I think you all know how i feel on this, so...

How do you all feel about this garbage,err, i mean film.

It definitely has its merits. I like the opening "dawn of man" sequence a lot, the transition to the modern era has become part of our culture, and overall the view of spaceflight in the 'future' is very well done and realistic. Incredible use of music, too.

The characters are rather lifeless, though. Bowman and Poole were simply assigned to the mission and there they are. Heywood Floyd doesn't open up at all. HAL is a machine, but he has the most character development of all, as we find the reasons for his schizm.

And I find the trip through the monolith to be overly drawn out and tedious. It comes across to someone who didn't live through the 60's as psychedelic crap. It redeems itself a good bit with the white room at the end, and the starchild in space is quite errie.

Overall, I liked the book better. 2010 is a decent book, too. The rest are pointless cash-ins, especially 3001. 2010 the movie is a lot more straightforward than 2001, and is a servicable followup with some impressive visuals in its own right.

As a side note, my father (a big western fan) finds this movie to be almost painful to watch. He says it's the only movie ever made that could have just been released as a series of still pictures.

I voted masterpiece. For me, it's not a typical film to sit down and watch, taking at face value. It's a film to immerse yourself in. To let go, and let it take you on its ride visually and intellectually. The long scene where David is travelling into deep deep space is so visually involving, I couldn't help but be mesmorized by it. In general, I love Kubrick's slow and drawn out style, which sucks me in much more than any faster paced film.

It's been on the top of my all time list ever since I first saw it... watching it again Wednesday though (for my Kubrick film class - talk about the best homework ever!), so I'll see how I feel about it after this viewing. But I don't expect my feelings to change.

It's okay. People are quick to label it a masterpiece, because the movie really leaves everything up to interpretation and since people make their own interpretations that please them, people find it incredibly brilliant and a pinnacle of cinema.

I don't feel that way. I do think it's an interesting film, love the classical music and visuals, and the HAL sequence is great. But it's not, to me, "genius."

And it's my favorite Kubrick film, so that should tell you how I feel about labelling Kubrick a genius.

a No-Brainer Masterpiece for me.

Masterpiece, and one of the few films ever created that actually broke new ground--narratively, technically and stylistically.

Not only on my personal "top ten" list, but arguably one of the most influential films of all time, affecting not only the technical craft of movie-making forever, but also expanding the "language" of film.

They are meant to be lifeless. The lack of personality that humans suffer at the fate of their own "tools" is one of the main themes of the film. 2001 shows us how boring we have/will become, the mundane life that Bowman and Poole live is representative of this; watching tv, eating mash for food, using sunbeds and having the computer do all the work. Even when Dr Floyd is taking his trip, there is some remarkable scenery out his window yet he has fallen asleep in front of his in-flight tv.

By the way I voted masterpiece.

masterpiece, hands down.

"There should be a cathedral where it plays 24 hours a day." - John Lennon.

I say it's a "Masterpiece" but I still think some parts could've been edited down.

Masterpiece without question.

and...I think a lot of people do not realize, or overlook the fact, that this film was made before man walked on the moon.

masterpiece for using a non-narrative style to tell a story of epic (and evolutionary) proportions and doing it in of the most visually stunning films ever made.

I voted Masterpiece, but some other things to consider:

1) It was very groundbreaking for it's time

2) It has a great use of music, in fact, Strauss' "Also Sprach Zarathoustra" is now just known as the 2001 theme, despite being written ages ago.

3) the parodies of HAL and stuff still live to this day.

Even if you don't like the movie, there are elements of it that have stayed with popular culture, even 40 years later. That alone says something.

This movie is 35 years old and it blows me away each time I see it. Just simply amazing.

This is superb cinema that is brilliant art as well as a story. The funny thing is I saw it for the first time a week ago, and I am just sad that I waited 30 years to see it.

DVD Smurf

I love everything about it but the story, because for some reason it has put me to sleep the last several times I have tried to watch it. Storywise its okay, but it is a technical marvel.

Masterpiece. And I'm glad to see the results of this poll thus far.

Re: the story. It really is what you make of it, which is precisely the reason the film works - each viewing experience is different every time I watch it.

Masterpiece, and my favorite film of all time

Masterpiece. Period. How many other films have entered public conscience like this one? I see references to 2001 quite often. Just recently saw a commercial for some golf tournament; I think they were calling it "2003: A Golf Odyssey", with "ALSO SPRACH ZARATHUSTRA" playing (what else?). The parodies, imitatons, & references are uncountable. Even people who dislike the film never forget it. I think that speaks volumes.

Easily, one of the greatest films ever made.

I watched it last night, and enjoyed it but I fell asleep about an hour and a half into it. It is just one of those very relaxing movies, but since I taped it, I'll try to watch it in incraments.

Masterpiece, no question about it.

Still one of my favorite movies. I feel that it can't be judged on the same merits as a conventional narrative film - it's poetry.