DVD Talk
Good Sci-Fi movies? [Archive] - DVD Talk Forum
 
Best Sellers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The Longest Day
Buy: $54.99 $24.99
9.
10.
DVD Blowouts
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Alien [Blu-ray]
Buy: $19.99 $9.99
8.
9.
10.

PDA
DVD Reviews

View Full Version : Good Sci-Fi movies?


josuff247
05-09-04, 10:06 PM
Any recommendation for some good sci-fi movies.
I can only watch starwars, star trek, terminator and Matrix
so much!

Thanks.

Rivero
05-09-04, 10:16 PM
If you haven't already, try Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey and Blade Runner, the two finest science-fiction films ever made.

btw, Star Wars isn't sci-fi.

DaveCole
05-09-04, 10:16 PM
Avalon, 12 monkeys, Dark City, eXistenZ, Thirteenth Floor, and a classic: Tron

Matthew Chmiel
05-09-04, 10:42 PM
- 12 Monkeys
- 2001: A Space Odyssey
- The Abyss
- Akira (Japanese anime)
- Alien
- Aliens
- A.I.: Artificial Intelligence
- Blade Runner
- Brazil (more of a fantasy than sci-fi)
- Close Encounters of the Third Kind
- Cube
- Dark City
- The Day The Earth Stood Still
- The Matrix / Reloaded / Revolutions
- Metropolis (both the original silent film and the Japanese anime)
- Minority Report
- Solaris (both the Russian and American versions)
- Starship Troopers

NitroJMS
05-09-04, 10:53 PM
Dark City is excellent.

Also, check out The Fifth Element. A very fun scifi/action film.

nemein
05-09-04, 10:54 PM
What do you mainly like about Sci-Fi? Is it just furturistic settings or do you like space battles, robots/computers gone amuck or the "classics", action movies just set in a "sci-fi" setting or dramas, or all the above?

Not knowing what you are looking for anyway some that come to mind are:
Equilibrium (action, better than Matrix IMHO)
12 Monkeys (it's Gilliam what more needs to be said ;))
Gattaca (great drama/mystery)
Cube (fun independent film can be a bit gory at times)
the first 3 Alien movies (I know not everyone likes the 3rd one but I thought it was good)
Last Starfighter (not the best movie in the world but the first to use CG extensively)
Pitch Black (decent action/horror)
Free Enterprise (not really sci-fi but about people who like sci-fi)
Time Machine (the old one)
Planet of the Apes (again the original)
Red Planet (I know not everyone liked it though)
Total Recall (based on a story by the same author who did the Blade Runner story)
Strange Days (maybe a bit dated now considering the 00 is past but still enjoyable kind of in a film noir sense)
TRON, Them, Thing from Another World (3 more classics)
Outland (a old fashioned western shoot out in space)
Minority Report (It's got Tom but it's still good ;))
Event Horizon (atleast it starts off good ;))
Logan's Run, Fahrenheit 451 (two more classics)
Soldier (again not everyone likes this one I thought it was enjoyable)

If you are looking for TV series I'd recommend Firefly (watch the series to prep for the movie), Stargate SG1 (watch the series based on the movie ;)), Babylon 5 (watch the series and the movies [atleast all that are out now]), Roughnecks: Starship Troopers Chronicles (the series that was better than the movie IMHO, it's animated though so not everyone likes it)

cruzness
05-09-04, 11:45 PM
Some more that nobody mentioned:
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (original and 70's version)
Krull (more fantasy than SciFi)
The Thing
Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai
Independence Day (popcorn Sci-fi)
The Running Man (great Scifi action cheese that is surprising revelent when you consider our fascination w/ game shows and reality TV)

Dead Star
05-09-04, 11:48 PM
Originally posted by Matthew Chmiel
- 12 Monkeys
- 2001: A Space Odyssey
- The Abyss
- Akira (Japanese anime)
- Alien
- Aliens
- A.I.: Artificial Intelligence
- Blade Runner
- Brazil (more of a fantasy than sci-fi)
- Close Encounters of the Third Kind
- Cube
- Dark City
- The Day The Earth Stood Still
- The Matrix / Reloaded / Revolutions
- Metropolis (both the original silent film and the Japanese anime)
- Minority Report
- Solaris (both the Russian and American versions)
- Starship Troopers
Wow this is like 99.9%(starship troopers as the .01%) exactly what I wouldve posted. Awesome :)

mgbfan
05-10-04, 12:26 AM
Well that's a pretty open question. I'll suppress the overwhelming urge to make the distinction between "sci-fi" and "science fiction." Yes, there is a difference, but for the purposes of your question, it's not important.

That said, science fiction is a very wide open genre, so it's hard to pin down what's good for your tastes. If it's action movies in futuristic settings that you like, try classics like Blade Runner and the Alien series. These are more than just action movies, but they'll satisfy that requirement plus give you a little extra.

If you prefer a more dramatic, emotional, intellectual piece, consider the absolutly fantastic Gattaca, and 12 Monkeys. You should be thrilled with both. Gattaca, in particular, is probably the most underrated science fiction movie I can think of.

If you're more of a guy who just wants some braindead entertainment (some will tell you otherwise, but these films have their place as well), go with the likes of Armageddon, Starship Troopers, etc.

Saw some recommendations here for Cube and Solaris. Personally, I'd shy away from these films. Both very weak, in my opinion.

