August 30, 2004

The Scientists Agree: Top 10 SCI-fi Movies of all Times... so I ask you monkeys...what are YOUR top 10? or top 5 or top 3 or whatever? (Greetings from the Warrior)
posted by Warrior 20 years ago
  • I've got to agree with the good professors here, Blade Runner (Director's Cut, nturally) wins for me. Also, taken as a double whammy with Alien, the lad Scott done good. I always prefer my Sci-Fi to be more allusive than mechanistic, and those two do a fine job of immersing you in an alternative world, provoking thought not by blank statements but by showing the whole architecture of a possible future. Or something like that, possibly less pretentious. There's a fair few older films from the B-movie tradition that also stand out for their intelligence - The Incredible Shrinking Man, The Thing From Another World, The Day The Earth Stood Still, etc. Also, both the 1956 and 1978 versions of Invasion of the Body Snatchers. And as I've said before, I'm a huge fan of recent sci-fi films where the science bit is kind of left alone to toddle along in the background, allowing the film to go places where other films can't, but never getting in the way of the characters, dialogue, themes, and so on. Donnie Darko (not the Director's Cut) and Eternal Sunshine... are the two best examples of this. If you're willing to count them as sci-fi films, which I think you pretty much have to, they've got to be among the best. Gattaca and Michael Winterbottom's Code 46 move in similar directions, I believe (haven't seen Code 46 yet), but don't quite make it.
  • Interesting that this poll selects Blade Runner as the #1 movie when the film had to be re-released with additional voice-overs because nobody understood the story in the original release. Further, it's my understanding that most people feel that the movie hardly does justice to the novel; (I know I agree with that sentiment.) Still a great film though.
  • I liked Contact - what would really happen if aliens contacted us (up until the wormhole bit, of course).
  • Why are scientists considered the best judges of cinematic merit when it comes to science fiction? I would prefer the opinions of film-historians.
  • Ah, there is often some elitism which deems sci-fi a second-class citizen (of course, any of the d-grade films shown on sci-fi channel during the weekends support this argument). But, in any case, only a anti-sf partisan would find Eternal Sunshine to not be SF. They might as well say The Straight Story is not a David Lynch movie (I have had some people tell me the latter--can you say heavy denial?). I would add Terry Gilliam's Brazil to the list. Not sure what film I'd displace.
  • Not a lot of old movies on the list besides "The Day the Earth Stood Still". I liked "Forbidden Planet" a lot. Also "Metropolis" is a great movie.
  • What about Dark City? That's sci-fi, right?
  • jaypro22, is that not the wrong way round? The original release was the one with voices-over* and the happy ending, because the studio didn't think anybody would get it or like it without those. Scott's version - without the narration and happy ending, but with bonus unicorn footage - wasn't seen by anybody outside of the studio system until ten years later, and it was only then that people started giving the film good reviews. Er. I think. Can't believe I forgot Forbidden Planet and Brazil. Duh. *Not only a pedant, but one who doesn't even know if he's right.
  • You could displace the Terminators - fun movies, but not exactly brilliant. However, though I love Brazil, is it really SF? Or is it a strange fantastical alternate world distopia? I normally have a very wide definition of SF (I am a soft/new SF person myself), but I've always wondered about Brazil. Of course, some people just change the SF to "speculative fiction", which covers all bases. I am glad they got The Day the Earth stood Still - I've heard it called hokey, but it's nothing of the sort. Just a damn good classic film. Now for the list of Sf we love, but really shouldn't, with Planet of the Apes at the top, of course. (No, not the Tim Burton - Charleton Heston all the way!)
  • (Oh yes! Metropolis is great! And has social commentary, which is always a plus in my book.)
  • No one's mentioned 12 Monkeys, but I love it to pieces. And a big second to Brazil and Eternal Sunshine. Must see films. How about guilty pleasures? They won't make anyone's top ten list, but Buckaroo Banzai and 20000 Leagues Under the Sea still bring me delight.
