Rating: 
Summary: One of his better books
Review: I started reading 2010 right after finishing 2001, which was confusing because many of the details were different. Instead of being on one of Saturn's moons, the black monolith is suddenly orbiting Jupiter. There were a few other details that were jarring. Clarke explains in the beginning that he decided to base 2010 on the movie 2001 instead of the book, which makes it tough for us readers to keep things straight.That said, however, I have to admit that I loved the book. One of the things I loved most about it was the imagery. The descriptions of Jupiter, Io, and Europa made me run to the library to try to find more books about these heavenly bodies. Clarke made the appearance of life on Jupiter and Europa seem highly plausible, even probable, and I was intrigued by the shapes this life took. At one point Dave Bowman reappears to warn the crew of impending danger. I thought that was a nice human touch, and I especially liked the way Dave was able to visit Earth and say goodbye to people and places he had loved. I would recommend reading 2001 first; I didn't feel like 2010 was a stand-alone novel.
Rating: 
Summary: It doesn't get any better than this!!!
Review: 2001 is one of the greatest novels written by Arthur C. Clarke but 2010 is even greater. It is perhaps the best of them all! Before I read this book I had strongly suspected that it would be a weak attempt to follow up on one the greatest sci-fi stories ever written but I was mistaken. Fortunately, because this novel explains much of the stuff from 2001 which weren't that clear in the first place all the while it expands the odyssey universe to an extend that is even greater in scope than in the first novel. The only negative thing there is to say is that the first half of the novel is a bit technical. Some of the things going on can be a bit tedious I think but this is entirely made up for in the second half which, for my part, is probably the best work of fiction I have ever read! Clarke's imagination is apparently infinite and it is no wonder that he has recieved the status of both guru and prophet.
Rating:
Summary: A Book that is Appeciated Differently by Different Readers
Review: =====> This 1982 book (that consists of 55 chapters plus an epilog), by Sir Arthur C. Clarke (who "said for years that [a sequel] was clearly impossible"), is really a hybrid book since it attempts not only to be a sequel to his previous novel ("2001: A Space Odyssey," published in 1968) but also attempts to be a sequel to the 1968 movie (also called "2001: A Space Odyssey"). In this novel, a joint Russian-American space mission is sent to the planet Jupiter (on the spaceship called "Cosmonaut Alexei Leonov") to try and discover what happened to the previous American spaceship (called "Discovery") that was sent previously in 2001. As well, Leonov's crew is "to locate the alien artifact [also called the monolith] encountered by Discovery, and to investigate it to the maximum extent possible." Because this book attempts to be a sequel to the previous novel and the 1968 movie, it appeals to four different types of readers: (i) those who have not read the previous novel and have not seen the 1968 movie
(ii) those who have read the previous novel only
(iii) those who have seen the 1968 movie only and
(iv) those who have read the previous novel and have seen the 1968 movie (as I have). Each of these four types of readers will probably rate this book as follows: (1) Those who have not read the previous movie or have not seen the 1968 movie will enjoy this novel. Reading the previous novel or seeing the 1968 movie is not needed to understand this novel. There is good character interaction and there is both known and speculative space science throughout. (Examples of speculative science include the idea that gas giant planets such as Jupiter may have diamond cores and there may be aerial life forms in Jupiter's atmosphere.) There are excellent descriptions of Jupiter and its moons (especially of the moons Io and Europa). As well, this novel's climax (that occurs in chapter 52) is exciting and unexpected. These readers will probably give the novel a 5 star rating. (Note that these positive comments will apply to the other types of readers indicated below.) (2) The reader who has read the previous novel only will notice some differences that interfere with the continuity from the previous novel. For example, Discovery is no longer orbiting one of planet Saturn's moons but is now orbiting one of Jupiter's moons. (No explanation for this is given.) Instead of the monolith being on one of Saturn's moons, it is now in orbit around one of Jupiter's moons. (Again, no explanation for this is given.) As well, the mystery and awe of the previous novel is replaced with the straightforwardness of this novel. Many of the questions left open in the previous novel are now answered. These readers might give this novel 3 1/2 stars. (3) Fans of the 1968 movie will have a stronger sense of continuity after reading this book than those who have only read the previous novel. However, they may not recognize some of the dialogue that was said to exist (since it appeared in the previous novel only.) The overwhelming mystery and awe of the movie is replaced with the straightforwardness of this novel. However, many of the questions left open in the movie are now answered. These readers will perhaps give this novel 4 stars. (4) Those who have read the previous novel and have seen the 1968 movie might be a bit confused since they have to contend with what has been said in (2) and (3) above. But with some reflection, they should be able to sort out this confusion. Possible rating by these readers: 4 stars. As mentioned in (1) above, there is quite a bit of true and speculative space science throughout this book. Thus, this book would have different appeal to yet two more types of readers: (5) Those without space knowledge. Such readers, I believe, would find this novel fascinating. These readers would probably give the novel 5 stars. (6) Those with some space knowledge. These readers would also be intrigued with the novel especially the speculative space science. However, they would be very dissappointed with the novel's climax (in chapter 52). For this climax to occur, there would have to be sufficient mass (which there isn't). Further, if this does occur (and it does in the novel), the novel would have to abruptly end since the spaceships (Discovery and Leonov) and Jupiter's moons would be instantly incinerated. Possible rating by these readers: 3 stars. The average of the above six ratings is 4 stars. Finally, there is the 1984 movie called "2010: The Year We Make Contact." It is a straightforward, traditional science fiction movie. You don't have to read this book to understand this movie. In conclusion, this novel as Carl Sagan says is "a worthy successor to 2001." It appeals in different ways to different people. <=====>
Rating:
Summary: 2010: Odyssey Two
Review: This very engrossing sequel to 2001 once again brings us to the distant planet of Jupiter (now the second sun in our solar system). Although most sequels do not measure up to their predecessors, 2010 exceeded all my expectations for a follow up. I was taken to the outer reaches once again through the wonderful prose of Arthur C. Clarke. I felt like a child again full of wonder and imagination as I read this book! After a while, the printed words became a blur and it felt as though I was actually there experiencing the thrills along with the explorers! Thanks Mr. Clarke for giving me my imagination I thought was lost after I "grew up". I guess youre never too old to imagine! To all who have enjoyed 2001 or any other SF work, you will definately enjoy 2010: Odyssey Two!