RichC2
05-10-04, 12:29 AM
Ghost in the Shell is pretty apt. It's more of "see it to see what its inspired" than for the movie itself (which I didn't like, but it has legions of fans just the same).

Agree with Dark City (one of my all time faves), Minority Report, AI, and quite a few others.

Donnie Darko and A Clockwork Orange are listed as Scifi on imdb.com so I'll go ahead and add those... as well as City of Lost Children.

cheapskate
05-10-04, 12:40 AM
Originally posted by mgbfan
Well that's a pretty open question. I'll suppress the overwhelming urge to make the distinction between "sci-fi" and "science fiction." Yes, there is a difference, but for the purposes of your question, it's not important.

Don't supress the urge...

Tell us what the difference is between "Science Fiction", and the abreviated version "Sci-Fi". Then maybe I'll share my opinions on the difference between Hi Fidelity and Hi-Fi! :p

Gattaca is a fantastic movie though.

turborobb
05-10-04, 03:17 AM
Starship Troopers! (warning, people either love or hate Starship Troopers, there is no middle ground... personaly, I think it's one of the best sci fi films ever.)

Trancers (great 80's B-movie, it spawned 5 sequels, but the first is the best, one of Helen Hunts first roles)

Logans Run (classic 70's sci fi... a bit slow pased for some)

Doctor Who - Tomb of the Cybermen (ok, it's a TV show and not a movie, but "Tomb" is one of the most classic pieces of sci fi ever)

Apone
05-10-04, 04:43 AM
Only Star Wars, Star Trek, The Terminator and The Matrix? Firstly I recommend:

Total Recall
Arnold's most laughable performance!!! Still Predator is the best, check that out too.
Starship Troopers
Plenty of mid-level-gore battles. Arachnids tearing soldiers apart, then in an exchange Arachnids getting blown into pieces.
Equilibrium
Try not to compare or think about The Matrix while watching it, seperate movie experience makes it good.
Fifth Element
Gunfights aren't that spectacular but nevertheless enjoyable. Presentation itself is worth checking out anyway.

Then move on to these:

Aliens
One of the best Sci-Fi action films. No doubt.

Dark City
Wonderful cinematography, it's less dark mood than Blade Runner and around the end there's happy light. Yay!

Blade Runner
Not sure if you would like it straight away but give it a go. It's intelligent and grimly beautiful. Very dark tone so best to watch it at night.

Finally if you really liked those (or most of them):

2001: A Space Odyssey
There are no gunfights or explosive action and doesn't need them.

Metropolis
It's black and white but DOESN'T matter!!!


:)

josuff247
05-10-04, 07:49 AM
Besides the movies I mentioned in my original post the other sci-fi movies I own are

Planet of the Apes(yes, only the original)
Fifth Element
And Aliens(I saw all, but liked this one the best)

I have seen many of the ones posted, and look forward to trying some of the recommendations.

Thanks.

PS, Is the x-files TV series worth a try?

RyoHazuki
05-10-04, 09:19 AM
Originally posted by Rivero
btw, Star Wars isn't sci-fi. Yes it is.

nemein
05-10-04, 09:22 AM
Is the x-files TV series worth a try?

If you're w/ Netflix I'd rent it first (some store may have them too I haven't checked). It's really kind of a mixed bag, if you can get into the whole running conspiracy theme it's a decent show, if you can't some of the stand alone eps are still really enjoyable. Overall it's worth a look but it's not something I'd recommend as a blind buy (esp at the price they are asking for it).

nemein
05-10-04, 09:24 AM
Originally posted by RyoHazuki
Yes it is.

I agree, atleast in the way Outland and Soldier are sci-fi westerns, SW is a sci-fi fantasy.

antennaball
05-10-04, 09:36 AM
Haven't seen it mentioned, but I would also suggest Event Horizon. One of my favorite movies in this genre.

TomOpus
05-10-04, 10:03 AM
How about Silent Running?

mgbfan
05-10-04, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by cheapskate
Don't supress the urge...

Tell us what the difference is between "Science Fiction", and the abreviated version "Sci-Fi". Then maybe I'll share my opinions on the difference between Hi Fidelity and Hi-Fi! :p


Very well then. "Sci-fi" is, or at least was, originally a term used to describe a lot of the more pop-culture (but less literate and less scientific) fiction out there. The most obvious andf popular example of "sci-fi" is the various Star Trek series.

"Sci-fi" originally was not an abbreviation for "science fiction," but a desparaging term meant to seperate what many people considered to be drek from true works of classic science fiction.

Of course, in the interevening years, the term has found the mainstream and now it's largely used interchangably. But even still, to many of us out there, the term "sci-fi" still gets a cringe when applied to a genuine work of science fiction.

rushmore223
05-10-04, 01:22 PM
Did I see somebody actually mention Krull?????!!!!!! :jawdrop:


-screwy-


:whofart:


Hehehehehe, why not mention, Yor, Hunter from the Future then. ;)

Hendrik
05-10-04, 03:50 PM
. . . The Thirteenth Floor (http://www.thedigitalbits.com/reviews2/13thfloor.html) . . .

...and let's hear it for some oldies...!...:

. . . Destination Moon (http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s106moon.html) . . .

. . . When Worlds Collide (http://www.digitallyobsessed.com/showreview.php3?ID=1706) . . .

. . . The War Of The Worlds (http://www.dvdreview.com/fullreviews/the_war_of_the_worlds.shtml) . . .

. . . Forbidden Planet (http://www.thecinemalaser.com/dvd_reviews/forbidden-planet-whv-dvd.htm) . . .