  • I think Day the Earth Stood Still and Forbidden Planet often get lumped into the same B-movie slot that The Deadly Mantis and other 50s monster movies get lumped into whether justly or unjustly. Forbidden Planet was actually an attempt by MGM to capitalize on "this sci-fi trend" but with an A-List budget and special effects by Disney animators. The script is loosely, but explicitly based on Shakespeare's The Tempest. Though there's more than enough 50s hokeyness, IMMO (in my monkey opinion) it still qualifies as 'thoughtful sf.' Day the Earth Stood Still is a pretty somber sf tale warning against the dangers of atomic weapons and is completely awash in Christ imagery--not exactly matinee monster material. Though of course, both films have given us positively iconic robots.
  • I too agree with the scientists; Bladerunner is an excellent movie. The other big movie based on Philip K Dick's stories, Minority Report, wasn't as good, but it was still watchable. Movie that I hated and don't see why it's so popular: The Fifth Element. (Probably that orange-haired chick.) The Matrix was just pseudo-philosophical garbage dressed in tight-fitting spandex.
  • Ah, Dark City. After the crash and burn of Matrix 2: Pseudo-Intellectual Boogaloo, and Matrix 3: Destroy All Hope, it was nice to return to this reality bender. Alien expriemnts, paranormal powers, questions of memory and identity... Again, if that ain't SF, what is? I think some peeps get their knickers in a twist about SF because they forget or disregard the overarching genre of speculative fiction, which includes fantasy, science fiction, and horror--eseentially any story that traipses beyond what we collectively think is possible in reality. Moreover, purveyors of speculative fiction usually don't feel constrained to just have elements from one of those three main trunks. They could have a heaping does of fantasy, a sprinkle of sci-fi, and a dollup of horror in the same piece. Twilight Zone is a perfect example of this. While I'm sure some people would argue that it is mainly a SF show or a fantasy show, it borrowed freely from all varieties of speculative fiction. Some stories were more fantasy-based, some were more horror. Outer Limits was the same way. I mean I know some people only think of Predator-style movies when they think of SF, but just because Dark City has more mystery and film noir (and a hyperventilating Kiefer Sutherland) with its SF doesn't mean it ain't SF. Of course, in the interests of fair play, I must admit that Robot Monster is also SF. Ill-conceived, unintentionally funny SF.
  • What? No, Star Wars and Empire Strikes Back? They were kinda good. Too popular? How can you have a top ten list of sci-fi movies without one or both of these? I'm with ya zed, Buckaroo Bonzai is indeed one of my big guilty pleasures. -- "Laugh-ah while you can-ah, monkey boy!"
  • Blade Runner The Day the Earth Stood STill Brazil Close Encounters Space Odyssey Minority Report Logan's Run 1984
  • 12 Monkeys!
  • Yeah,I'm an idiot! Note to Reuters:, if you are doing a ranked list...PUT IT IN A LIST FORMAT!
  • naxo- I really tried hard to like 12 Monkeys, but I just don't think they pulled it off. It was a good effort, but didn't do it for me.
  • Well, the scientists did vote Star Wars and Empire Strikes Back into equal third spot. On Preview: you knew that, OK ;-) Personally, I think Star Wars is just a terrible film, and that's not some sort of contrarian elitist pop-bashing. It's simply that the dialogue has to rank amongst the worst ever written (well, before he then went and topped it with the prequels), the plot jaw-droppingly awful, and with most of the other elements (other than the visuals) not much better. Empire is much better - oooh! Look! Moral ambiguity! Giant Space Worm! - but I'd still not put it anywhere near a top ten list. Just to prove I'm not a snob, my vote for Terrible Adaptation of a Great Book which really could do with being remade, hell, perhaps even with Will Smith in the title role, but preferably not written and directed by Frank "I can only make life-affirming films about prisons" Darabont*: Francois Truffaut's Fahrenheit 451. *OK, maybe I am a snob.
  • ...Will Smith in the title role... Fahrenheit 451... That's right, Will Smith playing a temperature. I meant that.
  • Hmmm - best sci-fi.... Going out on a limb, how about The Last Starfighter, some nice ideas in it, liked the video game as trainer (paging Orson Scott Card, paging Orson Scott Card) I'd add Dark City and 12 Monkeys, but other people already have.....aha Titan AE neatly fills the guilty pleasure category.
