my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » The Afterlife   » 2010: The Year We Make Contact

Author Topic: 2010: The Year We Make Contact Tom Petrov Five Guys Lover Posts: 1121 From: El Paso, TX Registered: Jan 2003 posted 01-08-2011 02:32 AM                    2010: The Year We Make Contact ***1/2 Bring on 2061 Fresh on the heals of watching 2001 in theatre, I recently watched 2010. Pretty damn good part II. Peter Hyams does a good job of tension and wonder. What I liked was that the film was not the same style as 2001, its hard to compare 2001/2010 as they were made about 16 years apart. Although the central characters and theme are there, the overall sytle is different. This difference also leads to the faults of the movie. I also liked how HAL came back into the picture and became a central part of the conclusion. His understanding of why they must leave was interesting. The special effects are pretty decent for the era and the sound was good as the picture received 5 Oscar Nominations. It actually had more nominations that 2001 without winning any. You can clearly tell there is a "Hollywood" influence to the second part. Part two was filmed in the USA and used real locations. The level of detail was not the same as 2001. Perhaps the biggest flaw of 2010 is the ending. While 2001 left a lot open to interpretation, 2010 spells everything out for you with the voice over by Roy Scheider. "ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS, EXCEPT EUROPA. ATTEMPT NO LANDINGS THERE" would of been enough for the audience, instead we find out that the President of the USA/Premiere of the USSR looked out their windows and then there was peace, blah, blah, blah. There should of been a sense of wonder when the final monolith presents itself. Also, the main theme seemed horrible tacked on at the end. While it was fitting for the intro, the ending could of used some new, original music. These flaws do not make the movie bad, they just point to how Hollywood doesn't have the trust in audiences and the flaws also seperate 2010 from 2001. I am not sure how faithful 2010 is to the book, but 2001 was not exactly word-for-word...I am ready for Odyssey Three. Bring on 2061.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 01-08-2011 01:59 PM                        My main thought throughout this movie was that Roy Scheider really needed to stay inside more. I'm surprised he didn't die of melanoma. I mean, god damn!  |  IP: Logged Christian Appelt Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 505 From: Frankfurt, Germany Registered: Dec 2001 posted 01-10-2011 10:22 AM                     The visual effects still hold up, and they also looked great in 70mm release prints. I believe they were done in 65mm format, so even after optical compositing they looked much better than the non-effects stuff (anamorphic shot rather wide open, quite grainy). The mag sound mix was great; 2010, TRON and ALTERED STATES were the modern 70mm releases that impressed me most at that time.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 01-10-2011 11:57 AM                     The visual effects in 2010 were excellent. I love the shot where the shrinking Jupiter disappears into blackness behind the Discovery and then explodes. Unfortunately "garbage mattes" are clearly visible in some of the effects shots (like space ships moving across a star-filled background). Star Wars had the same problem of visible garbage mattes which is one of a number of reasons why George Lucas chose to digitally re-create many of the shots. I'm not sure what could be done to reduce or get rid of the garbage mattes in 2010 completely. I think the current Blu-ray merely uses a HD telecine master created for HD cable/satellite broadcast. The movie may not be enough of a high profile catalog title to justify a new precise film scan and digital intermediate treatment. The DI tools might be able to get rid of those garbage mattes. But I don't see WB spending the money to make that happen, especially with the current Blu-ray being available at or below $10 in some stores. As for the movie, it was good but not great. It's a very conventional Hollywood movie. 2001 wasn't very conventional at all. Although the visuals in 2010 were great, the live action cinematography wasn't so good. Peter Hyams insisted on being both director and DP for many of his movies. So many of his shows are so washed out and murky it's just unbelievable.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.