. . . On The Beach (http://www.dvdauthority.com/reviews.asp?ReviewID=1798) . . .

. . . The Day The Earth Caught Fire (http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s248caught.html) . . .

...and last, but by no means least (although, truth to tell, I could go on all day!)...:

. . . The Day The Earth Stood Still (http://www.scifi.com/sfw/issue314/screen.html) . . .

. . . :o . . .

nemein
05-10-04, 04:24 PM
Did I see somebody actually mention Krull?????!!!!!!

Atleast noone has mentioned "The Core" yet ;)

Hendrik
05-10-04, 04:49 PM
Originally posted by nemein
Atleast noone has mentioned "The Core" yet ;)
...or "Sphere"...

. . . :) . . .

The Dude
05-10-04, 05:16 PM
Originally posted by Hendrik
...or "Sphere"...

. . . :) . . .

I was just laughing about how horrible that movie was with my students...it pained me to even think about it (and sadly, many of them thought it was a really "neat" movie, sigh)

antennaball
05-10-04, 05:29 PM
Originally posted by Hendrik
...or "Sphere"...

. . . :) . . .

*sigh*

My wife wanted to watch that last night so I had to suffer through it. It was my first time seeing it. I had been putting it off even though she bought it over a year ago.

OldBoy
05-10-04, 06:45 PM
1. Equilibrium
2. Contact
3. Runaway (classic 80's Tom Selleck movie)
4. The Day the Earth Stood Still
5. Mad Max (considered Sci-Fi), but I wouldn't really consider Road Warrior as that is pure action
6. The Final Countdown
7. V: The Original Miniseries
8. V: The Final Battle
9. Soylent Green
10. Impostor
11. Time Bandits
12. Terminator
13. Terminator 2
14. Terminator 3
http://www.therewindforums.co.uk/forums/images/smiles/new_borgsmile.gif

And whoever said Star Wars isn't Sci-Fi should have there genre definitions checked. I think Star Wars almost epitomizes that one!

cruzness
05-10-04, 07:01 PM
Originally posted by rushmore223
Did I see somebody actually mention Krull?????!!!!!! :jawdrop:


-screwy-


:whofart:


Hehehehehe, why not mention, Yor, Hunter from the Future then. ;)

Hey I liked Krull (saw it when I was like 13 in the theaters). And I think it's a fun movie to watch.....dated...but fun.

Neville
05-10-04, 08:21 PM
Some 'oldies' worth watching:

The Omega Man
Robinson Crusoe on Mars
The Andromeda Strain (one of the best ever)

And if you can find it, Closet Land (Alan Rickman and Madeleine Stowe). Some say it ain't sci-fi, but it's worth it.

DVDho78DTS
05-10-04, 08:56 PM
Originally posted by scott1598
12. Terminator
13. Terminator 2
14. Terminator 3 (how could peeps not mention these!!

Because the person that started the thread did. :)

mgbfan
05-10-04, 09:15 PM
Originally posted by Hendrik
...or "Sphere"...

. . . :) . . .

Yeah, but I saw Event Horizon listed here. Ugg.

I've also seen a lot of recommendations that seem to ignore what the original poster seemed to be looking for. Look at the list of movies he likes and think about what else he might want. I agree that The Day the Earth Stood Still is a great science fiction classic, but is there really a strong chance it's going to please this particular poster? That's really more for a person interested in the history of film and SF.

nemein
05-10-04, 11:03 PM
Maybe he's looking to expand his horizons ;) That's why I asked what type of "sci-fi"...

mookiemeister
05-10-04, 11:16 PM
Has anyone mention these movies yet:

Truman Show
Iron Giant
Day the Earth Stood Still
Abre los ojos

dave-o
05-10-04, 11:49 PM
Do we really need to have the old star wars is/isn't sci-fi debate again? I thought I set all of you straight the last time we did this! :p

Must resist the urge...must resist...nooooooooooo

Is Spaceballs sci-fi?

....noooooo...I can't stop the debate now.....it is too late....ok, here are some highlights of the last debate....remember these?


Just b/c something has space ships in it, does not a sci-fi movie make.....

Blockbuster and Best buy are not reliable sources for the delineaton of genres....

Philip K. Dick posed the most thought provoking and thorough definition of what sci-fi is (in my opinion).

There are distinct, although related, genres such as Space Operas/serials (see Star Wars), Space Adventure/Fantasy among others and these are not just sub-genres of sci-fi.

Ahhh...good times...good times...Shall we go through this again?

mgbfan
05-11-04, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by dave-o
Do we really need to have the old star wars is/isn't sci-fi debate again? I thought I set all of you straight the last time we did this! :p

A good chance to point out the difference between "sci-fi" and "science fiction." Star Wars is the former, but not the latter.

Science Fiction is fiction driven by science or technology that will exist or could conceivably exist, events that could have a scientific explaination. Science fiction seperates from fantasy in that fantasy is not tied down by the burden of science - magic is the norm.

Star Wars fails the "science fiction" test because the Force is magic. It's fantasy. But it's also "sci-fi" in the classic sense of the word, because "sci-fi" includes all of the stuff that sort of poses as science fiction, but really isn't.

rushmore223
05-11-04, 01:05 PM
let's not forget Star Wars takes place in the past.

das Monkey
05-11-04, 06:36 PM
• mgbfan •

Science Fiction is fiction driven by science or technology that will exist or could conceivably exist, events that could have a scientific explaination. Science fiction seperates from fantasy in that fantasy is not tied down by the burden of science - magic is the norm.
I've already had this debate countless times and am confident in my position, so I won't debate that again here, but to add to your definition ...