  • Do they call it Centigrade 232.8 for non-US markets?
  • As for guilty pleasure, i give you Evolution.
  • Darshon, I'm actually not a sci-fi buff, and only mentioned 12 Monkeys for a nominal tribute to our cherished website!
  • I'm not a scientist, but here are few from my list of favorites -- all of which date from the 1970s. Soylent Green Zardoz A Boy And His Dog Silent Running
  • I think John Carpenter's The Thing is a fantastic film, overlooked by loads of people because it straddles different genres. But it is terrifying and compulsive.
  • A best sci-fi list that includes The Matrix? C'mon. The Quiet Earth should out-rate it. I like the Matrix, but great sci-fi?
  • Reasons to like The Fifth Element: it has really snazzy design, Bruce Willis being funny (when he is good, he is quite good - as also in 12 Monkeys), it has really snazzy design (for props, set, costumes and everything) ...um....yeah... (I had fun watching it :) - and it was for design that I wanted to watch that French movie about mating with a God too...) I always thought Truffaut's Fahrenheit 451 was suposed to be very good, but I couldn't bring myself to watch more than a few moments. I adore the book so much, and the ineffable feel was all off in the movie for me. Perhaps because I pictured the book taking place in the most quintessential of 1950's North American suburbs, bright, clean, shiny and fake (except for a few older houses described as being different), whereas the movie feels so very 1960s and European - grey cement apartment buildings, crowded public transit, and a sense of grittyness that wasn't compatible with my vision. I'm not really looking forward to another version either, though - I think I've directed it too many times in my head to appreciate anyone else's. Other guilty pleasures (and I know I'm probably setting myself up to be banned here) - I actually liked Waterworld. I'm just fascinated by worlds of water, or air - I really liked Larry's Niven's Smoke Ring series for the same reason (and it shares many of the same faults). And I actually read the novelization of Waterworld, which certainly explains a lot more. It would have been nice if it could have gotten more a Dune miniseries-style treatment, or a full on complex novel series, because the concept is endlessly fascinating.
  • Flash - I meant that the original version - the director's cut - was the one that was too confusing, and the subsequent released version had the voice-over and the happy ending that diverged from the novel. For some reason I thought that the original director's cut was released on a limited scale, but this monkey could well be wrong.
  • sleeper brazil trx1138 barbarella electric dreams heartbeeps(andy kaufmans finest moment)
  • A Boy and His Dog I refuse to acknowledge any movie that has Don Johnson in it. But I'll definately give you Soylent Green! City of Lost Children is really good for the look of it, but the story lacks a little bit. Hated Barbarella. Slightly off topic; I'll suggest Catch 22 and Eraserhead.
  • I'm down with "Logan's Run" - although the one time I watched it, I had to leave two minutes before the ending, just when Logan had been captured and locked in with the computer. My favourite sci-fi, in no particular order: Logan's Run The Fifth Element Terminators 1 and 2 Alien (has anyone even mentioned Alien?) Bladerunner Star Wars and Return of the Jedi Dark City (way, way better than The Matrix) The Day the Earth Stood Still Oh, and the "V" miniseries, which I saw when I was little and was scared shitless by when the alien swallowed the hamster.
  • upasakabrian, MSNBC.com paid me to say nice things about "Silent Running", the seventh item on this list. Though I do have to give it up for the "space cheese" of "Flash Gordon" (also on the list). What, no love for any of the "Star Trek" movies (even "IV: The Voyage Home")? And is "The Blob" too much horror and not enough sci-fi? For best Sci-Fi Comedy, I'd like to nominate "Earth Girls Are Easy".
  • Oh, just realised flash had mentioned Alien, after all.
