the movie other than the amazing Visual Effects. This was at the time that Star Wars was still in the theaters and that was getting all the attention at the time. Then when 2010 came out I saw that in a theater in Santa Barbara with my 1str wife and really enjoying that movie completely. It made it going back to 2001 much easier though when I was younger still didn't get the ending. Recently I have watched 2001 in HD and then in 4k and that I thoroughly enjoyed much more. I really hope 2010 gets a good version of 4k as well as that movie really deserves it. Your explanation of the ending of 01 I believe is spot on and helps explain that movie much more. I never realized though that Roy was playing the same character as was in 2001, in that movie he talks to a daughter, not a son. On a side note a bit of trivia, when Roy is sitting on a bench talking to another gentlemen a black man, I have forgotten his characters name, but if you look at the end of the bench is Arthur C. Clarke sitting there. Feeding pigeons if I remember right. Great video John, I always look forward to your reviews here. Keep them coming.

Great review

Recently purchased the 4K version of 2001 after hearing about the huge praise the remaster was receiving and since I don't own a physical copy I picked it up, was hoping for the same treatment for 2010 but unfortunately it's yet to recieve a 4K release so I just settled for the blu-ray. Still should make for a great weekend though!

You are not wrong John in regards to the multiple theories out there. I believe Kubrick and Clarke purposely made it ambiguous because they wanted an Alien intelligence to be beyond our compression, so by playing with time and dimension in the Star Gate sequence, it was supposed to be ethereal. The fact that Bowman could see himself at different times implies he is beyond our understanding of how Time works. He is almost in another dimension, another realm where Time and Space is being bent so that he can be studied. Bowman becomes the next evolution of Man as Moonwatcher (the ape) once was. That bit was in the book.

I always understood that Kubrick had very different ideas from Clarke who was very much into scientism and the rational remembering that it was Kubrick who had the final say and kept Clarke in the dark with a lot of what he filmed and I think Clarke then had to write sequals to course correct and explain HAL's behaviour as one of many examples. 2001 is my favorite film just because I think Kubrick created a work that could be understood on a lot of levels and was left open to interpretation.

To be correct the effect produced from you called "split screen" was actually "Slit scan", also used for the Jon Pertwee Dr Who title sequence. Pity the Cineavision 2001 was cropped to 2.35:1 from the single strip Cinerama ratio and the Super 8 prints of 2010 were cropped to 2.66:1 from the Panavision ratio.

Another good review John :) It's been many years since I saw these movies so maybe it's time to watch them again sometime. If I remember correctly, I preferred 2001: A space odyssey but both are fantastic.

I watch 2001 last night at Imax in Melbourne Australia So glad I got to see it on the big screen

Thank you for this! I saw 2001 for the first time on HBO, recently, and I feel like a total fool for not having watched it sooner! It's holding up as my favorite film ever.

one of my favorite movies, i love the odyssey, how the movie literally absorbs you and how at the end every audience member leaves the movie with a different realization; great visuels i love my 4k steelbook of this :)

Great video as always! Well I remember 2001 being offered as a Cineavision full length feature on Super 8. I didn't buy it back then, since it was very expensive. Shortly after I read in the German film collector magazine "Die Leinwand" (=the movie screen) that the quality is not the greatest to put it mildly. I wonder why it hadn't been made from a better source. 2001 once aired on TV somewhere in the early 1990s here in Portugal (I moved here back in 1985). It was clearly a heavily letterboxed 16mm scope print, some older films were still aired from old 16mm prints, mostly 3:4. It looked very bad as well. Probably a run-off-the-mill print made from a 35mm release print, through a 16mm interneg. The Super 8 print of 2010 looks wonderful though! There are fantastic videos about the making of 2001 by Cinema Tyler. Originally Kubrick wanted to include extraterrestrials, but he didn't like the results. So the mysterious ending can (in part) be explained by failed attempts to be more concrete/explicit. I like 2010, but Kubrick's 2001 remains mind blowing. Everything looks so pristine and perfectly composed, easily explained since all equipment is brand new, the complete opposite of, say, Alien. Thanks, as always, for sharing your thoughts and knowledge.

Thanks John I see what you meant about the ending. I plan to cover 2010 on my channel aswell within the next week or two!

2010 was 1984 at theater my first CINEMA movie after moving to Germany + my first Helen Mirren movie, back then in the 80s she was unknown, can't wait for a 4K UHD

I would love love love to see a video of your film collection! At least some of your favorite ones. I have always wanted a sound super 8 projector and some films but haven't yet made that happen. Someday I'll have one and at least a few selected scenes features

Thank you for the review John 👍, Completely forgot about "2010" existence 😂, I think I watched it long time ago though...

