Worlds of Tomorrow: 2010

[Russell Nash]

Worlds of Tomorrow: 2010

Welcome to Worlds of Tomorrow, an occasional feature we’ll be running looking at some of the best in science fiction cinema. From acknowledged classics to forgotten gems we’ll be covering them all. Some of them you’ll have seen, some you won’t, some you’ll agree with me on and some you’ll wonder what I was drinking when I watched them but that’s half the fun. Spoilers abound so if you haven’t seen the movie and want to be surprised, go rent it now, we’ll be here when you get back. Otherwise, set a course for fun. Or in the case of our first instalment, huge black objects circling Jupiter…



Listen to this Worlds of Tomorrow!

[alllie]

Beautifully written. Beautifully narrated.

But the author and narrator are not listed.
They should be.

[Alasdair5000]

Thank you:)  I'm really glad you liked it.  I wrote and narrated the review and also posted it so the missing information is entirely my fault.  I'l make sure it's corrected on all future reviews and should be able to correct it on this one.

[izzardfan]

It's been years since I've watched that movie, which I always enjoy, and yet your observations brought it all back, and more.  Thanks for that.   

[stePH]

2010 improved on its predecessor by being comprehensible without having read the novelization. I still maintain that 2001 as a film is impenetrable overrated toss.

[Heradel]

2010 improved on its predecessor by being comprehensible without having read the novelization. I still maintain that 2001 as a film is impenetrable overrated toss.

I still maintain that it's better for being somewhat incomprehensible. It's not meant to be complete, and the mystery at the end is necessary. My biggest problem with 2001 is that Discovery doesn't work as a spaceship.

[Zathras]

Where's the review for The Black Hole?

Do I smell ZARGA V?

[MacArthurBug]

and now I have something new to watch- I don't mind spoilers much.

Well put together Al,thanks so much for introducing (me at least) to something new

[Russell Nash]

2010 improved on its predecessor by being comprehensible without having read the novelization. I still maintain that 2001 as a film is impenetrable overrated toss.

I still maintain that it's better for being somewhat incomprehensible. It's not meant to be complete, and the mystery at the end is necessary. My biggest problem with 2001 is that Discovery doesn't work as a spaceship.

What do you think is wrong with it?

[Heradel]

2010 improved on its predecessor by being comprehensible without having read the novelization. I still maintain that 2001 as a film is impenetrable overrated toss.

I still maintain that it's better for being somewhat incomprehensible. It's not meant to be complete, and the mystery at the end is necessary. My biggest problem with 2001 is that Discovery doesn't work as a spaceship.

What do you think is wrong with it?

Things don't fit. The pod bay is too big along with the centrifuge to fit in the globe at the front of the ship.

It's not a huge quibble, but the rest of the movie's so accurate it's a little annoying.

[JoeFitz]

Thanks for bringing back this feature. It brought back the memories of a movie I thoroughly enjoyed.

[Darwinist]

Great!  Thanks for rapping about 2010.  I've only seen it once, when it was in the theater, but I loved it.  I'll now go rent it again with the famn damily.  Well done.  Looking forward to more of this. 

[Unblinking]

I hope Alasdair's got more movie reviews in store:  I love hearing his breakdown of movie plots!

Confession:  I've neither seen nor read 2001 or 2010.  Something which I need to remedy.  Even though I listened to the review, I doubt I'll remember enough details of the events listed for them to be spoiled to any great degree.