  • Flash Gordon is a work of exceeedingly gay excellence
  • jaypro22 - having looked into it a little bit more (not actually being able to recall where I got my original information from), the non-narration version of Blade Runner recieved preview screenings, which is where it got negative feedback about its supposed incomprehensibility, but it was never actually released. So the narration was introduced, against Scott and Ford's wishes (which may explain why Ford sounds half-asleep on the voice-over). I don't know if the happy ending had already been inserted, or if it was tacked on subsequently (I suspect the latter, as it uses left-over footage from The Shining, which sounds like a rush job to me). The Director's Cut is not merely a restoration of the original version, but expands on it. Except, in some places, it cuts down on it - there's less visible violence than there was in several previously released verions. Er. I can't remember what the point we were discussing was, but suffice to say I think it's a warning to studio execs against judging your hot new director's dystopian masterpiece on the views of a couple of hundred disinterested gawkers. Having said that, most hot new directors' dystopian masterpieces are rubbish, so perhaps the disinterested gawkers have a point. MonkeyFilter: a work of exceedingly gay exc... oh, I can't be bothered.
  • yentruoc: One of my inlaws loaned me a copy of City of Lost Children a few weeks ago. I was mesmerized, but can't put it on my 'top-ten' list yet with any fairness, having seen it so recently and only once. I do suspect it'll rank highly, though, after more consideration. My favourite sci-fi film is Brazil, probably followed by Alien. Guilty pleasure: T2. Blade Runner I doubt is on my list, but it'd be close.
  • The Orgasmatron alone should propel Sleeper to the list.
  • jb: Where's the sci-fi in Fifth Element, though? I mean, I defy anyone to show me how Fifth Element is more "sci fi" than, say, "Star Wars". (And I actually find Gary Oldman a pretty crappy villain. I love The Professional, but James Woods' performance in the otherwise unremarkable The Specialist shits all over Oldman's villain therein). Alien is the same story: it's a horror film. Sure, it's set in the future an' all, but really, it's a horror film. I realise genre snobs who are forced to admit it's a fine film like to call it sci fi (since it's a less spat upon genre than horror), but I'm unconvinced.
  • flashboy: Personally, I think Scott is wrong in his hatred of the voiceover. One of the things that makes Blade Runner is how it cribs from the hard-boiled detective style of films adapted from Chandler and Hammet's novels; truely American cinema. Cut the voiceover, and you lose that.
  • Other than films already mentioned, I'll post some love for Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home and A Boy and His Dog. But my favorite not-so-guilty pleasure sci-fi film is Pitch Black. It's more fi than sci, but I love it so. Has anyone seen THX 1138? Worth seeing?
  • genre snobs Real genre snobs recognise that you can mix and match generic elements. Alien = sci-fi + horror, Blade Runner = sci-fi + noir, etc. The other gits are called "fanboys".
  • 45 comments and no mention of Man who fell to Earth? no not the Buster Keaton one
  • Another vote here for The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension. Oh, all right, Blade Runner and Brazil are OK, too...
  • By genre snobs, Wolof, I mean "those people who disdain anything that can be identified as belonging to a genre", ie lit-crit types who let "belonging to a genre" interfere with evaluating quality.
  • I thought Space Balls was awesome.
  • Cronenberg's brilliant "The Fly" ranks high on my list. And I've got to give some love for "Star Trek:The Motion Picture"--yep, number one. Lotta cheese, porno-riffic shots of the Enterprise, and bald Ilia, but dammit, this is the movie that told everyone that SCI-FI is here to stay...it resurrected a decade-long series, laid the groundwork for sequels and FOUR spin-off series, created the first true SF media empire, and ensured the success of sci-fi as a commercial and artistic field. Oh, and add Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind to the list, too.
  • Well, rodg, I read you crosswise there, but I really think you're taking aim at an extinct species. Any and all genres are up for serious study these days -- people need the material.
  • Oh, no. They may not inhabit Universities so much any more (I wouldn't know), but they're still seem to be a-plentiful among the ranks of professional critics and sub-terriary education.