Great review! I really enjoyed 2010 but the dvd had a bad picture, but last year I managed to get hold of it on blu ray and the picture is much better so I bought 2001 a space Odyssey from the premier collection also because the special features were on a separate disc. But I've noticed the bit rate on certain blu rays has been lowered to less than 30 Mbps yet Arrow video and Disney can be as high as 40 Mbps.

The ending is actually explained on the original book. The star child is the next step of evolution for humanity and has the ability of shaping the world with his thoughts

Another Excellent Review John,I picked up 2010 a few months back,very good film and we'll done HMV for releasing it

Darn. I was hoping you were going to announce that 2010 was coming out in 4K. As I mentioned to you before, my all-time favorite movie is 2001. I actually saw it in the theatre with my father. I loved it; he hated it. I once watched it three times in a single evening, once with the commentary track with Dullea and Lockwood. The track is excellent; although it is obvious the two actors were not in the same room together at the time. I have always been fond of 2010 and consider it to be an underrated sequel. I have read all the novels and I honestly believe you are wise not to read the remaining two books. I am envious of your memorabilia. Another great video. I still need to see Open Range; did you ever see Futureworld?

I found 2010 to be one of the best movie sequels. It was well done following up a masterpiece and that's tough to do.

So many people have issues with the ending of 2001, and issues with how 2010 looks like a less flourished sequel. For me, 2001's ending provides wide scope for your imagination to fill in the blanks, and as for 2010, it's a well crafted picture even if it isn't as popular.

corection 8:37. The name of the tune is "Ric Flair theme".

Don't forget the short story called The Sentinal was written by Clarke which was the seed for the 2001 collaboration with Krubrick.

Great video john 👍 I saw 2010 in the cinema I think it might have been 70mm I remember the seat shaking from the surround sound 😀

I believe there is a cut of 2001 by Steven Spoderbergh which makes a more explicit connection between HAL and the monolith, implying AIs created the monolith to educate humans so they in turn would create AIs in the future . Rob Agers also has an interesting take. Not sure I agree but worth checking out his channel

I read 2001 a space odyssey as a teenager and it did quite a lot to explain the film. However, I wouldn’t say the film needed the explanation to be great.

Great review. Nice to see 2010 getting some love, I've always been a big fan of it but it has always been overshadowed by its mammoth predecessor, which is a shame.

Well.... After this I had to go into town and buy it. I always remember 'breaking' when Hal asks 'will I dream'... Always felt a touch of sadness for Hal. No way near as good as 2001 but that's just because it's a different style of film altogether.

I have to revisit "2010: The Year we Made Contact." I have the blu-ray in my collection. I saw it when it was released. Suffice it to say, I didn't like it. And that's being mild! Not because it lacked merit as a more "conventional" film, but because it attempted to explain its predecessor in mostly literal terms. That said, I barely remember it, and am willing to give a second look. Anyway, great video, as usual, John!

An underrated sequel. Probably a minority opinion but I find this one a lot easier to watch than 2001. I love 2001 and it’s definitely a more technical marvel of a film but I find you’ve got to be in the mood to watch it. Where as 2010 is more digestible, however not as good. Regardless, it’s a competent sequel.

2010 pretty much completely explains 2001. 2010 is a great movie. If you watch them back to back, it's one giant masterpiece...

I love 2010! Peter Hyams movies were awesome!

Hello John, hope your okay, havent had a video from you in a while. All the best!!

2010 is like a very well made fan fic sequel...

It makes me chuckle to see the CRT monitors throughout "2010" when 15 years earlier (9 years in story time) they're all flat (albeit rear projection for production sake) and closer to what we have today. The thing that is jarring is that they're even CRTs on the Discovery in "2010!" No attempt to recreate the previous look of these displays.

John, have you ever been to the annual Widescreen Weekend in Bradford? I’ve seen 2001 in 70mm there a couple of times.

I would highly recommend reading 2061 as I felt it was a fantastic continuation of the story. I've heard quite negative things about 3001 and I haven't bothered reading it yet

"2010" is a decent science-fiction movie, and the interpretation of "2001" that it runs with is a variant of Arthur C. Clarke's original vision of the story as stated in the first two novels. That said, I don't think we have to take this as the one true explanation for what was happening in "2001". It's just (a version of) *Clarke's* own interpretation-- and Clarke radically tweaked it a couple more times in the sequels (especially "3001"), and even stated in the introductions to the books that they don't take place in exactly the same continuity. Based on early interviews, Kubrick seems to have had *broadly* the same idea of what the story meant as Clarke did, but he also deliberately didn't want to spoon-feed it to the audience and wanted them to develop their own interpretations. It's as if he was deliberately embracing the Death of the Author thesis. So on that basis, I would regard some of the radically different fan interpretations of the story as perfectly legit.