Rating:
Summary: Almost as good as 2001
Review: It is rare that a sequel is accorded as much credit as the first book in a series. This book is one of those rare events. Like my review for 2001, I do not choose to re-hash the plot or repeat what other reviewers have said. I just want to add a few thoughts. 1) The focus of 2001 was Saturn -- a focus which did not survive even into the movie. 2010 is more of a sequel to the movie than to the novel. 2) The character focus is shifted to Dr. Heywood Floyd -- an important but relatively minor character in the first book, but essential in making this book "work". The side-plot which concerns the effect a multi-year space voyage has on his marriage demonstrates a real problem which will have to be addressed when such extended space travel become possible. 3) Like in 2001, it is interesting to see the "Cold War" politics from a distance of several decades. Things sure turned out differently than Dr. Clarke expected, didn't they?! 4) Several "loose ends" are tied up in such a manner as to give the reader a view into the development of David Bowman from "childhood" to some level of maturity -- as well as the discussing the emotional needs of someone who has suddenly found himself to be (more or less) immortal. 5) Again, Clarke's "theology" comes through -- even more developed than in 2001. It is a theology based entirely on secular humanism and the evolution of Mind -- if necessary, to the exclusion of all else. But like the previous book, hints of transcendence still manage to shine through -- a terrifying notion for the true humanist! One begins to wonder if Clarke is trying to convince himself as well as the reader! Regardless, an excellent read and a good follow-up.
Rating:
Summary: What's up with EPCOT?
Review: In this case, I'd say that the film is better than the book. I have a few complaints about the book. It bothers me that Clarke caved to the plot of the movie, 2001, and removed the whole bit about going to Saturn from Jupiter. It leaves his first book standing alone. Books and movies diverge all the time and he should have just stuck to his original storyline for the sequels. My second complaint: what's up with the EPCOT retirement home? It's a completely hokey idea and distracting from the overall flow of the story.
Rating:
Summary: Better Than 2001
Review: This book is the sequel to 2001: A Space Oddysey, and is, in my opinion, a superior book. First, to clarify: this is not a sequel to the novel 2001, rather it is a sequel to the movie. If you do not watch the movie you might get lost. This book is superior to its predecessor because of its pacing and greater level of wonder and suspense. While 2001 grabbed my interest, it moved a little slow. 2010 starts quickly and doesn't stop until the last page. This book begins with the launch of LEONOV, a Russian Space Ship with an important mission: to rendezvous with DISCOVERY and find the invaluable information contained in its computer banks. There is trouble from the start: a Chinese vessel has beat them to Jupiter, presumably to view the invaluable information for themselves. The vessel is destroyed on Europa, a moon on Jupiter. Meanwhile, Dave Bowman, now a being of pure energy, returns to Earth, effectively as a probe, to find out about the planet. He makes contact with an old girlfriend and his mother, then he returns to his old ship, DISCOVERY. I could not stop reading this exciting and compelling novel and cannot wait to read the final two of the series, although I have heard that they are subpar.
Rating:
Summary: Better than the origianl novel?
