I find this whole thread of discussion fascinating. I'm kind of shocked though that no one has mentioned Frankenstein. I guess there are those who might claim it is some other genre than science fiction, but I feel it is the quintessential sci-fi and perhaps the awesome mother of all sci fi. The theme of how far should science tread, the horrific terror, the mixing of religion and science, the great special effects (which surely must have given HR Geiger some nightmares as as a kid and inspired him as an adult),....what more can you ask! The original story was developed at a time when modern science was just beginning to develop. Though there were certainly other sci-fi movies prior to Frankenstein, such as Metropolis, which had tremendous influence, Frankenstein captures the "mythos" of science fiction almost completely. Look around and you'll discover Frankenstein's monsters all over the place. The machines in the Matrix and the Terminator--creations of science that are monsters--are just some of the progeny of Frankenstein.

Read through the thread and nobody named Pleasantville. To me, this is the best sci-fi ever because it's the best use of an alternate universe to critique our own. Absolutely brilliant directing.

quote:

Originally posted by cari:
Read through the thread and nobody named Pleasantville. To me, this is the best sci-fi ever because it's the best use of an alternate universe to critique our own. Absolutely brilliant directing.

I love Pleasantville, but I've never thought of it as a sci-fi movie. You make a good point though.

I also think Pleasantville was a good film, but it was not even remotely sci-fi. It's a Wonderful Life and The Wizard of Oz also do a great jobs of presenting an alternate universe through which to critique our own. Fictions depicting alternate universes have always been around...long before science ever came about. The idea of alternate universes is central to fiction...perhaps the essence of fiction. All fictional worlds are alternates of the real world. I think what makes Pleasantville or It's a Wonderful Life so cool is that the universes they present are not just alternate but are also symmetrical or parallel to the worlds they critique. In the language of Superman Comics or Seinfeld, they present "Bizarro" worlds.

quote:

Dale M. posted:

I find this whole thread of discussion fascinating. I'm kind of shocked though that no one has mentioned Frankenstein. I guess there are those who might claim it is some other genre than science fiction, but I feel it is the quintessential sci-fi and perhaps the awesome mother of all sci fi. The theme of how far should science tread, the horrific terror, the mixing of religion and science, the great special effects (which surely must have given HR Geiger some nightmares as as a kid and inspired him as an adult),....what more can you ask! The original story was developed at a time when modern science was just beginning to develop. Though there were certainly other sci-fi movies prior to Frankenstein, such as Metropolis, which had tremendous influence, Frankenstein captures the "mythos" of science fiction almost completely. Look around and you'll discover Frankenstein's monsters all over the place. The machines in the Matrix and the Terminator--creations of science that are monsters--are just some of the progeny of Frankenstein.

The American Film Institute in its Desk Reference has placed as you have already suggested in the horror genre instead of the science fiction/fantasy genre. They have defined the horror genre as a film whose principal goal is the creation of fear and revulsion while science fiction/fantasy are films whose principal goal is to depict phenomena not yet possible or even possible based on science or myth and imagination with usually an emphasis on adventure. However, your idea of Frankenstein is nevertheless valid and a strong case as you have began can be made.

Pleasantville (1998) can be argued to be one of the more significant, entertaining, and insightful "fantasy" movies of the 1990s because it dealt on several levels of what if - personal, 1950s - cold war, prejudice, love, relationships, siblings. At its core it had several powerful messages delivered in a fascinating and wonderful way.

OK. There is a little known movie that I got recently. And plotwise, and script wise, I truly believe that it is the best movie of all time. Its called Primer. Has anyone else seen it?

quote:

anotherrainyday posted 06 June 2006:

OK. There is a little known movie that I got recently. And plotwise, and script wise, I truly believe that it is the best movie of all time. Its called Primer. Has anyone else seen it?

Yes I managed to rent it last year. Unfortunately, I found the movie overly convoluted and difficult to follow, in part, it seemed to lack the substance that I find interesting and compelling. While there was a lot of scientific talk, it just didn't seem coherent even for a sci fi film. For some reason the movie didn't interest me and the tension wasn't there. Along similar lines Idaho Transfer (1973) has a more simple but interesting storyline with a nice bittersweet twist at the end.

Since it looks like another thread died trying to create a Top Ten Science-Fiction film string, I thought I'd post one here. Especially after someone recently brought up Primer, which blew my mind.

