The Web    Google
2010: The Year We Make Contact [Blu-ray]
List Price: $28.99

Our Price: $13.94

You Save: $15.05 (52%)


Product Description

Studio: Warner Home Video Release Date: 04/07/2009

No director could ever have hoped to repeat the artistic achievement of Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey, and nobody knew that better than Peter Hyams, who made this much more conventional film from the first of three sequel novels by Arthur C. Clarke. Whereas Kubrick made a poetic film of mind-expanding ideas and metaphysical mysteries, Hyams shouldn't be blamed for taking a more practical, crowd-pleasing approach. In revealing much of what Kubrick deliberately left unexplained, 2010 lacks the enigmatic awe of its predecessor, but it's still a riveting tale of space exploration and extraterrestrial contact, beginning when a joint American-Soviet mission embarks to determine the cause of failure of the derelict spaceship Discovery. Having arrived at Discovery near the planet Jupiter, the American mission leader (Roy Scheider) and his Russian counterpart (Helen Mirren) must investigate the apparent failure of the ship's infamous onboard computer, HAL 9000, as well as the meaning of countless mysterious black monoliths amassing on Jupiter's surface (an interpretation Kubrick originally left up to his viewers). Meanwhile, Earth is on the brink of nuclear war, and an apparition of astronaut David Bowman (Keir Dullea) appears to repeatedly promise that "something wonderful" is about to happen. --Jeff Shannon

Customer Reviews:

  • Superb follow-up to the first
    I found 2010 much easier to follow, largely due to the fact it had a conventional story line rather than seemingly random scenes that made little sense like its predecessor (a movie I appreciate, but still find somewhat confusing). The acting is superb and the plot makes complete sense. In the end, one actually feels attached and sympathetic to Discovery. If you liked the first, this will probably seem less stellar; but if you found the first thought-provoking, albeit confusing, then this movie will help you understand its predecessor substantially....more info
  • Great follow up
    Faster paced, more thrilling, great acting, yes it is not Kubrick, but it was and is a great movie as sequels go! ...more info
  • finishing the remake
    This is the rest of the remake of Assignment: Outer Space. See my comments in 2001: Space Odyssey.
    ...more info
  • As long as you don't expect another "2001", you can get a lot of enjoyment out of this
    Having not seen it in a while, I watched this movie on DVD the other day, a day or so after also re-visiting "2001: A Space Odyssey". My verdict? "2010" shouldn't be faulted for simply being an intelligent, solid movie while its predecessor was a filmic milestone. One thing that this later film does just as well as the earlier one, however, is its communication of the wonder and danger of space travel and space exploration. Two examples of this: the tense slingshot-around-Jupiter braking sequence with the Russian vessel and, later, the two astronauts moving toward and boarding the slowly-spinning-out-of-control U.S.S. Discovery.

    Other plusses: a great stable of actors (Roy Scheider, John Lithgow, Helen Mirren, and Bob Balaban join Keir Dullea from the first film), a resistance to over-explaining the alien monoliths from the earlier story (though we get a little more about their possible aims and purpose), and just a general air of intelligence. On this last point: although the film is definitely more conventional and mainstream than "2001", there's a refreshing non-reliance on cheap thrills and other typical movie conventions. Yes, the "we should all get along" political message (not a part of the original novel) is a little clunky, but I'm willing to forgive that

