Almost a "10" because I can't bring myself to rate it on the same level as "2001" which remains a confusing-classic masterpiece of film-making. Explaining most of the mysteries of 2001 takes away some of the wonder, such as explaining "The Force" and "The Phantom of the Opera". So Hal had a twin sibling computer named "Sal" and Hal had a nervous breakdown because of conflicting direction and programming? I never quite bought that! I prefer to think of "him" as an imperfect entity, like "Data's twin android" on Star Trek. A far more coherent, understandable story. Great special effects and a far more logical conclusion. The nations of Earth (primarily Russia and The U.S.) finally stop warring with each other because a superior being, perhaps God, tells them not to do so or face complete oblivion and utter destruction. Find out which planet "God" lives on! John Lithgow and Helen Miren, lead a great cast. Wonderful. Read both books by Arthur C. Clarke and be further amazed!

I gave 2001 a 1 rating as I'm not into pretentious artsy foolishness. Probably an hour was given to long, loud videos of imagery that did nothing for the story. So this movie actually had a plot and told a story. It still leaves you hanging with questions, but at least I didn't fall asleep 4X while watching it, as I did in the original.

I saw this movie 33 years after it came out. The original, 2001: A Space Odyssey, is my favorite movie. This 2010 movie gave me nothing to think about. The writers threw us some sentimental images of Bowman and of the Discovery so we might be excited at seeing old friends. The outdoor spaceship special effects were far inferior to the 1968 version. Why did that have to be? A low budget? The monolith was not black at every appearance in the movie. And when the spaceships MADE SOUND in the vacuum of outer space, that is heresy! I chalked that up to a post-Star Wars mentality. I found it annoying that the scientist who initially programmed HAL protected HAL almost like a lover. The original movie made me think as I watched. This sequel only made me watch the story-line cliches unfold. I was waiting for some Ewoks to show up.

Despite the common belief, this movie has no answer to unanswered questions of the 2001 nor it helps the audience to better understand the original movie. This a cheap flick, an attempt to make some money on the success of the 2001. I would say it is something like Terminator 3 or 4, cheap movies based on awesomeness of the originals however it was good entertainment on it's own. Plays were cheesy, Roy Scheider appears as "NAGGING MR ALWAYS RIGHT" which why I despise him because he had absolutely no talent, playing 100 movies and he has the same character in all of them! The opening scene is probably the most ridiculous when Dr Moisevitch approaches Floyd (Scheider) on the telescope. There is no way that someone could hear Moisevitch's voice while standing on top of the giant telescope! Seriously, how a director or screen writer can make such an obvious mistake? Movie is too noisy, inside spaceships are too dark as of most sci-fi of the period and instead of having an imitation of futuristic electronics, there are monitor screens straight from mid 80s but probably the ending was what made me go ballistic! A new sun was created in the solar system! Sounds cool except that in reality, such phenomena would cause the earth to be over heated and almost all life on planet earth would be destroyed! I'm a great fan of Sci-Fi and I hate open ended movies in which the ending would be left open to be guessed by the audience but what I hate more is cheesy and obviously unscientific answers. I believe an open ended is far better than a sham like this. If you watch this movie as a sequel to the 2001, you'll despise it immediately but if you try to forget about the 2001 and what it as a stand alone sci-fi, there is some entertainment value in it.