Is 2010 Worth Watching?
Answer: Yes, 2010 is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Thriller movies.
It features a runtime of 116 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to general audiences.

Verdict:2010 is a confirmed HIT based on our analysis of audience ratings and box office momentum.
With a rating of 6.6/10, it has delivered a mixed experience for fans of the Thriller, Science Fiction genre.
Answer: Yes, 2010 is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Thriller movies.
It features a runtime of 116 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to general audiences.
Last updated: January 18, 2026
Released in the dynamic cinematic landscape of 1984, 2010 emerges as a significant entry in the Thriller, Science Fiction domain. The narrative core of the film focuses on a sophisticated exploration of While planet Earth poises on the brink of nuclear self-destruction, a team of Russian and American scientists aboard the Leonov hurtles to a rendezvous with the still-orbiting Discovery spacecraft and its sole known survivor, the homicidal computer HAL. Unlike standard genre fare, 2010 attempts to deconstruct traditional tropes, offering a conventional take on its central themes.
The success of any Thriller is often anchored by its ensemble, and 2010 features a noteworthy lineup led by Roy Scheider . Supported by the likes of John Lithgow and Helen Mirren , the performances bring a palpable realism to the scripted words.
Performance Analysis: While the cast delivers competent and professional performances, they are occasionally hampered by a script that leans into familiar archetypes.
In summary, our editorial assessment of 2010 (1984) is mixed. With an audience rating of 6.6/10, it stands as a highly recommended experience for genre enthusiasts.
Quick Plot Summary: 2010 is a Thriller, Science Fiction film that builds tension through unpredictable twists and keeps audiences guessing until the final reveal. This summary provides a scannable look at the movie's central conflict and narrative structure.
The plot weaves a complex web of mystery and suspense. While planet Earth poises on the brink of nuclear self-destruction, a team of Russian and American scientists aboard the Leonov hurtles to a rendezvous with the still-orbiting Discovery spacecraft and its sole known survivor, the homicidal computer HAL. Information is revealed strategically, keeping viewers engaged as they piece together clues alongside the protagonist. The narrative maintains momentum through well-timed revelations and unexpected turns.
Ending Breakdown: 2010 concludes its story with a mix of closure and open interpretation. The finale presents its approach to thriller resolution.
The final reveal recontextualizes earlier scenes, offering viewers material for post-viewing discussion.
The final moments of 2010 reflect the filmmakers' creative choices, offering an ending that aligns with the film's tone and style.
Worth Watching If You:
| Metric / Region | Collection (Approx) |
|---|---|
| Production Budget | $28.0M |
| Worldwide Gross | $40.4M |
| Trade Verdict | CLEAN HIT |
The estimated production budget for 2010 is $28.0M. This figure covers principal photography, talent acquisitions, and visual effects. When accounting for global marketing and distribution, the break-even point is typically 2x the base production cost.










Amazon VideoAnalyzing the audience sentiment, IMDb rating of 6.6/10, and global collection metrics, 2010 stands as a successful venture for the creators. It remains an essential piece of the 1984 cinematic year.
2010 has received mixed reviews with a 6.6/10 rating, making it a moderate success with the audience.
2010 is a mixed bag. It might be worth watching if you're a fan of Thriller, Science Fiction movies, but read reviews first.
2010 may be available for rent or purchase on digital platforms like Apple TV, Google Play, or Amazon Prime Video. Specific streaming availability can vary by country.
_**Another trip to Jupiter to find answers**_ After the mysterious failure of the Discovery One mission to Jupiter in 2001, Dr. Heywood Floyd (Roy Scheider) resigned his position as head of the National Council for Astronautics. Several years later, the Soviets send the spacecraft Leonov & crew to Jupiter along with three Americans, including Floyd, to help investigate Discovery and the malfunction of the vessel's sentient computer, HAL 9000. Keir Dullea returns as the missing astronaut David Bowman while Helen Mirren plays the captain of the Leonov. Bob Balaban and John Lithgow also appear as the other two American astronauts. "2010: The Year We Make Contact" (1984) is realistic science-fiction that’s less artsy and more dramatically compelling compared to its predecessor, “2001: A Space Odyssey” (1968). That doesn’t make it better, of course, just different. “2001” raised questions while this one provides answers, which some people inevitably won’t like. The questions include: Why did HAL malfunction? What was the real reason for Discovery's original mission, unknown to Floyd? What happened to Bowman? What is the purpose of the colossal monolith orbiting Jupiter? Both films compliment and counterbalance each other. This one’s more of a straightforward space adventure in the near future. Unlike Star Wars, which is space fantasy, “2010” is space-oriented adult science-fiction. Star Trek is too, but “2010” is far more realistic, which I appreciate. In other words, don’t expect any Klingons or spacecraft dogfights. This is more along the lines of “Mission to Mars” (2000) and “The Martian” (2015). The film runs 1 hours, 56 minutes. GRADE: B
A much more standard affair compared to its predecessor. Given that's the case, I honestly enjoyed this more than '2001: A Space Odyssey' - if only because it's more closer to what I'd personally want from a film than what that 1968 flick offers, which is moreso an attempted art piece. Of course, the original does things visibly and audibly far, far greater than this 1984 release - just plot-wise, this is better in my opinion. That's not to say that '2010' is something I'd consider great, because I wouldn't. It is, though, solid sci-fi fare, one I had a decent time watching. I'm not a fan of recasts, but Roy Scheider does a good job in place of William Sylvester as Heywood Floyd. Bob Balaban does well, while it's neat to see John Lithgow and Helen Mirren involved. I'm somewhat surprised (but agreeable) that this has, seemingly, been fairly well received. I was expecting it to be poorly thought of by the majority, as is usually the case for sequels of iconic movies that aren't cut from the same cloth; different director etc.
This analysis is compiled by our editorial experts using multi-source verification and audience sentiment data for maximum accuracy.



Explore the full watch order, ratings, and collection details.
View Full Franchise