Science fiction must not simply contain elements that are built on science or technology; it must address the consequences of such elements. A film where some guy happens to have a time machine in his basement but never uses it would not necessarily be science fiction. A film that simply takes place in the future would not necessarily be science fiction. A film that simply takes place in space, or on another planet, where the differences aren't addressed would not necessarily be science fiction. A film where people used laser weapons instead of projectile weapons, but no content was addressed on how one differs from the other, would not necessarily be science fiction. A film where people fly space ships just like they drive cars would not necessarily be science fiction. You get the point.

As such, the simple entry of the Force in the <b>Star Wars</b> saga does not define whether or not is passes/fails a science fiction test. A fantasy film can have science fiction elements, and a science fiction film can have fantasy elements. <b>Star Wars</b> could have the Force and still be a science fiction film.

das

dave-o
05-11-04, 11:03 PM
Here it is again, one man's opinion on what Science Fiction is and what it is not. Of course this one man happens to be a genius and a world famous mastermind of the written word. I thought it was worth posting again since it is such an eloquently worded and thoughtful definition of Science Fiction....

''My Definition of Science Fiction''(1981)
-Philip K. Dick (in a letter)

I will define science fiction, first, by saying what SF is not. It
cannot be defined as "a story (or novel or play) set in the future,"
since there exists such a thing as space adventure, which is set in the future but is not SF. It is just that: adventure, fights, and
wars in the future in space involving superadvanced technology. Why, then, is it not science fiction? It would seem to be, and Doris Lessing (e.g.) supposes that it is. However, space adventure lacks the distinct new idea that is the essential ingredient. Also, there can be science fiction set in the present: the alternate-world story or novel. So if we separate SF from the future and also from ultra-advanced technology, what then do we have that can be called SF? We have a fictitious world; that is the first step: It is a society that does not in fact exist, but is predicated on our known society-that is, our known society acts as a jumping-off point for it; the society advances out of our own in some way, perhaps orthogonally, as with the alternate-world story or novel. It is our world dislocated by some kind of mental effort on the part of the author, our world transformed into that which it is not or not yet. This world must differ from the given in at least one way, and this one way must be sufficient to give rise to events that could not occur in our society-or in any known society present or past. There must be a coherent idea involved in this dislocation; that is, the dislocation must be a conceptual one, not merely a trivial or bizarre one-this is the essence of science fiction, the conceptual dislocation within the society so that as a result a new society is generated in the author's mind, transferred to paper, and from paper it occurs as a convulsive shock in the reader's mind, the shock of dysrecognition. He knows that it is not his actual world that he is reading about.

Now, to separate science fiction from fantasy. This is impossible to do, and a moment's thought will show why. Take Psionics; take mutants such as we find in Ted Sturgeon's wonderful 'More Than Human'. If the reader believes that such mutants could exist, then he will view Sturgeon's novel as science fiction. If, however, he believes that such mutants are, like wizards and dragons, not possible, nor will ever be possible, then he is reading a fantasy novel. Fantasy involves that which general opinion regards as impossible;science fiction involves that which general opinion regards as possible under the right circumstances. This is in essence a judgment call, since what is possible and what is not [cannot be] objectively known but is, rather, a subjective belief on the part of the reader.

Now to define good science fiction. The conceptual dislocation-the
new idea, in other words-must be truly new (or a new variation on an old one) and it must be intellectually stimulating to the reader; it must invade his mind and wake it up to the possibility of something he had not up to then thought of. Thus "good science fiction" is a value term, not an objective thing, and yet, I think, there really is such a thing, objectively, as good science fiction.

I think Dr. Willis McNelly at the California State University at
Fullerton put it best when he said that the true protagonist of an SF story or novel is an idea and not a person. If it is good SF the idea is new, it is stimulating, and, probably most important of all, it sets off a chain reaction of ramification ideas in the mind of the
reader; it so to speak; unlocks the reader's mind so that that mind, like the author's, begins to create. Thus SF is creative and it
inspires creativity, which mainstream fiction by and large does not
do. We who read SF (I am speaking as a reader now, not a writer) read it because we love to experience this chain reaction of ideas being set off in our mind by something we read, something with a new idea in it; hence the very best science fiction ultimately winds up being a collaboration between author and reader, in which both create- and enjoy doing it: Joy is the essential and final ingredient of science fiction, the joy of discovery of newness.

mgbfan
05-12-04, 12:19 AM
Thanks for the above post - Dick has a good take on things.

As I read Dick's definition, though, I got to thinking. Where does Dune belong? Unless you accept spice and its effects as a scientifically valid idea, Dune wouldn't really satisfy Dick's requirements, and I think that might be a hard sell.

