I do not agree with people saying this is a bad movie. It's true you see some anachronisms, but Nicolaescu isn't Ridley Scott, he couldn't just empty the streets of Prague, it isn't easy nowdays, without Ceausescu to support him :-))). It's true this is not like the old Comissar Moldovan series, but it is not intended to be like the old ones. People who expect this to be like the classic, are generally deceived. It is wrong to expect this as this is not the purpouse of the movie. This is more an art movie than an action one. It tells some stories using flashbacks and insists on the characters rather than the action. This is what I like the most. This movie bring together the old actors and the new ones, the only one who doesn't fit in this movie is Loredana. I can't believe she wastes 15 minutes of this movie. Whatever, ignore her ... and you'll do just fine. Most of all I like the beginning and end of the movie, specific to Nicolaescu's style. I'm a person who prefers to see the good side of things so I gave a 8/10 mark.
The romantic side of Milla Jovovich and a very good performance too.
To be honest, I watched this movie because Milla Jovovich was starring in. And I rediscovered her romantic side, which I was used to from her movies of the 90's. Many of my friends associated her with the movie Resident Evil or the The Fifth Element, saying "Oh, Milla, the one who kicks the bad guys". But Personally I am not a fan of Resident Evil, but I do like a lot The Fith Element and perhaps Ultraviolet. Here in this movie (YSM) Milla played an ordinary girl that is single and tries to win Owen's heart, an ordinary, yet naive, young man. She does it so well that we almost believe it really happened to her, and all her emotional feelings are so well expressed. Sometimes is not that easy playing a role that reproduces a real person who can be any of us. So I think some of us would really find ourselves among the characters more or less. This is definitely my favorite Milla Jovovich film. But I hope changing my mind in the future when I'll see a better one.
"2010" was made as a sequel to "2001". Of course Peter Hyams, as many other people, thought it was a great movie that trembled the universe of the SyFi, so a sequel could be successful. Knowing that Kubrick destroyed all material used in the original film for the special effects (spaceship miniatures) in order to prevent anyone from making a second movie, they had to use the man's new best friend, the computer, to reproduce the spaceships. A difficult task, but successfully achieved.
By trying to explain the mystery of 2001, this new movie is obviously inferior to the original one, but doesn't give a wrong explanation. I think that 2001 didn't need a sequel. A Kubrick film is hard or impossible to be continued. And for sure 2010 is more commercial so it's easier to watch. But I am sure that Kubrick hadn't had in mind Europa when he made 2001, so 2010 tries to stick with the reality, with the mystery of Europa's ice ocean, and tries to associate the process of life on Europa with the anomalies in 2001. In fact I think that Hyams did not understand pretty much of the last 20 minutes of 2001: A Space Odyssey, but he brings in a new idea so the movie is saved.