  • I wasn't describing 5th Element as a great SF, but explaining to the question upthread what one might like in the film (since I really liked it, for all its faults and sillyness.) I have always had difficulty talking about Science FIction as a genre, because it feels like there are so many different branches and exceptions that it's hard to characterise. One the one hand, they asked scientists to rate these films, because one plank of the genre is heavily involved with talking science and technology - though interestingly enough, these scientists eschewed the science heavy Andromeda Strain in favour of Star Wars and Terminator. But is Brazil really about science or technology?* The science fiction I was raised on was a mixture of fantasy stories without magic on a different planet (like McCaffrey or MZ Bradley), and the new wave style SF (is there a proper name?) which is more interested in "what if's" about society than science. Since I am now in the social sciences, this makes sense. Add in fantasy and horror, and you get the sense of genres twisting around each other, borrowing from each other - sometimes having discrete set conventions (which is what a genre is about, of course), but generally getting all mixed up. Frankenstein - horror or science fiction? Or maybe we need to rethink the now huge SpecFict genre as having many subgenres, which aren't neatly divided - many of the space opera/ adventure science fiction stories share conventions not with hard SF but with fantasy, after all (eg Star Wars compared to The Black Cauldron) - and authors will othen cross the bounderies, following these rather than a simple division betwen SciFic and Fant. I have to say, as much loving as I've had for both Brazil and Terry Gilliam, it doesn't seem hold up when compared to the distopian classics like We, Brave New World and 1984 - there is no sense of the way the society fits together, like a machine, or of why things are happening the way they are. Maybe as a statement about beaurocracy - 1984 was about Stalinism, but maybe Brazil is about that banal evil perpetuated in every office, government and private...
  • There's a film of We? Haven't seen it. But the film of 1984 is dead ordinary. Are we still talking about films? Is La Jet
  • Supposedly, the bbc version of 1984 is excellent, but I've never been able to find a copy.
  • the bbc version of 1984 is excellent Bearable. But the movie was bearable too. *fails to link to bear on purpose*
  • Has anyone seen THX 1138? Worth seeing? Yes, although keep in mind that the pacing in the movie is glacially slow.
  • Bearable. But the movie was bearable too. *ignores possible bear comments. THX 1138 is an expanded version of the student film Lucas made at USC and comes across much like that. Earnest, interesting, low budget sci-fi. THe unfortunate side effect is it will make you loathe the Star Wars prequels all the more because at one point in time, he did know better. (I blame the Ewoks for corrupting him).
  • I recall maybe 10 years ago seeing on one of the cable channels THX1138, followed by Lucas's earlier version he did for his film class. Definitely an interesting comparison. Wish I had the foresight to tape it, since the odds of finding it on video are probably lower than The Star Wars Holiday Special (undoubtedly the worst sci-fi film of all time.) Flash - I totally agree. Small focus groups of industry professionals have the potential of ruining great films. It's no wonder Blade Runner did so poorly at the box office.
  • Actually, THX1138 is being re-released. At least, I think it is because I saw that it was opening at one of my local art theaters on Sept. 10th.
  • Sorry - I was thinking SF and dystopias in general, books or movies, comparing society creation. I've never heard of a movie for We and would be really surprised if there was. I liked the movie of 1984, though the end was more ambiguous.
  • jb: Comparing Brazil to 1984 is the problem mehinks. It owes more to Kafka than Orwell.
  • 1. Aliens 2. Predator (heh!) 3. Pitch Black Disclaimer: when I talk about SF flicks I always focus on the action/FX/coolness of it. "Intellectual" SF movies then to disappoint me one way or the other. Mostly because when they start me thinking I end up dissagreeing with the premises and hating them.
  • then -> tend
  • It blows me away that Solaris, (the original, not the George Clooney tripe), does not get more credit. It is probably the most complete foray into human psychological response to science ever filmed. Sci-fi is not about science. It's about how WE REACT to science. Solaris manifests this brilliantly. Also has anyone mentioned Tron?!
  • Sci-fi is not about science. It's about how WE REACT to science. I agree- SF is so much more than space ships and blasters, but there will always be more Star Wars fans than Solaris fans: the former is easily accessible, while the latter requires some work to comprehend. SF has a long tradition of examining the human condition, and that's when it really shines. I still get pissed when a movie adaptation (i.e. War of the Worlds or Starship Troopers) cut out all the socio-political commentary that made the book so memorable.