Are we forced, then, to take the greatest science fiction novel ever written and call it something other than science fiction? This is dangerously close to leaving the realm of movies, but since Dune has been adapted twice, I think we're still on topic.

das Monkey
05-12-04, 01:41 AM
• mgbfan •

Are we forced, then, to take the greatest science fiction novel ever written and call it something other than science fiction?
No. 1984 fits the definition just fine. (rimshot)

Seriously, science fiction isn't defined by taking what we assume to be science fiction and then backtracking to a definition that includes those works. It simply is what it is. What I don't get is how angry people get when you assert that their favorite work is actually fantasy, not science fiction. One is no better than the other. They are simply different.

das

mgbfan
05-12-04, 12:55 PM
Originally posted by das Monkey
Seriously, science fiction isn't defined by taking what we assume to be science fiction and then backtracking to a definition that includes those works. It simply is what it is. What I don't get is how angry people get when you assert that their favorite work is actually fantasy, not science fiction. One is no better than the other. They are simply different.
So, then, are you saying that indeed Dune is not science fiction? I'm not attacking here, I'm merely looking for clarification.

das Monkey
05-12-04, 01:25 PM
• mgbfan •

So, then, are you saying that indeed Dune is not science fiction? I'm not attacking here, I'm merely looking for clarification.

Bob Dole's not saying that; you're saying that. :)

My posts weren't intended to classify Dune or <b>Star Wars</b> or anything else as science fiction or fantasy, only to help clarify the definition and point out what I believe to be a flaw in your logic. Often, I hear the argument "[film] is <i>obviously</i> science fiction, because everyone says it is" or "because that's where you find it at Blockbuster." I disagree with this. The definitions define the contents, not our perception, as genre perception is more often defined by marketing desires and general indifference or ignorance than accuracy -- or perhaps, more correctly, "precission."

Whether Dune fits said standards is for you to decide. However, I do not think that the popular perception that it is "science fiction" should factor into that decision making process. Were we to bow to that perception, Frankenstein and Slaughterhouse Five would be filed under horror.

das

DVD Smurf
05-12-04, 01:57 PM
Lost Horizon
Nausicaδ
Delicatessen
Stalker
Open Your Eyes
City of Lost Children

to name a few brilliant, but odd sci-fi films...

necros
05-12-04, 02:26 PM
I consider everything that takes place in the future or outer space "sci fi" even though that might not be what it really is. I'd call Xmen sci fi. I have a preference for action oriented sci fi movies instead of the ones that are more like drama. I don't care for the really old sci movies because I just don't like old movies. I want to see modern high tech special effects and things blowing up a lot and icky aliens eating people.

That being said if anyone asked me for some good sci fi movies, I'd recomend any star wars film, terminator film, or Matrix film or Aliens film (directors cut only for part 3).. in addition to others like Armageddon, Independance Day, Minority Report, Signs, Total Recall, Predator, and of course, Transformers: The Movie :) Those are some of my favorites. I wouldn't reccomend Star Trek movies to anyone cuz I never liked any of them, except for part 2 and that was because of Mr Roark.

mgbfan
05-12-04, 02:49 PM
Originally posted by das Monkey
Bob Dole's not saying that; you're saying that. :)

My posts weren't intended to classify Dune or <b>Star Wars</b> or anything else as science fiction or fantasy, only to help clarify the definition and point out what I believe to be a flaw in your logic.
Flaw in my logic? Be careful you don't confuse my arguments with the imagined arguments that you might expect to get in this sort of discussion.
Originally posted by das Monkey
Often, I hear the argument "[film] is <i>obviously</i> science fiction, because everyone says it is" or "because that's where you find it at Blockbuster."
Perhaps you have heard such an argument, but you have not heard it from me.

I'm merely testing the limits of the posted definition. You may bothred by people wanting to classify a movie as one genre or another - a flaw in logic, you say. Fair enough. But I'm bothered by the supposition that one definition is true and final - an equal flaw in logic, in my eyes. I'm not prepared to accept the posted definition as the true definition of SF, and my questions are leading toward exploring & testing that definition.

das Monkey
05-12-04, 03:34 PM
I must have misunderstood this statement:
• mgbfan •

Are we forced, then, to take the greatest science fiction novel ever written and call it something other than science fiction? This is dangerously close to leaving the realm of movies, but since Dune has been adapted twice, I think we're still on topic.
I took it to mean that Dune was inherently science fiction because of popular perception. It was an inference made from your implication that the title "greatest science fiction novel ever written" precluded the definition for the genre given by Dick and could be used to test the accuracy of that definition. I apologize if I confused your point; however, given your "testing that definition" comment, I'm not sure if I did or not.

My stance is simply that one must esablish a criteria that applies consistently across the board and then apply that to the works of art. Dick's criteria may work for you, or it may not. However, one cannot pick and choose which critieria to apply based on common perception. Too often films/books/whatever are dumped into the science fiction category without much reasoning other than "future" or "space" or something. Such application causes unnecessary confusion amongst the genres and isn't particularly fair to fantasy, an equally valid and important genre.

It is my position that the definition (whatever you decide it should be) cannot be "tested" the way you imply. It is what it is. If some film that you previously considered science fiction doesn't fit into that definition, then it isn't science fiction. The true test of a definition isn't whether it includes the work we instinctively think should be there, but how well it works in concert with other definitions. If you have significant overlap and confusion, it is not adequate; nor is it adequate if you have significant loss. In truth, once can not simply define science fiction without also defining fantasy, horror, goth, etc.

I don't believe that we arrive at the definition by analyzing the characteristics of what we currently accept as science fiction and then working our way back to a definition that sufficiently includes all those works. That's circular logic. We must start with a definition and work forward from there. That definition, obviously, cannot be random; it must have foundation. As such, I would argue that foundation is perhaps rooted in Frankenstein, the work that likely inspired the genre we are currently discussing. By comparing and contrasting it with the foundations of other genres (more difficult propositions to be sure as fantasy probably predates written word), one can hopefully arrive at suitable definitions that apply consistently to works of fiction. As Dick indicates, the way you apply that definition may be different from the way I apply it, but that application for either of us must be consistent.

