Great, but not perfect

Rating: 8/10 (5 August 2019)

I wish there was a way to write reviews without having to rate it. But since it's the only way, I'm giving it eight stars. Like the title says, it's good, but not perfect.
There are some who thinks the movie is pretentious and boring, and I can understand why some feel that way. Still, I'm convinced that it is available for most people. It all depends on the context.
What my opinion would have been had I seen it for the first time today, is hard to say. But I saw it on TV as a kid, and was extremely disappointed. Back then I was expecting something like Star Wars perhaps, and instead got something completely different.
Then several years passed, and one day I decided to read about the movie on Wikipedia and in a couple of articles. There we learn that Clarke's novel (which I haven't read yet) provide you with all the information you need, such as the meaning of the monoliths (dimensions 1 X 2 X 3), and how the objects seen by Bowman during his trippy journey are beings from other planets going through the same as him. Information that should be easily available for those interested.
So, when I finally saw the movie again a couple of years later, this time on TCM, I had forgotten most of what I had seen as a kid, but knew what to expect and what kind of movie it was. And I knew what it was all about, even if Kubrick left the explanations out of the film, thanks to information found on the net. Cheating? No, because there are no rules about how to watch a movie. It all depends on the person watching it. Some would perhaps say that if you need to go through all this to apprieciate it, then it's not that great in the first place. Maybe so, but if anything can give you a better experience about a movie, book or piece of music, one shold never reject that.
By rewatching it these years later, it felt new and fresh considering I had forgotten most of it, and yet I knew what to expect, which made a disappointment in that regard impossible.
One of the reasons why many dislikes the movie is because they are trying to see something that's not there. Like a modern painting that somehow has hidden qualities that's only available for the most intellectual art lovers. But if there are no hidden layers to begin with, you will obviously never be able to see them, which probably creates the frustrating feeling of watching something that is unavailable for you. What you see is what you get, even if it should require some background information first. Sure, there are those who see it for the first time without knowing anything about it, and still loves it. But one way of seeing it is not more right or wrong than another. Just don't expect an action movie. This is a film that depends on a different mood and atmosphere.
Kubrick himself explained that he went for an open interpretation and it was all up to the viewers themselves to decide what it was they were seeing. This of course mean that some are looking for meanings and symbolism in almost everything, like the conversation with the girl (Kubrick's daughter) on the monitor. Elements I personally see as just something added to show us what everyday life in space is, even if most of it never came true. Liquid food, people so used to travel to the space station that they sleep in their seats instead of watching the stars, objects floating in the air if they are not attached to something, talking face to face with your family through satellite phones, and so on. Just another day at the office.
What makes the movie different from what most of us are used to today, is that in order to tell the story it doesn't depend on main characters through the whole movie. As the story progress, you are introduced to characters which are then left behind when new ones are introduced. It's not about the main characters, but about how humanity evolves from our apelike ancestors to a point when we are ready to join a cosmic civilization consisting of aliens species from all over the whole, all with a little assistance from some godlike aliens that are never shown. A topic that is Clarke in a nutshell, and typical for much of his Olaf Stapledon inspired authorship.
The movie is a product of its time. We see the best practical effects science fiction movies had to offer back then, and speculations about what the future might hold. Some have criticized it for the fact that there are only white characters. Well, this was 1968 and NASA, Europe and USSR reflected the world back then. Not something I consider a problem.
It's the last and longest part of the movie, where a ship from earth is heading for Jupiter, that is given most attention. It's also a way to explore what artificial intelligence in the future might be like. For me it was also a reminder that now matter how far we have come, it doesn't take much to bring us back to the times when life was a struggle for survival. If it is the prehistoric plains of Africa or a ship in space, the struggle is the same when your life is in danger. In that regard, modern humans are not that different from other animals. Do what you can to survive. The only new element is HAL, a threat humans have never encountered before. Intentionally or not, the idea of only a single human out of all the millions that lives and have lived on earth should result in a cosmic fetus, also makes me think of how only a single sperm cells out of millions of others is able to reach the egg.
Kubrick was making up much of the story as they went along. Near the end they were running out of time and money, and settled with the scene in the luxurious hotel room. That's when Bowman leaves his old humanity behind and is reborn as a space child. The narrative technique, the way this is visualized, how he repeatedly find himself in another and older body as he is getting closer and closer the end of his human life, in an attempt to make his rebirth as little traumatic as possible, is well done. The movie then ends with a new dawn for humanity. Along with the book of concept art and ideas, one get the impression of the true scale of the project.
Still, the movie was not perfect. Some would argue that Kubrick should have added a little more explanations and information, which could have made sense when it came out. Today it is too much of a classic that the idea of adding info dumps doesn't seem especially appealing. What I had some issues with was the evolution of our ancestors. The aliens are actually interfering, by making is walk upright and start hunting for meat. In my opinion, it would have worked better if they gave a helping hand that allowed us to survive instead. Like acting as a doorway to another area with better living conditions if out ancestors were on the brink of existance due to a harsh environment. And we never lived close to tapirs.
As many may be aware, the scene with the jogging astronaut was supposed to last for several minutes, just to show us the boredom of space travels. Luckily that idea was dropped. But it shows that Kubrick wanted to be as autentic as possible where there was an opportunity.
And not all science was correct, like the one where Bowman is filling his lungs with air before he is exposed to the vacuum of space. But these are just minor problems that doesn't affect the movie as a whole.
The psychedelic journey through the monolith orbiting Jupiter lasted a little too long. And the first time I saw the final scene with the space child I wasn't sure if it was metaphor, a mental image or a dream sequence, or soemthing else, but if you're going with Clarke's explanation it's literally the return of a human reborn as a child of the universe.
All in all, a classic science fiction movie of a kind that would have been impossible to make today. There is a reason why it's mentioned on practically every list of movies that's considered worth watching. And hopefully some of those who disliked it the first time are willing to give it another chance sometime, to see if they appreciate it more then.