    My DVD of "2010" came out a few years ago, has an adequate level of visual clarity (though no more than that), and a somewhat interesting, though ultimately bland, nine-minute "behind the scenes" featurette that was apparently produced back in 1984 as an introduction to special showings of the film. Unless another DVD edition has already come out since then, this interesting, well-crafted example of 1980's science-fiction filmmaking really deserves a better-looking, more generously equipped DVD.
    ...more info
  • Still love it, years later
    I liked it when it came out, but now it's also a bit of a time machine to the Cold War. No, it's not going to make anyone's best sci-fi movies list, but the story is compelling and the acting is better than most. Check out Helen Miren as a Russian commander. ...more info
  • great flick
    If you have seen 2001: A Space Odyssey, you will definitely have to watch this one....more info
  • 2010 - The Day we made contact
    I love this movie but - the video quality is not even close to being Blu-Ray quality. It is even blurry at some points. They must not have used the master - who knows....more info
  • 2010: Space Farce?
    I thought this was a silly movie. I don't know what I thought I was expecting... but while 2001 made sense, 2010 didn't seem to do that. ...more info
  • Completely unnecessary....
    This is an OK film. It has none of the mystery, the art, the ambiguity, or the brilliance of 2001. It's just a rather straightforward story. It explains everything that happens in 2001, which isn't the point. One of the reasons 2001 worked so well is there were no explanations. It just happened, and you were supposed to let your mind and imagination interpret it. And as some reviewers have noted, the bizarre inclusion of a Cold War, US/USSR military confrontation over Central America was short sighted, stupid, and now, terribly dated. It wasn't in Clarke's original novel, and Hymas should have never put it in. Of course, this was made during the 80's, where we were led to believe that the Russians are going to invade any day now (needless to say, they never did). It is nice to see Keir Dullea and Douglas Rain reprise their roles. The rest of the performances are good for this kind of thing. If there was no 2001, this would be an OK film. But it's really an unnecessary sequel. Read the book, instead. ...more info
  • disappointing
    this movie was very disappointing after watching 2001, I honestly didn't think they could make a movie 20 years later and make it look worse than the a movie made in 1968. The conversion to Blu-ray is terrible, it looked like a low budget B movie. The story line was alright in retrospect, except it could have been done much much cooler, without all the 80's....more info
  • Dated followup to 2001
    The basic plot of this film is so dated, with the evil Soviets and crazy Americans squared off in a repeat of the Cuban Missle Crisis, that the only real reason to watch this film is the acting and effects. The effects are so-so with the mats being the most obvious example. The Blue-ray brings this out, since you can see the outlines of the moving elements more clearly. The acting is good, especially Helen Mirren and the actors manage to convey the tension between Soviet and American sides. The ending is the clossest element to 2001.
    Overall, if you like the film and can accept the Soviet-American tension as a plot, the Blue Ray version is the way to go. The picture is soft - as is typical of films of the 1980's - but the details are easier to pick up in the Blue Ray than the old DVD....more info
  • Unfairly maligned
    "2010: The Year We Make Contact" gets a bad rap primarily because it's not "2001: A Space Odyssey." No matter what they would have filmed, the movie would have been dismissed out of hand by most people. I think it's a fine film, though. I know that I'll get hammered for this, but I enjoyed it more than I did "2001." The Kubrick film was indisputably beautiful, but I found it to be dramatically inert. I was mesmerized by the imagery but I didn't care about the characters or the story (and the "acid trip" at the end went on for far too long). "2010," by contrast, isn't as beautiful. The utilitarian nature of the space craft design is carried over to the storytelling style as well. Peter Hyams, the director, sacrifices the perfectly composed shots that Kubrick created in deference to keeping the story moving.

    In the end it all comes down to whether you prefer poetry or prose. I like prose. I prefer forward momentum to stasis. "2010" doesn't have the sense of wonder that "2001" does, but it's populated with characters and a narrative that you can become emotionally invested in.

    A NOTE ABOUT THE DVD: As much as I like the film itself, the DVD is just okay. The transfer is substandard (non-anamorphic) and pretty bare bones. Rumor has it that there will be a special edition DVD in the year 2010. One can hope....more info
  • Great movie, but not Blu-Ray worthy just yet.
    This is still one of my favorite movies, but aside from the crispness of the video (which to me differs very little if at all from the DVD), I was put off by the fact that there are no special features different from what was in the DVD version. In other words, all you pay for is just a barely noticeable better screen and sound quality, but absolutely nothing else. Unfortunate. Perhaps a minifeature on Galileo's odyssey as it circled Jupiter, or a retrospective look back at the opinions then and comparison with the realities of now? There is a vast untapped resource of information that could have been included. Sadly, it wasn't....more info
  • Seeing this movie twenty years later, two things are apparent.
    After watching "2001" and "2010" back to back, some differences are obvious: is it less stylized, lacks 1960's fashions, and not a s slow-plodding as the classic. Therefore, it is a more accessible film. "2001" was about mystery, while "2010" is about answers.