Anyway, whether you're arguing a contrary position or simply a tangential one, that's <i>my</i> position. Take it for what it's worth.

das

ckolchak
05-12-04, 04:16 PM
If you prefer a more dramatic, emotional, intellectual piece, consider the absolutly fantastic Gattaca, and 12 Monkeys. You should be thrilled with both. Gattaca, in particular, is probably the most underrated science fiction movie I can think of.

If you're more of a guy who just wants some braindead entertainment (some will tell you otherwise, but these films have their place as well), go with the likes of Armageddon, Starship Troopers, etc.

i would agree that Gattaca is one of the most underrated sci-fi movies of all time.
just watched it again the other night.
speculative, w/ a story based on the practical consequences of new technology and how it affects the human condition...that is always what i understood 'real' sci-fi was all about.
a wonderful film.
(12 Monkeys is one of my favorites out of the 1990's also)

I still don't understand why Starship Troopers gets labeled as a 'brain-dead' action flick.
Armageddon, absolutely lacks grey cells, but ST has points to make, and makes them in a very entertaining way- it is as much a black humour satire of a certain era and genre of movies as it is a satire of human nature.
maybe because it deviates so much from the source text (deviations i think make sense for this film).

Regurgitator
05-12-04, 09:49 PM
Three words:

The Black Hole

and how about:

Saturn 3

mgbfan
05-13-04, 02:13 AM
Originally posted by das Monkey
I took it to mean that Dune was inherently science fiction because of popular perception. It was an inference made from your implication that the title "greatest science fiction novel ever written" precluded the definition for the genre given by Dick and could be used to test the accuracy of that definition. I apologize if I confused your point; however, given your "testing that definition" comment, I'm not sure if I did or not.

That's the heart of the question for me. Is Dick's definition satisfactory? I merely picked Dune as the most obvious candidate that may be precluded by the definition.

With some more thought, though, I suppose now that I have oversimplified the matter. Spice is the overwhelming thrust of all future technology in the Dune universe, but we also get quite a bit about non-spice-related environmental questions, even verging on terraforming, which would more than qualify for Dick's requirements. So perhaps, in retrospect, Dune is not the best example to challenge Dick's definition.

Hokeyboy
05-13-04, 10:01 AM
And whoever said Star Wars isn't Sci-Fi should have there genre definitions checked. I think Star Wars almost epitomizes that one!Star Wars is, without a doubt, "Sci-Fi". But it's far, far away from "Science Fiction".

mgbfan
05-13-04, 03:00 PM
Originally posted by Matt Millheiser
Star Wars is, without a doubt, "Sci-Fi". But it's far, far away from "Science Fiction".

Bingo.

corbin dallas
05-13-04, 04:10 PM
No mention of the Fifth Element yet?

Hendrik
05-13-04, 06:08 PM
Originally posted by Matt Millheiser
Star Wars is, without a doubt, "Sci-Fi". But it's far, far away from "Science Fiction".
...just as "HiFi" is far, far away from "High Fidelity", and "DVD" is far, far away from "Digital Versatile Disc", and "CD" is far, far away from "Compact Disc", and "TV" is far, far away from "Television", and "TPOTC" is far, far away from "The Passion Of The Christ", and...

(How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?)

. . . :o . . .

Hokeyboy
05-13-04, 07:30 PM
I am so not going into this argument again (http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=3419118#post3419118). Believe what you wanna believe dude.

mgbfan
05-13-04, 11:59 PM
Originally posted by Hendrik
...just as "HiFi" is far, far away from "High Fidelity", and "DVD" is far, far away from "Digital Versatile Disc", and "CD" is far, far away from "Compact Disc", and "TV" is far, far away from "Television", and "TPOTC" is far, far away from "The Passion Of The Christ", and...
This has been discussed in this very thread. "Sci-Fi" isn't just an abbreviation. It carries a different meaning.

Is it so much to ask that people keep up with the thread before inserting their ... *ahem* ... witty remarks?

NEUMANN
05-14-04, 12:15 AM
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=science+fiction

This says star wars is science fiction

Or this if you like
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?eu=68005&tocid=0&query=science%20fiction&ct=

Either way someone who say Star wars is not science fiction is in a very small minorty,the majority of the world will tell you that star wars is science fiction,now any one can come on a newsgroup and blow smoke up your butt and tell you that singin in the rain is a war movie or that star wars is not a science fiction movie but that does'nt make it so

dave-o
05-14-04, 12:30 PM
And just because the majority believes something, also..."does'nt make it so"...or another way of making this point is...

Blockbuster says Star Wars is Science Fiction...how could Blockbuster be wrong, I mean they are BLOCKBUSTER for goodness sakes!

mgbfan
05-14-04, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by NEUMANN
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=science+fiction

This says star wars is science fiction
No, it doesn't. This defines science fiction as:

fiction dealing principally with the impact of actual or imagined science on society or individuals or having a scientific factor as an essential orienting component

Show me how the "force" is science.

Originally posted by NEUMANN
Or this if you like
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?eu=68005&tocid=0&query=science%20fiction&ct=
The same. This is a definition that doesn't include Star Wars.

Originally posted by NEUMANN
[ Either way someone who say Star wars is not science fiction is in a very small minorty,the majority of the world will tell you that star wars is science fiction
And the majority of the world will tell you that evolution is a hoax, and that the Earth is really 4,000 years old. The majority of the world will tell you a whole lot of things.