Review: This is a very difficult review to write. Why? Well, before I get down to it, let me say that the film version of "2001" SHOULD HAVE BEEN the only story released. No books, No sequels! (One of the main reasons for this is that I prefer mystery over the always "too easy" answers. For example, I'd rather always wonder why HAL did what he did, rather than have them tell me). In spite of all that, this is actually a pretty good book. The creepy manner in which the often overrated Clarke deals with the fate of the Tsien journey is astounding, to say the least.( I wish this would have been done in the otherwise good movie version). The main part of the book, the journey to Jupiter, is made interesting by the fascinating characters and the growing animosity between them. Not to mention thenice way the tension in Dr. Floyd's family is handled. But,I have one more tiny problem with the book. Since the novel version of "2001" dealt with a mission to Saturn, shouldn't the novel version of "2010" have done the same? Instead of Europa and Io, they could have explored Japetus and Titan? It wouldn't really change the story but would have kept the continuity.(Again another minor failing by Clarke). Conclusion: yes, as far as the novels go "2010" is better than "2001." Clarke's "2001" severly "dumbed down" Kubrick's great story. In "2010: Odyssey Two," however, he puts together a decent Sci-Fi story.
Rating:
Summary: The Best SF book I have ever read
Review: Although, it is part of a sequel, anyone could read it in the beginning. It's a great story and very well-written. And the ending is superb - with a philosophical touch. A MUST read for any reader.
Rating:
Summary: A Book that is Appeciated Differently by Different Readers
Review: =====> This 1982 book (that consists of 55 chapters plus an epilog), by Sir Arthur C. Clarke (who "said for years that [a sequel] was clearly impossible"), is really a hybrid book since it attempts not only to be a sequel to his previous novel ("2001: A Space Odyssey," published in 1968) but also attempts to be a sequel to the 1968 movie (also called "2001: A Space Odyssey"). In this novel, a joint Russian-American space mission is sent to the planet Jupiter (on the spaceship called "Cosmonaut Alexei Leonov") to try and discover what happened to the previous American spaceship (called "Discovery") that was sent previously in 2001. As well, Leonov's crew is "to locate the alien artifact [also called the monolith] encountered by Discovery, and to investigate it to the maximum extent possible." Because this book attempts to be a sequel to the previous novel and the 1968 movie, it appeals to four different types of readers: (i) those who have not read the previous novel and have not seen the 1968 movie
(ii) those who have read the previous novel only
(iii) those who have seen the 1968 movie only and
(iv) those who have read the previous novel and have seen the 1968 movie (as I have). Each of these four types of readers will probably rate this book as follows: (1) Those who have not read the previous movie or have not seen the 1968 movie will enjoy this novel. Reading the previous novel or seeing the 1968 movie is not needed to understand this novel. There is good character interaction and there is both known and speculative space science throughout. (Examples of speculative science include the idea that gas giant planets such as Jupiter may have diamond cores and there may be aerial life forms in Jupiter's atmosphere.) There are excellent descriptions of Jupiter and its moons (especially of the moons Io and Europa). As well, this novel's climax (that occurs in chapter 52) is exciting and unexpected. These readers will probably give the novel a 5 star rating. (Note that these positive comments will apply to the other types of readers indicated below.) (2) The reader who has read the previous novel only will notice some differences that interfere with the continuity from the previous novel. For example, Discovery is no longer orbiting one of planet Saturn's moons but is now orbiting one of Jupiter's moons. (No explanation for this is given.) Instead of the monolith being on one of Saturn's moons, it is now in orbit around one of Jupiter's moons. (Again, no explanation for this is given.) As well, the mystery and awe of the previous novel is replaced with the straightforwardness of this novel. Many of the questions left open in the previous novel are now answered. These readers might give this novel 3 1/2 stars. (3) Fans of the 1968 movie will have a stronger sense of continuity after reading this book than those who have only read the previous novel. However, they may not recognize some of the dialogue that was said to exist (since it appeared in the previous novel only.) The overwhelming mystery and awe of the movie is replaced with the straightforwardness of this novel. However, many of the questions left open in the movie are now answered. These readers will perhaps give this novel 4 stars. (4) Those who have read the previous novel and have seen the 1968 movie might be a bit confused since they have to contend with what has been said in (2) and (3) above. But with some reflection, they should be able to sort out this confusion. Possible rating by these readers: 4 stars. As mentioned in (1) above, there is quite a bit of true and speculative space science throughout this book. Thus, this book would have different appeal to yet two more types of readers: (5) Those without space knowledge. Such readers, I believe, would find this novel fascinating. These readers would probably give the novel 5 stars. (6) Those with some space knowledge. These readers would also be intrigued with the novel especially the speculative space science. However, they would be very dissappointed with the novel's climax (in chapter 52). For this climax to occur, there would have to be sufficient mass (which there isn't). Further, if this does occur (and it does in the novel), the novel would have to abruptly end since the spaceships (Discovery and Leonov) and Jupiter's moons would be instantly incinerated. Possible rating by these readers: 3 stars. The average of the above six ratings is 4 stars. Finally, there is the 1984 movie called "2010: The Year We Make Contact." It is a straightforward, traditional science fiction movie. You don't have to read this book to understand this movie. In conclusion, this novel as Carl Sagan says is "a worthy successor to 2001." It appeals in different ways to different people. <=====>
| 
