Rating: 
Summary: Where things started to go wrong
Review: I have mixed feelings about this book. Clarke is my favorite science fiction writer and I enjoyed spending more time in the 2001 universe but, in a very real way, there should never have been a sequel to 2001. 2001 ends with the next evolutionary leap for mankind. This book - and all the others that follow - are merely an anti-climax and they belittle the importance of the first book. I don't think that Clarke himself understood the importance of the first story. All the successive books make you think, "Well, what was the point." All the Starchild can think of doing in this story is to start creation all over again on Europa. Why? What's the point? What about Earth? Clarke sidestepped all the important questions from the first novel for the rest of the series. I mean really, who cares about character developement? Also, an annoying trait that he has is that each novel disregards what happened in each of the previous novels: in the first book, Bowman goes to Saturn, in the second, we pretend that it was Jupiter so it can be more like the movie. In the end, this book turns out to be a pleasant but forgettable read. I do not view the events described as what "really" happened after 2001. I think the Starchild could have come up with a few better ideas.
Rating:
Summary: A good book.....sheds some light
Review: This isn't the best book i've ever read, but I liked where Clarke took the storyline. It kind of spoils the mystery of 2001, but at the same time (after reading the entire series) I got the feeling that Clarke himself didn't truly know where to take this storyline. I would recommend this book if you are interested in the storyline, but I don't recommend reading past this one. The last two are a waste of time, and don't add to the story whatsoever.
Rating:
Summary: Very Good, But Somehow Forgettable
Review: When I read this book right after it came out, I remember thinking that it was well-written, coherent, followed a rational progression from its predecessor, and created vivid mental imagery. At that time, I would probably have given it four, or possibly even five, stars.So, how come I cannot remember any of it? I certainly remember 2001, but that might be because of the movie. However, I read, enjoyed, and clearly remember the entire "Rama" series. The only thing that I can think of is that this book is technically very good, but just has nothing wonderful or spectacular about it. The "Rama" series left me with indelible memories. Neither 2010 nor 2061 did so.
Rating:
Summary: Very good; but not as good as 2001
Review: 2010: Odyssey Two is a very good book. It is not, however, of the same caliber as 2001: A Space Odyssey. 2001 is a thought provoking, philosophical novel which raises issues such as the nature and origin of mankind, the difference between man and artificial intelligence, extra-terrestrial life, etc while 2010 mainly deals with war and the nature of politics (not quite as interesting to me). I would recommend this book to any true science fiction fan but don't expect it to be as good as 2001.
Rating: 
Summary: Truly great Sci-Fi
Review: Wow. No way a sequel to one of history's best sci-fi novels, one of history's best movies, can be just as good, just as engrossing, but 2010 absolutely is. Clarke returns us to the bizarre frontier town of Jupiter, with the monolith floating in orbit so quietly you can hear yourself go mad. Instead of conflict between man and machine as in 2001, there is an uneasy tension between Russians and Americans (although without the Cold War hints of the movie version). Personal conflict serves to distract you until Clarke can slip in the most outrageous, mind-blowing, enlightening, and downright uplifting :) climax of any work of fiction, written or performed. If you haven't read the book or seen the movie yet, I won't ruin it for you, although I will recommend watching the movie first, which I prefer for it's better sense of timing and suspense. As usual, Clarke injects some first class science into his fiction, skirting the edge of real and unreal so skillfully you can't help but be carried way by this world which was supposed to have been happening this very moment.
