Over hyped

Rating: 4/10 (17 July 2001)

So many film fans/buffs love to rhapsodise about this movie and I've never understood why, as these are the same people who decry a lack of coherent intelligent plot and direction in modern movies.
The model work is of course outstanding, a technical achievement par excellence.
However, the beginning and end section are heavy handed pseudo-intellectual allegories with nothing particularly relevant to say, well that could not have been said a good deal more elegantly or succinctly in less pretentious hands .
Luis Bunuel showed what fun tricks can be had with a movie camera in the 1920's so why does Kubrick make us endure little more than an overlong, glorified light show after we reach Jupiter? The continued repetition serves no purpose, unless you ascribe one to it.
The pacing of the movie is stultifying, and events just "happen" almost ad hoc, with the subtitles apparently linking them into what is supposed to be a cohesive whole. We could loose at least 80 minutes from the running time and focus more on such paltry things as character and dialogue.

I don't dispute the technical achievement of the effects or that Kubrick did know film, but here I see the worst case of an auteur believing in his own 'genius',knowing slyly that anything open ended or vague will be lapped up by the cognoscenti eager to prove that they at least understood - pity poor peons that scorn us.
This is a personal opinion for which I expect vilification, but I believe a film should have something to say other than 'aren't I clever', and despite what many profess to be the hidden depths in this film, that's what always strikes me about it.