Read a bit about logical fallacy. Find the fallacy called "Appeal to majority." An argument of "most people think this, therefore it's true," is a laughably bad argument, generally posed by someone unwilling or unable to come to independant decisions.

In other words, it makes you look stupid.

JupiterPrime
05-14-04, 01:28 PM
Originally posted by antennaball
Haven't seen it mentioned, but I would also suggest Event Horizon. One of my favorite movies in this genre. I find Event Horizon to be more of a Horror genre film, made in a sci-fi setting

JupiterPrime
05-14-04, 01:31 PM
good "Science Drama" film - Contact

das Monkey
05-14-04, 02:53 PM
• NEUMANN •

Either way someone who say Star wars is not science fiction is in a very small minorty,the majority of the world will tell you that star wars is science fiction,now any one can come on a newsgroup and blow smoke up your butt and tell you that singin in the rain is a war movie or that star wars is not a science fiction movie but that does'nt make it so
Popular opinion is nonsense for this discussion, but if it makes you feel better, we had a poll on this exact topic a few years back (that appears to have disappeared over time), and the forum was split right down the middle. The last time I saw it, "not science fiction" was ahead by 3 votes, but given that there were hundreds of votes cast, that's hardly a convincing "victory." Suffice it to say that there is not this "very small minority" of which you speak. Granted Movie Talk is a bit more educated and informed that the average public, so it's not a particularly good statistical sample, but on this issue, I'd argue that the opinion of informed movie-goers is a bit more valuable than those who may or may not have even seen the film.

Not that it matters, though, since popular opinion does not dictate accuracy. If it did, we'd have to start adding words like "irregardlessly" to the lexicon.

das

Hendrik
05-14-04, 06:56 PM
"Sci-Fi" isn't just an abbreviation. It carries a different meaning.

...ahh... I see... mine eyes have been opened... like I always say: an attentive, alert person visiting the internet can learn something new every day...

(How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?)

. . . :o . . .

dave-o
05-14-04, 11:59 PM
You can pretend there is no history behind the use of the term sci-fi all you like, and that will serve you well if ignorance is your goal. It must be nice to be able to discount any new information that you "learn" if it doesn't fit in with your previously held beliefs.




(how big of a pin are we talking about here?)

NEUMANN
05-15-04, 12:24 AM
Its not just not Blockbuster that considers Star Wars Sci-fi its every retail store on the planet,for christ sakes it does'nt matter where you go whether it be barnes and noble or borders(Star Wars books) or wal mart, target, best buy, circuit city (Star Wars movies) any store you can think of Star Wars is listed as sci-fi,and you can come up with any lame ass excuses you want why it is'nt sci-fi,but you will still be blowing smoke up peoples ass,what part of this don't you guys get,Star Wars is sci-fi end of story

das Monkey
05-15-04, 12:41 AM
Well, I'm convinced.

das

dave-o
05-15-04, 12:51 AM
To be fair to Blcobuster, I was only using that store to represent all of the Best Buy's, Targets, etc. They operate on the 'keep it simple stupid" principle. If you actually have to think before you decide what section to peruse, that is bad for business. Once again, if we are looking to these sources to help us define our genres, then this discussion need not go any further, b/c we perceive and interpret things in very different ways.

NEUMANN
05-15-04, 01:33 AM
In my entire time as a member of this forum i have never heard a good solid arguement on why Star Wars should not be considered sci-fi,all i hear is a lot of double talk that can be easealy refuted,sure people like to play devils advocate and such but c'mon people this is a gimme,Star Wars is sci-fi always has been always will be,people that don't agree will post long elequent storys on why it should'nt be,but any two year old can see past there convuleted logic

Why they persist in such notions is beyond me(other than the devils advocate therory)this is a no brainer star wars is sci-fi always has been always will be,and although i am not the most elequent story teller(or typist,speller,lol) that has ever graced these boards do not fall prey to this ridicoulous notion that Star Wars is not sci-fi

Hokeyboy
05-15-04, 01:58 AM
Nobody said Star Wars wasn't "Sci-Fi". It is. I totally agree.

But it is not, nor has it ever been, "Science Fiction". Too many solid arguments have been presented against this notion, and none have been put forward to support it.

But if you want to judge an item's validity by going by whatever Blockbuster, Target, and Walmart say, vaya con pollo my friend. :)

NEUMANN
05-15-04, 02:02 AM
I have never seen a solid argument that Star Wars is not science fiction,perhaps you will indulge me with the first

mgbfan
05-15-04, 02:14 AM
Originally posted by NEUMANN
Its not just not Blockbuster that considers Star Wars Sci-fi its every retail store on the planet,
Oh. OH! Geez, you know, I was sitting here waiting for a good, solid argument to come along, and by god, it did. K-Mart said so!

LOL. And, by the way, most of the folks here have said that Star Wars is "sci-fi." What we're telling you is that it's not "science fiction."
Originally posted by NEUMANN
for christ sakes it does'nt matter where you go whether it be barnes and noble or borders(Star Wars books) or wal mart, target, best buy, circuit city (Star Wars movies) any store you can think of Star Wars is listed as sci-fi,and you can come up with any lame ass excuses you want why it is'nt sci-fi,but you will still be blowing smoke up peoples ass,what part of this don't you guys get,Star Wars is sci-fi end of story
Did you forget your Ritalin today?

mgbfan
05-15-04, 02:16 AM
Originally posted by NEUMANN
I have never seen a solid argument that Star Wars is not science fiction,perhaps you will indulge me with the first

Read the thread, genius. It's been explained at least three times. It's not science fiction because it relies on MAGIC.