1. Brazil (1985) – Gilliam
2. A Clockwork Orange (1971) – Kubrick
3. Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980) – Kerschner
4. Aliens (1986) – Cameron
5. Blade Runner (1982) – Scott
6. Predator (1987) – McTiernan
7. The Matrix (1999) – Wachowski
8. Videodrome (1983) – Cronenberg
9. Gattaca (1997) – Nicol
10. Primer (2004) – Carruth

For this list, I chose Blade Runner over Alien as my Ridley Scott selection, and Aliens over Terminator 2 as my James Cameron selection, as I think it's unfair to list multiple films by the same director or series -- although I do believe all four deserve recognition. I considered adding one of the Star Trek films or something written by Charlie Kaufman or perhaps a cold war flick like Them!, but I think this collection is stronger without either.

I'd love to hear what other people would put in their Top Tens for the science-fiction genre, however much the line may be blurred between horror, fantasy, and "pure" science-fiction.

quote:

NButler11 Posted 11 July 2006 11:53 AM

Since it looks like another thread died trying to create a Top Ten Science-Fiction film string, I thought I'd post one here. Especially after someone recently brought up Primer, which blew my mind.

1. Brazil (1985) – Gilliam
2. A Clockwork Orange (1971) – Kubrick
3. Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980) – Kerschner
4. Aliens (1986) – Cameron
5. Blade Runner (1982) – Scott
6. Predator (1987) – McTiernan
7. The Matrix (1999) – Wachowski
8. Videodrome (1983) – Cronenberg
9. Gattaca (1997) – Nicol
10. Primer (2004) – Carruth

For this list, I chose Blade Runner over Alien as my Ridley Scott selection, and Aliens over Terminator 2 as my James Cameron selection, as I think it's unfair to list multiple films by the same director or series -- although I do believe all four deserve recognition. I considered adding one of the Star Trek films or something written by Charlie Kaufman or perhaps a cold war flick like Them!, but I think this collection is stronger without either.

I'd love to hear what other people would put in their Top Tens for the science-fiction genre, however much the line may be blurred between horror, fantasy, and "pure" science-fiction.

Your idea that "it's unfair to list multiple films by the same director or series" is a fascinating point of contention because I feel that it's unfair not to list multiple films by the same director or series because a top ten list for me should be based on the product not on the director. If Blade Runner or Alien happen to be better than say Predator, then I believe that its the movie not the person that needs to be credited. Your selection criteria by director is the first I've come across in terms of best "..." movie of all time. By your way of thinking, you list is more about the best sci fi director of all time based on their "single" best movie which feels to be also a bit narrow. I would judge a sci fi director on his or her body of sci fi movie works rather than a single movie. Anyway, that's what I believe.

As to your list, it's a solid one though like every list I don't agree with every movie listed here (but nobody ever seems to agree on everything with such lists).

1. Brazil (1985) – Gilliam. Brazil is #4 on my all time sci fi list. Easily a classic and one of the most unique and innovative movies I've ever experienced. I'm a sucker though for happy endings but I can't fault you for making this number one.

2. A Clockwork Orange (1971) – Kubrick. #9 on my list, this is considered one of the best movie on any type of movie list sci fi or not. It is timeless. The cinematography follows Kubrick's earlier 2001 photographic technique that portends its use in United 93 (2006).

3. Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980) – Kerschner. Personally, I'm not partial to what I consider to be more of space western soap opera as opposed to the more serious hard core sci fi film.

4. Aliens (1986) – Cameron. I've always thought that Aliens was less of an sci fi achievement than a sci fi action thriller hit that relied more of the action genre than sci fi genre and that there were other sci fi movies that have at their core sci fi elements that I consider better than those found in Aliens, the original Alien being one of them.

5. Blade Runner (1982) – Scott. #3 on my list of sci fi movies, again this is a classic sci fi movie recognized by almost all those in the industry (at least in hindsight).

6. Predator (1987) – McTiernan. As with Star Wars, this movie for me was more horror/monster than sci fi and somewhat manipulative, predictable. The very fine distinction between this movie and Alien is one of nuance where the alien in Alien is more organic, believable whereas the Predator is more of a product of human creative minds that I've seen before. But your listing of this movie does raise some definite questions for me about how I approached these types of sci fi movies.

7. The Matrix (1999) – Wachowski. Understandably this movie is a mind-blowing movie with a strong sci fi twist. Surprisely, it didn't make my own top sci fi list. Part of the reason is that my list covers sci fi classics going back to the 1950s.

8. Videodrome (1983) – Cronenberg. More of a horror movie than sci fi for me.

9. Gattaca (1997) – Nicol. While this movie didn't make my list, it was clearly underrated (partially because it was more sci fi than action thriller). I really did enjoy this movie, but again considering the span of 50 years of sci fi movies, I had other more time tested ones in mind. But I'm glas to see this movie on your list.