Thanks John. Picked up 2010 this week at HMV on the blu ray and really enjoyed it. Plus Helen Mirren looks and sounds great as a Russian lass - could have been in from Russia with love! Joking aside - I liked this as a different movie that helped explain its predecessor. 👍

Love see 70mm on cinema bet look s stunning

I must give 2001 ASO a look. Havent seen this in 30 years. I hope it doesnt look as dated as Clockwork Orange. I imagine though with Kubrick's 4K movies the transfer will be top notch.

2001: Aspace oddyssey is one of a kind movie experience unlike anything else. As a piece of art you can put anything in there to explain it. It simply makes you think as it is more of a philosophical piece of film and therefor is open for any points of view. 2010 is a conventional sci-fi drama and therefor it is not as interesting but it is still a very good movie. But, is there any explanation to 2001 in any of the novels or in 2010? I am still not sure😆 Great vidoe as always👍

2010 was really popular here in Portugal when it was released back in 84. It had great reviews and people came to see it several times. I was 14 at the time and loved it. I’ve seen it in the cinema in subsequent years through out the 80s when movies came back to town several times and each time the theater had a good crowd to see it. This one and Dune by David Lynch always had a lot of fans here in Portugal and cinemas were always filled no mater when these movies came back. I’ve seen 2001 when I was a kid back in 77 in the cinema too. I was totally confused but the images never left my mind. I read all the novels and I think 2010 should have been the last one. 2061 is a bit pointless and 3001 mostly ruins the universe built in 2001 and 2010 when everything is more about describing the future on earth and the way computer virus operate than has to do with real answers for 2001 and 2010. The 2001 4K Blu-ray edition is incredible. It’s my best 4K along with blade runner which is also incredible in 4K. You have great memorabilia there for 2010 , the only thing missing is the marvel comic book adaptation which is not bad at all and which I have also. I still love Peter hyams 80s sci-fi and as a movie sequel I think 2010 is excellent. At the time the only negative thing I’ve read about it was from scientific critics which said the credibility of 2010 was ruined by the fact that heywood Floyd was at the beach with a portable laptop computer connecting to some wireless web of information. To them that scene was absolutely ridiculous from a science point of view because there was no way computers would be present in our homes in 2010, much less portable hardware and even less imaginary wifi networks of information. Spaceships to Jupiter all cool, laptop computers science nonsense that ruined the realistic feel of the movie. How times have changed. 😂

Just finally watched it 1 month ago, dont know why it took until age 48 to watch it, i was blown away even by todays standards, i love the special features very interesting, i do need to watch it on 4k , i have blue ray. I will get it on 4k for sure.

I recently saw this movie for the first time a couple months back after finishing 2001 for the first time, and of the two movies I think I like 2010 better as a movie. It's something that I'm more inclined to revisit than 2001, as amazing as 2001 is of course. I first watched 2010 in a VR IMAX theater, the screen was a 16:9 proportion but it was just really big and it was a pretty sweet way to watch that movie, though I'd love to watch it on that film print you have just cuz I think that'd be really cool. I recently rewatched it again where I just decided to rent it from Amazon Prime video and unfortunately that version was only in stereo so I couldn't take advantage of my surround sound which sucks. I definitely need to pick up the Blu-ray for it as I already have 2001 on 4K. I was also able to find a lot of us copy of the soundtrack to 2010 on the internet archive and it is a great listen. I think my favorite track is New world, the orchestral police that plays at the end of the movie before Also Sprach Zarathustra. It's very beautiful.

Hey John, Haven't heard from ya ina while,Hope all is well🙂

How do you store your actual film prints? I’ve never gotten into them myself, like most movie collectors i started out on VHS (sadly, after a while having to clear out since I no longer even had a VHS player) and started my current collection on DVD and subsequent digital media (i missed out on Laserdisc as it was a lot more limited and specialist media that I could not really afford or invest in at the time). You seem to have a number of prints in your collection, and given how they can easily degrade and are perishable, and it might be interesting to see how you care for them since I presume they need a lot more maintenance and caring for than DVD discs?

The monolith is the screen from the cinema. Kubrick is saying film, tv and now phone would advance the human race

2001 should always been watched on a giant screen...

Afternoon John. 2010 another film I watched at the pictures with my nan. Looking back she might not have been keen on taking me to see some of the films I wanted her to take me to see. I haven't seen it since I first saw it on the big screen until I bought the same Blu-ray you have. It's definitely more of a straight forward and not as esoteric film as 2001, I enjoy the film though. When are we going to have dolphins in our lounge pools as pets?

