Who are these people?... Everyone here is dumber . . .

Rating: 3/10 (24 April 2004)

Who are these people that voted high scores for this movie? Were they afraid their friends would think they were unsophisticated or dumb because they didn't get it? When this movie came out, everyone heard all the glowing praise from the phony critics, and flocked to the theaters. And all of them came out saying what the heck was that? Don't let anybody tell you they "got it" the first time around. If they say that, they are lying. No one understood it. Even me. I had read the short story that was the seed of 2001, and I thought, "Well, I will be the one who understands it." Nope. Actually, the short story - called "Sentinel" - was FAR better and explained what was going on WAY better than Kubrick did. The "trip" scene was just cinematic background for one of those psychedelic rock bands on a TV show. Kubrick threw in some good classical music and the cinematography was very well done. The story line you could describe thoroughly in 12 words. The plot was so basic up till the trip that most people wondered when the heck K was going to put some story into the story. Well, he never did. A sad case of hype, folks. Most of the high scores were evidently by people who had the movie explained to them before or afterward - what kind of recommendation is that for a movie, that you have to have it explained to you? EVERYONE I knew that saw it on first release thought they had totally wasted their money and time. And NOBODY went back to seee it a second time! What kind of recommendation is THAT? If this vote was taken at the exits of the theaters back then, this movie would be on the bottom 100 list. Thumbs down. Stanley, everyone on the planet is dumber for having seen your movie. I award you 2 stars (3 of those for cinematography), and may God have mercy on your soul.