i just watched this movie a couple days ago on cable. it’s a decent sequel in a ‘cold war commentary’ kind of way (my son really liked it, whereas he finds ‘2001’ a huge snooze — kids!); i think hyams wisely chose not to try to precisely recreate kubrick’s aesthetic and go with his own brand of space drama/adventure while retaining some of the flavour of the original classic (dullea and rain, yay!), i’m not sure how others feel about it but i think it works quite well
For a sequel to a film that one could never imagine being sequelized — and by Peter Hyams — it’s amazing it turned out as decent as it did. I like the fact that it’s a perostroika-era 80’s film, so the Russians are not the Reagan bad guys. Of course, it’s very 80’s in that it makes HAL a hero and has a straight-forward narrative. And Roy Scheider.
i love you guys. i feel all alone when i say i actually prefer this sequel to the first one. i know it sounds crazy. but : the 80’s, the narrative, the amazing fall in space, the overall look and feel, the soundtrack… gee, i m a 80’s guy, i m all about the eighties… this movie is just superb, in all its modesty. for the first time, a lack of scope is giving strength to something that could have been just another hyams space opera. of course, the movie would not work without the abstract first part, and it does a great job of “rationalizing” everything, giving it a sense of truth and reality.
and yes, roy scheider….
it was a bit of an overstatement ahaha. i really love 2001, it s so beautiful ;) but i think both movies work together, in order to have a good sense of the “metaphysical” experience of the concept, we need both ends of the spectrum. clarke got it right. call that my somewhat sci-fi roots. in the end, i saw 2010 more times than 2001, because i guess it’s easier to watch in one seating…
I saw this in Atlanta on a GIANT screen when it was first released & liked it quite a bit. I haven’t seen it since (tough to replicate that experience), but if I did watch it again it would be for the great Roy Scheider.
That space walk was an amazing thing to see on the big screen. I’m surprised the New Beverly didn’t have this scheduled 1/1/10.
I enjoyed this sequel when I first saw it in ’82. Yes, I didn’t have the same reaction as I had with 2001, but I was entertained and really enjoyed the cast (and I agree, “…Keir Dullea is genuinely wonderful in it.”). Well, Clark had no issue in sequelizing his work in books: 2010: Odyssey Two, 2061: Odyssey Three, and 3001: The Final Odyssey. Fun post, christian. Thanks.
Yeah! Let’s hear it or Ellison. Love ol’ uncle Harlan and his brilliant short stories. I’m an even bigger fan of his essays – HARLAN ELLISON’S WATCHING and the HORNBOOK are some of my fave stuff by him.
THE FUTURIST! watched this at his annual New Year’s Eve Way Past Midnight Movie Event with friends. This and STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE (inspired by Technicolor Dreams and Mr. Peel) … THE FUTURIST! found it a bit tepid and the excuses for HAL’s nastiness seemed disappointing. When THE FUTURIST! first saw this in 1984, the film broke during its presentation … refunds were given and THE FUTURIST! never went back. He finally saw it all last week. He likes Peter Hyams’ OUTLAND.
Unrepentant Peter Hyams fan here… He’s kind of regarded as a hack these days, and his last few movies have been TERRIBLE — especially The Musketeer, though Sound of Thunder and Beyond a Reasonable Doubt were good for a few inadvertant chuckles.
But I liked his ’70s-through-early ’90s run of B-movie potboilers: Capricorn One, Outland, Star Chamber, 2010, Running Scared, Presidio, Narrow Margin, Timecop, etc. Always kind of cold, chilly, murky and gray, almost always in glorious 2.35:1 with his trademark hazy lighting schemes and too-dark interiors and occasional red-light sequences. He kind of OD’d on that stuff as he went on, as critics frequently complain you can’t even SEE his images half the time, but still always thought it was neat he’d shoot most of his own films. Doesn’t make him a wild-man auteur, per se, but with his ex-newsman, just-the-facts vibe and coldly stylish, borderline TV movie aesthetic, he can be a better craftsman than his unfair reputation suggests.
THE RELIC was also pretty good, by late-hyams standards. not as good as the book, but a solid monster munch. too bad hyams he s considered a hack now. there was a golden age of the hollywood craftman (in some way, we can consider joe johnston as a late-heir to that caste).
Yeah, I dig THE RELIC as well — definitely my fave thing Hyams has ever done. As you say, it’s a solid monster movie with Tom Sizemore being pretty good as the cop investigating things-that-go-bump-in-the-night at a museum. And for a change Penelope Ann Miller didn’t annoy the hell out of me.
Brilliant distillation of Hyman’s style, Lex. I respect his obvious genre ardor but there’s something about his filmmaking that just lacks rhythm or something. I probably love OUTLAND the best mainly because it’s one of Sean Connery’s great screen performances. But the movie is enormous dumb. As Ellison points out in his razor-stropping of the film, his audience boo’d when the gunman blows a hole in the outer space greenhouse — as did mine. And one of Arnie’s final lesser glories, END OF DAYS, looks like it was shot in 1984.
But CAPRICORN ONE is good fun and the helicopter chase is a firecracker. When Cinefantastique reviewed the film, the reviewer said, “No film with Telly Savals as a cropduster pilot should be taken seriously.” But he’s pretty funny in it.
‘the relic’ is great b-monster movie fun but i think they shot themselves in the foot excising FBI agent pendergast from the page to screen adaptation with a ready-made detective franchise in the making with ‘reliquary’, ‘cabinet of curiosities’, ‘brimstone’, etc. following the terrifically macabre adventures of agent pendergast and detective d’augusta, a bit of a modern day twist on sherlock holmes and watson.
at any rate, i have a huge soft spot for hyam’s ‘narrow margin’; i admit to a serious weakness for flicks set on trains to begin with but ‘NM’ is well shot and clever, and hackman and archer are great together, love that movie
they did kill the franchise, maybe pendergast was way too borderline for hollywood… it wasn’t the only thing they missed from this awesome book *spoilers ahead* – i think of the old professor and his wheelchair who comes back in a very important position in the book sequel, reliquary.
perdergast, d’agosta (mangled the spelling of his name horribly in my earlier comment), frock, margo, smithback, ‘reliquary’ is a terrific continuation of the story and could have been a wonderfully macabre sequel with the underground settings and creatures…oh well, i guess it just wasn’t meant to be. pendergast lives on in print!