10. Primer (2004) – Carruth. Didn't like it. Didn't understand it. It bored the heck out of me. Compare Idaho Transfer (1973), a little known time travel pic directed by Peter Fonda. Contains a Blair Witch Project (1999) feel, low-budget but decent script with a surprise ending.

I'm a little confused. Although I agree with you, tabuno, about most of your specific comments, aren't Metropolis, The Invisible Man, Things to Come and The Man Who Could Work Miracles ALL sci-fi films, and damned good too. The fact that they are all at least 70 years old (or 50, or 10) seems irrelevant.

I agree with the majority of the last two posts, actually. I could have easily posted Tabuno's list in a different mood, with the omission of Forbidden Planet, as I simply would rate it that high. I have yet to see Wavelength or The Idaho Transfer, but hopefully I can track them down.

THX, 2001, and 12 Monkeys were extremely close calls for me. If the list would have gone past ten, they would have been the next three listed, but becuase I chose Clockwork, that bumped down 2001 for me. Likewise, Star Wars trumped THX and Brazil edged out 12 Monkeys. I guess I try to abide by those rules simply to spread the wealth and avoid flooding the list with Gilliam, Cameron, Scott, and Kubrick.

I also recognize that my top ten are all from the last 30 years. That's not to say that I haven't seen the other films mentioned, it's to make the statement that I think that the success of a science-fiction film is relative to it's believability. Today's films are superior to older ones in this respect, IMHO. I totally agree with Mark that Metropolis, The Invisible Man, and even something like A Trip to the Moon, which is over 100 years old, are justifiable selections -- I just don't think they hold a candle to something like The Matrix. It's arguabbly an unfair comparison, but as a genre, it's difficult to dispute the fact that as technology improves, the visions that directors are able to create on-screen become much more seemless and real to viewers.

In ten more years, I would bet that my list becomes even more contemporary. Not to mention more controversial, as the line between horror, action, and science-fiction only continues to blur.

quote:

Mark f "Forum Moderator"
Super Bad-Ass Jedi
Posted 13 July 2006

I'm a little confused. Although I agree with you, tabuno, about most of your specific comments, aren't Metropolis, The Invisible Man, Things to Come and The Man Who Could Work Miracles ALL sci-fi films, and damned good too. The fact that they are all at least 70 years old (or 50, or 10) seems irrelevant.

I am embarrassed to admit that I haven't seen Things to Come nor The Man Who Could Work Miracles. As for Metropolis, I've seen bits and pieces over time and I've seen several versions of The Invisible Man. I think there comes a time like with music when generationally speaking a person gets personally attracted to some component of their own time and way of experiencing things. Very old sci fi movies lack certain elements that I grew up with and I am unable to appreciate. While I can acknowledge that Metropolis is considered a sci fi classic, it's hard for me to personally identify with it for its own merits without my own personal bias and preferences in terms of what a movie does for me emotionally. Metropolis is even more starkly mechanical than say Forbidden Planet which is itself pretty tacky nowadays. My list is based more on how the movies on my list impacted me on an emotional level not on a technical level and there are several sci fi themes that resonant for me more than Metropolis and how it was produced.

quote:

NButler11 Participant Posted 14 July 2006

I guess I try to abide by those rules simply to spread the wealth and avoid flooding the list with Gilliam, Cameron, Scott, and Kubrick.

I can't argue with being a democrat or socialist in trying to spread the wealth around. Equal opportunity. I guess I'm becoming a conversative capitalist in my old age.

After writing the list above, I decided to rewatch Alien and Aliens this weekend. Although I defend that they both belong near (if not both in) the Top Ten Sci-Fi movies to date, they seem to lose their edge after the first hour in each. The metaphors of HIV/AIDS in Alien and Vietnam in Aliens grow more undeniable to me each time I view the films, which I really appreciate, but once all of the action starts (especially in Aliens) the craft and message of the two films seems thrown to the wind by the time the credits roll. I swear that Cameron stole a few shots from The Birds in the second film too -- for example, the scene when Hicks peers into the ceiling. I don't know if that's homage or theft.

Not sure what order I'd put them in, but my top 3 are:

The Day the Earth Stood Still
Blade Runner (director's cut)
2001

Contact will always be one of my favorites and is so fun to watch, but is too flawed for reasons already discussed to be a contender. I also love Forbidden Planet, They Live, Dark City. Close Encounters, and The Wrath of Khan. I enjoy most of Croenberg's stuff, but none of it would make my to 10.

