It's easy for sequels to be overlooked and overshadowed by their predecessors. 2010: The Year We Make Contact, is a great example. The film takes place nine years after the events of Stanley Kubrick's masterpiece, 2001: A Space Odyssey. How to compete with that film, a movie that's almost universally recognized as a classic? In 2010, Dr. Heywood Floyd (Roy Scheider) is on a joint US/Soviet mission aboard the Leonov to discover what happened to astronaut Dave Bowman (Keir Dullea), his ship the Discovery, and the murderous computer that ran it, HAL 9000.
 |
| 2010 on Facebook |
One big aspect about 2010 is the creepy vibe throughout the film. For instance, the film starts with a deep, distorted voice (which, it turns out, belongs to the missing Dave Bowman) saying "My God, it's full of stars." This line is in reference to the monolith Dave discovered at the end of the first film. Interestingly, this line isn't in the original film, but does appear in the book. Also notable is a scene where a probe is searching for signs of life on Jupiter's moon Europa. The probe's on-board camera pans across the surface as the crew looks on. I don't particularly remember a creepy factor in 2001 (suspenseful, sure), so I think it's notable that it's so prevalent in this sequel.
Also notable in 2010 is the US/Soviet relationship. The film was made during the Cold War amid tensions between the two countries. This factors heavily into the movie's plot, despite the fact that it was, at the time, portraying the future. This quality definitely dates the film. In fact, the film's ending is a bit preachy, with a cosmic message that the Earth's inhabitants need to live in peace. The US/Soviet subplot does add a bit of political intrigue to the film, however, so it's not a complete waste of time.
The cast is one of the film's strongest suits. Scheider is the film's star, and he's a little more grandiose than Jaws' Chief Brody (oddly enough, both characters are members of a team on a ship, hunting for something...hmm). Helen Mirren is great as the Russian Captain Tanya Kirbuk (Mirren is actually of Russian descent despite being known simply as a Brit) and Lithgow turns in a solid performance, portraying a nervous American engineer named Walter Curnow. Bob Balaban plays Dr. R. Chandra, Hal 9000's creator.
With the special effects of today's films, you may think that 2010 looks dated. And it does, to an extent. But there are some beautiful cosmic shots, such as a scene where the crew's ship is sent hurtling towards Jupiter after they attempt to "air brake", a process where they slow their velocity by using the planet's atmosphere. There's also a great Gravity-esque scene where Lithgow's character travels from the Leonov to the Discovery while tethered to a Russian member of the crew.
At the end of the day, 2010: The Year We Make Contact is a smart, engaging sci-fi flick, overshadowed by its predecessor simply because of the high bar set. Seek it out if you're looking for a thoughtful, well-acted space drama.
This review is part of Forgotten Films' 1984-a-thon.
 |
Also notable in 2010 is the US/Soviet relationship. The film was made during the Cold War amid tensions between the two countries. This factors heavily into the movie's plot, despite the fact that it was, at the time, portraying the future. This quality definitely dates the film. In fact, the film's ending is a bit preachy, with a cosmic message that the Earth's inhabitants need to live in peace. The US/Soviet subplot does add a bit of political intrigue to the film, however, so it's not a complete waste of time.
The cast is one of the film's strongest suits. Scheider is the film's star, and he's a little more grandiose than Jaws' Chief Brody (oddly enough, both characters are members of a team on a ship, hunting for something...hmm). Helen Mirren is great as the Russian Captain Tanya Kirbuk (Mirren is actually of Russian descent despite being known simply as a Brit) and Lithgow turns in a solid performance, portraying a nervous American engineer named Walter Curnow. Bob Balaban plays Dr. R. Chandra, Hal 9000's creator.
With the special effects of today's films, you may think that 2010 looks dated. And it does, to an extent. But there are some beautiful cosmic shots, such as a scene where the crew's ship is sent hurtling towards Jupiter after they attempt to "air brake", a process where they slow their velocity by using the planet's atmosphere. There's also a great Gravity-esque scene where Lithgow's character travels from the Leonov to the Discovery while tethered to a Russian member of the crew.
 |
| Reflections on Film and Television |
At the end of the day, 2010: The Year We Make Contact is a smart, engaging sci-fi flick, overshadowed by its predecessor simply because of the high bar set. Seek it out if you're looking for a thoughtful, well-acted space drama.
 |
| 3.5 Out Of 5 Stars |
This review is part of Forgotten Films' 1984-a-thon.
This is a great sci-fi film! It is overshadowed by its predecessor, but I think it's just as good, if not better than 2001. Also, considering the growing tensions between the US and Russia over Ukraine, I think we will be back to Cold War status in the next few years - which will make it not feel dated. :)
ReplyDeleteThere's definitely an argument to be made that this film is just as good as 2001. It's a bit of a different beast. More of a straight up adventure story. It's sort of the "working man's" 2001 in a way. And that's an optimistic way to look at the Ukraine situation! :) Thanks for reading!
DeleteRespect to Peter Hyams to taking on a sequel to arguably one of the best sci-fi films of all time. I really like 2010, and find it's a lot more assessable than 2001. Character development is a step up from the first film too, and you're right - the effects haven't dated that badly at all. I think Kubrick referred to this film as 'Ten past Eight' !
ReplyDeleteIt's definitely more accessible! That's a great way to put it. Gone are the scenes of evolving apes and trippy wormholes, replaced with more human characters and situations. I think the space shots were done in a unique way. Instead of a blue screen, they used "front-light/back-light filming", although I think it was done for practical reasons. It kind of reminds me of The Fountain, where Aronofsky filmed bacteria (or something crazy like that) instead of simply using CGI. That's interesting about Kubrick! Thanks for reading!
DeleteI'm one of those who doesn't get 2001: A Space Odyssey. Someone recommended 2010 by saying it would explain 2001 and it didn't for me, but I did enjoy this film for its own merits. You're right about the shots in space. Some of them are stunning.
ReplyDeleteIt might be time to look at both of these movies again, now that I've read your review.
Thanks for reading! I think 2010 is supposed to explain 2001 but I don't know that it does, upon first viewing, anyway. Definitely check them out again!
DeleteI saw 2010 in the theaters as a kid (I would have been eight), and it freaked me out a little. I had no idea what 2001 was, but I do remember thinking 2010 was pretty cool. I revisited it maybe 10 years ago, and it did feel clunkier than I remembered. Even so, I totally agree that the cast is excellent. Despite some preachy parts at the end, it's a solid film. The problem is that there's no way not to compare it to 2001. That aspect has hurt its reputation.
ReplyDeleteYeah there is just such a striking difference between the two films but they're still so similar in weird ways. It definitely hasn't aged as well as 2001 but I agree, still solid. Thanks, Dan!
DeleteNicce blog
ReplyDelete