I like both films. 2010 did a good job of recreating some of the discovery sets just wish the corridors were more accurate minus the numbers. I love the score to 2010. The Russian ship is cool looking as well

Oh Man! This Is a great video! I have to say, while i don't think that 2010 Is as good as 2001 i've always thought That Is a very good movie, hell i even calle It my favorite movie that no one else seems to caré about. It's a flawed film for sure but at the same Time i appreciate that Is a well Made and intelligent science finction film on it's own which offers answers to questions that you might not want to know but also presenta More interesting ideas. The actors do a good job and i find Roy Scheider to be a very likable Protagonist. Oh yeah And It has my ❤️❤️ Dear Hellen Mirren. The bluray has great sound, very dynamic.

I feel like the books, while they still retain enough ambiguity to be captivating, are somewhat "better" at implying what the object of the monoliths is. I've read the first 3 of 4 - I'll get to the fourth when I've got some time to read what I like (doing a masters literature eats up any time I've got for reading for pleasure). I thoroughly enjoyed them all, particularly the first one. Have you ever read them?

From "landlord" in the film you go to "creator" in your analysis. Many landlords are not creators, they just manage.

The only problem I had with 2010 was it didn't seem that the society's tech level was as advanced as 2001.

Arthur C. Clarke states in the books: the sequels are not linear sequels to one and another. they are more of variations on the same theme and characters, not in the same universe. I kind of like to think this is true, I enjoy the mysterious ending of 2001.

Love this channel btw . 2001 simply doesn’t have an explanation to its ending. Kubrick only suggests . It’s more about discussion, and leaving the viewer thinking about the future of man and technology and the possibility of alien contact . He isn’t reborn. The room is just a metaphor. It means nothing and isn’t a hotel . Symbolic of something meant to comfort the Astronaut. The light tunnel is just all symbolic and is just about travelling to another dimension, but the images are more experimental meaningless psycadelia than anything else. The whole movie is about the cycle of life, in symbolism , from ape, to man to higher level contact. There is no explanation or definition to the Monolith. It is just symbolic of the unknown, whether it’s God , aliens , or undiscovered science . It’s a movie, yet not a movie. Clarke thought Kubrick was the most intelligent person he’d ever met 😄and trusted him with interpretation of the book.

The sequel to the sequel that’s been proposed appears to harken back to more old school science fiction.

Yep. This is why I thought the film “Europa report” was a fitting explanation.

I watched both films on Bluray about 2 months ago, back to back. I think 2010 undid some of 2001. The first film portrays HAL has a fallible mind that thinks it is infallible. The second blamed HAL's behavior to conflicting objectives of the government. I've also watched the analysis on the RU-vid channel Collative Learning by Rob Ager. Highly recommended.

You have an interesting take on the material given that Arthur c Clarke was an atheist and the monolith represents alien life that interfered with human evolution so that we evolved at a faster rate. It is suggested that the monolith increased the intelect also. This is only half the story though as the star child represents our next stage of evolution beyond a physical form and the voyage through the Star Gate being a voyage of many millions of years. I did not find the 2010 entirely satisfying as I did not feel it followed the kubrick vision. The reason I love the original is that you can see it from a religious view as you do which is a very interesting take on it. I miss Roy schnieder. No actor has ever made me feel like he is me in the film. He's the best actor at playing the audience. Loved his work. Even in mediocre films like blue thunder, he made them memorable films with his performance

Ok I didn't see an answer there. 2010 is a great movie in my opinion, on par with Return of the Jedi and E.T. But it is very much an Arthur C. Clarke write. HAL explains away his previous murderous rampage by claiming that he was confused by mission control telling him to lie to the crew. And that never quite sat right with me. What exactly was he afraid of Dave and Frank (and the crew in hibernation) doing that would have jeopardized the mission? And why kill the crew in hibernation if they were also aware of the monolith? Visually, I can get behind 2010 a lot more than 2001. Those Voyager shots of Jupiter and Io are unreal, and unmatched since. The story is great but it doesn't explain what happened in 2001. The only way the movie 2001 makes sense, HAL murdering the crew and attempting to kill off Dave and Frank, is if HAL is not only aware of the monolith but also in competition with the human crew to reach it and travel through the (worm hole?) worm hole to make contact with the transcendental beings who created it. I think that's what Kubrick was going for in 2001.

Surprised they haven’t made 2061 yet.

Hi John. I’ll get slaughtered for this but 2001 never clicked with me, I enjoyed the cinematic experience of it but there was no emotional connection at all.

E X C E L L E N T V I D E O ! ! !

Super 8 =)