One of the few listed I didn't care for was THX-1138. I found it barely watchable.

quote:

NButler11 Posted 17 July 2006 12:58 PM

After writing the list above, I decided to rewatch Alien and Aliens this weekend. Although I defend that they both belong near (if not both in) the Top Ten Sci-Fi movies to date, they seem to lose their edge after the first hour in each. The metaphors of HIV/AIDS in Alien and Vietnam in Aliens grow more undeniable to me each time I view the films, which I really appreciate, but once all of the action starts (especially in Aliens) the craft and message of the two films seems thrown to the wind by the time the credits roll.

I won't dispute your comments about Aliens which I consider a science fiction action thriller western as opposed to the purest piece of science fiction. But as to Alien which I've placed on my top ten movie list, I have watched this movie many, many times and each time I find that even beyond the first hour, there is a strong element of realistic strong performance/acting following the sci fi horror genre without HIV/AIDS connection which I have never come across since I saw Alien when it was first released even before HIV/AIDS became a medical concern. The craft of this movie is never diminished unless you are talking about the Director's Cut which I feel isn't as strong as the threatrical release. The inclusion of the Ashe scenario later in the movie was a strong science fiction theme (along the lines of Westworld (1973)). The best touch of this movie was Sigourney Weaver's female leading role and her decision to go back to look for Jones, her cat.

I don't have any trouble putting the MATRIX(S) aside; I thought the two I saw were terrible.

If I had to pick one sci fi, it would certainly be 2001. However, I'd like to throw the name of another sci fi film out there that I don't think has been mentioned and that I really liked when it came out a few years ago.

That film would be CONTACT. I can't remember who directed it. Robert Zemeckis maybe. But it starred Jody Foster & Matthew McCaugnehy and there was some interested debate between the scientist Foster and the preacher McCaugnehy. A real interesting film.

quote:

ChrisFromAstoria Posted 05 October 2006 08:53 PM

I don't have any trouble putting the MATRIX(S) aside; I thought the two I saw were terrible.

If I had to pick one sci fi, it would certainly be 2001. However, I'd like to throw the name of another sci fi film out there that I don't think has been mentioned and that I really liked when it came out a few years ago.

That film would be CONTACT. I can't remember who directed it. Robert Zemeckis maybe. But it starred Jody Foster & Matthew McCaugnehy and there was some interested debate between the scientist Foster and the preacher McCaugnehy. A real interesting film.

Contact (1997) remains one of the more intriguing science fiction movies more because of its build-up and focus on the hard-core essence of science fiction novel background and texture. Except for the more stereotypical governmental bad guy, most of the story follows a typical but compelling science fiction storyline with good ethereal impact. It is also one of the few science fiction movies that waxes philosophical in its debate surrounding science and religion.

I'm glad to have this movie brought up since I just now realized that I haven't really considered this movie as part of my favorite movie list - I'm going to have to look it over and see if this movie qualifies. Thank you.

quote:

Originally posted by tabuno:

quote:

ChrisFromAstoria Posted 05 October 2006 08:53 PM

I don't have any trouble putting the MATRIX(S) aside; I thought the two I saw were terrible.

If I had to pick one sci fi, it would certainly be 2001. However, I'd like to throw the name of another sci fi film out there that I don't think has been mentioned and that I really liked when it came out a few years ago.

That film would be CONTACT. I can't remember who directed it. Robert Zemeckis maybe. But it starred Jody Foster & Matthew McCaugnehy and there was some interested debate between the scientist Foster and the preacher McCaugnehy. A real interesting film.

Contact (1997) remains one of the more intriguing science fiction movies more because of its build-up and focus on the hard-core essence of science fiction novel background and texture. Except for the more stereotypical governmental bad guy, most of the story follows a typical but compelling science fiction storyline with good ethereal impact. It is also one of the few science fiction movies that waxes philosophical in its debate surrounding science and religion.

I'm glad to have this movie brought up since I just now realized that I haven't really considered this movie as part of my favorite movie list - I'm going to have to look it over and see if this movie qualifies. Thank you.

Contact really disappointed me. Mainly because I had read the book prior to seeing the film. I defy someone to try and persuade me the film even comes close to the book. I know this is an age old argument when it comes to debating the book vs. the movie, but this is an instance where it really falls short. The movie barely grazes the issues explored in the book and the ending definitely falls short in the movie. To those who enjoyed the movie but have not read the book, I urge you to pick it up.