    Seeing this movie twenty years later, two things are apparent. First the special effects are top notch. The "Leonov" has a cramped, dark, submarine feel that was adopted for "Star Trek: Enterprise." The computer monitors--despite being non-Plasma--do the job and convey the feeling of what we are actually doing in the 21st Century. The Jovian systems, revealed so beautifully with the Voyager probes, gives you the feeling of actually being there. Compare the external scenes with "Silent Running."

    The second observation is that film is dated. Keep in mind that we are watching a film that is the product of the Hollywood Culture and reflect the hopes and fears of the Hollywood Microverse--that it was made five years before the Velvet Revolution--and that Hollywood has never forgive actor Ronald Reagan for betraying the quote-unquote Cause and becoming a conservative. In the film, the US president is an obvious effigy of Reagan.

    The clash of politics is a reminder of several aspects of the 1980's scientific culture. One is the love-hate relationship between the Scientific-Industrial Complex with the Military-Industrial Complex. The scientists were "high and mighty" with their distain of the atavistic military (reread your Carl Sagan as a refresher), but they were also dependant upon the military for funding. So the relationship is reminiscent to that of a 30-year old unemployed teenager still living with his parents and collecting an allowance, but mouthing off to dad, and not doing his chores.

    Defense, which is the first order of government (Federalist 23), serves to protect life, liberty, and property; specifically the lives of the scientists, the liberty to be heretical to established orthodoxy, and the scientific hardware that they use to advance knowledge.

    This leads to the last point: the film is dated because our quisling-enemies have changed. You can see a Soviet wanting to go to the moon or using the Hubble, but you cannot see Al-Qaida doing the same thing. Can you honestly us having a joint US- or UN-Al Qaida mission to Jupiter? Beginning with the 1975 Apollo-Soyuz mission, US-Russian missions are commonplace, but could we do a joint space mission that Al-Qaida or the terrorist cells?

    Maybe that is an unintended Take Home Message from the film: Know Your Enemies....more info
  • Good movie but.....
    ...what you get will not resemble the product shown. The product shown has a picture of the planet Jupiter and one of its moons in the background, Discovery floating in the foreground, with the monolith (full of stars) in between, movie by MGM studios. What you'll get will be the el cheapo snap case with Jupiter and the infant on the cover, movie by Warner Bros., which you can typically find at WalMart for $7.50.

    I thought I would get a decent copy of 2010 in a keep case, what I got was the bargain bin copy in a snap case that I paid too much for.

    The 3 stars is for the deception, not the movie. The movie rates 4 stars, with 2001 a strong 5. -kd5- ...more info
  • 2010; The Year We make contact
    Really enjoyed this one. on time and in good condition...more info
  • 2010 The Year We Make Contact
    2010 is a wonderful continuation of 2001. It is well acted and has plenty of technical reality straight from NASA for its day. There are no science fictions that come as close to real weightless space travel then 2001 and 2010. These two highest quality movies show the positive ingenuity that ambitious mankind can create and dream about from childhood.

    A quality science fiction movie is NOT one that relies on violence of sex to sell the movie. Filling time with violence is the lazy way to fill time in a movie and dash the hopes of young children. We need more quality movies such as 2001 and 2010 in which our humans ingenuity and dreams come true.

    Since 2010 is a timeless classic, 2010 MUST be rendered into High Definition with the upmost care for detail of picture quality.

    2010 explains the odd behavior of HAL9000 in 2001. Hal was forced into acts of death by directive of the White house, due to White house folks who would not share information to the public but placed the top secret into HAL's memory and directed HAL to protect it's release at all costs. An intelligent being like HAL would constantly dig at such locked code and be suspicious (just as NORTON virus protection is today). This locked code is the same as we would describe today as a computer virus and a virus is very hard to get rid of.

    I look forward to the HD release!
    ...more info