Rating: 
Summary: Towards the Shrine of the Gods
Review: This, the second book in the Space Odyssey saga, is a fine return to the universe Arthur C. Clarke created with "2001", only this time we are not allowed to travel to the far reaches of space and reality itself, but to stay at the vicinity of the silent and enigmatic giant monolith. 2010 is a book very different to 2001 in nature, although the main idea remains the same, but unlike the previous chapter in the saga, this book is not without flaws. To be honest, it only has one single failure: The location of the monolith. Clarke explains this happens due the fact that mostly everyone is familiar with the movie's (2001) setting, while the book's location is left somewhere in oblivion. Although it was quite nice from Mr Clarke's part to write a whole book, that was the logical follow up of the previous, based on the settings of the original movie to make things easier for the ones who were not familiar with the original book, 2010 remains a sequel of 2001 the book, not the movie, and should have occurred on the original settings. But taking this aside, this is a great story and highly recommended
Rating:
Summary: Very good book, but believe it or not, the movie was better
Review: Having recently rewatched the under-rated Peter Hyams adpatation while also reading a book of Clarke's essays, I was inspired to read this. Clarke is one of the most accomplished and intelligent science fiction writers around, a man whose work is very heavy on what's possible and thankfully light on psuedo-science. But this book, while very entertaining and readable, lacks very much in the way of tension. Oddly, adding the now-dated Cold War subplot to the film was what this book needed to really move. Is it fair to compare book to film when each has a slightly different goal? Probably not, but the film points out that Clarke is a science writer as much as he is a fiction writer. The meticulous care he takes with facts slows the book down in a few places, and lack of tension creates as happy a family aboard the Leonov as you could find on the Enterprise. Clarke is such an utopian that his world could be a little duller than we would want for fiction. That said, this is still a fun and intelligent novel which offers a realistic vision of the future, and which helps make some sense of the incomprehensible final 15 minutes of Kubrick's bizarre masterwork.. What's more, I might even try to read the original 2001 novel to see if Clarke can do with words what Kubrick fails to do with 3 hours of slow-moving pictures.
Rating:
Summary: Clarke at his best
Review: 2001: A Space Odyssey was written at a time when the outer planets of our solar system were only known as fuzzy discs, and their satelites as tiny dots of light. Arthur C. Clarke had to rely on his imagination to create the evocative outer solar-system vistas of 2001. This all changed when the Voyager probes flew past Jupiter in 1979, and the world marveled at the magnificent views of the Jovian system they beamed back to Earth. The dynamic, colorful atmosphere of Jupiter itself, the newly discovered Jovian ring system, the active volcanoes of Io, and the icy worlds of Europa, Ganymede and Callisto inspired the imaginations of millions, including Clarke's. It was time for Clarke to write what his fans had been waiting for for over a decade: a sequel to 2001 that would finally answer the many questions that 2001 had left unresolved, among them, why did HAL fail, and what happened to Dave Bowman? Often, sequels turn out to be little more than just dull rehashs of the original work, but not this time. 2010 is as fresh and breathtaking as the first part, and, as we have come to expect from Clarke, is packed with surprises, plot twists and awe-inspiring revelations. The technically sophisticated reader will enjoy discussions of orbital mechanics, as well as richer character development and more complex social interactions than those in the previous work. To my knowledge, this is the book where Clarke started to add gay or bisexual characters on a regular basis, and I cannot praise him enough for that. In the early 1980s, a bold statement like this took courage and moral integrity, and by making this statement, Clarke established himself as a social visionary, as well as a scientific one. Unlike the movie adaptation, 2010 is a worthy successor to 2001, and a must-read for anyone who has enjoyed the original novel or movie.
Rating:
Summary: The Best Sequel Ever!
Review: This is, in my opinion, the best sequel ever written. Most sequels are just poorly written cash-ins on a successful first book, but this is different. It is just as good as, and perhaps superior to (yes! you read that right) 2001. However, you MUST read 2001 before you read this, it is not really meant to stand on it's own. If you have read that awesome book (and/or seen the awesome movie) then this will be a real treat for you. Many of the questions left unanswered in 2001 (the whole monolith thing, the ending, etc.) are explained or partially explained here (somewhat to the chagrin, one might think, of Kubrick). This is simply a tour-de-force of fiction, it is at once technical and yet hard to put down. The descriptions of the various parts of the solar system (particularly Jupiter) are great, and leave one yearning for more. That said, what really makes this book shine is the awesome ending, which is, I belive, the best ending I have read in any book ever, (and in view of the next two good but not great Odyssey books, almost makes one wish that Clarke had ended the series here). I gurantee you it is not what you expect, and if you try to guess it (as I did) by the title of the last chapter you will be thrown off. It is a very poetic ending, a la Childhood's End. Okay, enough of my preaching, JUST READ IT.
Rating:
Summary: A creative masterpiece by Arthur C. Clarke
Review: This book was an incredible and amazing journey through the solar system and the mind. A worthy succesor to 2001, and a creative adventure about the possiblity of life elsewhere. For me, the most intriguing aspect of this novel pertained to it presenting a new and different perspective on the thought of man and even a controlled outcome. A great book and movie.
|