Any story that relies on magic is not science fiction..

NEUMANN
05-15-04, 02:18 AM
Oh great mgbfan thats just the argument that i was looking for to sway my decesion,could you add anything to that so i could be positive lol,this is just the thing that i have been saying,nobody has ever even come close to a solid argument that star wars is not science fiction, and yes i have read the thread,i must have missed the three times that the powers that be have declared Star Wars not science fiction,so maybe you could be a helpful gent and spell them out for me,and as hard as it may be for you to believe,relegion or magic can be part of a science fiction story,GEEZ when will this end

das Monkey
05-15-04, 02:56 AM
I don't say this to be rude, but you've barely been here less than a year. In the 5 years I've been here, we've argued the hell out of this and presented incredibly detailed and IMO compelling reasons for why <b>Star Wars</b> is or is not science fiction. It's unfortunate that those discussions were not archived, but the way you so completely and utterly dismiss the mere thought that those who say it isn't may in fact have a point, refering to the concept as a "lame ass excuse" and a "ridiculous notion", I'm not sure those discussions would be of any value anyway. We've discussed this so many times, you can find discussions about how we're tired of discussing it if you search on the topic.

Frankly, I don't see why you care so damn much. Fantasy is an incredible genre, and the original <b>Star Wars</b> trilogy is a wonderful representation of some of the genre's best characteristics. As a science fiction film, it's downright terrible, but as a fantasy film, it's amazing. And there's nothing wrong with that, because it's not intended to be science fiction. It's fantasy in space. It's the classic hero's quest -- separation, initiation, return -- building on the foundations of Homer and Tolkein. It wouldn't matter if the setting were the high seas, and Han was a boat captain, and Luke fought with a sword, and they bounced from island to island instead of planet to planet. The story would remain the same. It isn't about technology's effect on man, it isn't an analysis of the human condition ... it's a hero's quest. It embodies the very heart of the fantasy genre, and I would think any fan of the franchise would be proud to consider it one of the truly great fantasy epics of the modern age.

das

Apone
05-15-04, 05:30 AM
So tell us josuff247 which ones did you watch? :)

JupiterPrime
05-15-04, 07:06 PM
Star Wars is a Western with Laser pistols and space ships

during the scenen where Luke is out overlooking the plains at night and we have the sad, sorrow, hero music, I can almost hear the classic western trill....Doo dee doo dee dooooooo.....waaaa waaaa waaaaaaaa

mgbfan
05-16-04, 11:30 PM
Originally posted by NEUMANN
relegion or magic can be part of a science fiction story,GEEZ when will this end

Religion, yes. Magic, no. Science fiction does not include magic. That's fantasy. Heroes and villians running around with swords and performing magic spells on one another is practically the definition of "high fantasy," and just mixing in some space ships and laser guns doesn't change that.

In any event, try not to pop a vein. Like an earlier poster said, there's nothing shameful about fantasy as a genre. The Lord of the Rings movies are fantasy, and I don't see anyone holding genre against them.

NEUMANN
05-16-04, 11:49 PM
Spaceships,aliens and laser guns are the definition of sci-fi and throwing in a little magic does'nt change that

mgbfan
05-17-04, 01:02 AM
Originally posted by NEUMANN
Spaceships,aliens and laser guns are the definition of sci-fi and throwing in a little magic does'nt change that

Are you just a terminally slow learner? Pretty much everyone in this thread has agreed that Star Wars IS "sci-fi." Star Wars is NOT, however, "science fiction."

Your inability to grasp the basic terms being thrown around in this thread really invalidates any opinions you give. It seems we have to re-explain EVERYTHING to you every two or three posts. Sci-fi and science fiction are not the same thing. Star Wars is, by most everyone's definition "sci-fi." But it is not, by any serious definition, "science fiction."

Now ... why do I get the sense that three posts from now, you're going to need all of this explained again?

Hendrik
05-17-04, 02:21 PM
...what about " SF "...?...

. . . :o . . .

dave-o
05-17-04, 10:36 PM
...what about " SF "...?...

What an insightful addition to this thread, thank you for your contribution, it has helped me to better understand myself and the world around me.





Why is it that you frequently end your posts with a yawn? I am genuinely concerned about the amount of sleep you are getting.


...:o...

mgbfan
05-17-04, 11:15 PM
Originally posted by Hendrik
...what about " SF "...?...

SF is, of course, the abbreviation for "science fiction."

NEUMANN
05-18-04, 06:11 PM
mgbfan wrote

Are you just a terminally slow learner? Pretty much everyone in this thread has agreed that Star Wars IS "sci-fi." Star Wars is NOT, however, "science fiction."

Your inability to grasp the basic terms being thrown around in this thread really invalidates any opinions you give. It seems we have to re-explain EVERYTHING to you every two or three posts. Sci-fi and science fiction are not the same thing. Star Wars is, by most everyone's definition "sci-fi." But it is not, by any serious definition, "science fiction."

Now ... why do I get the sense that three posts from now, you're going to need all of this explained again?

____________________________________________________


My god are you some kind of self absorbed,ego driven idiot,pretty much every one in this thread has been useing sci-fi as a abrevation for science fiction,you and maybe 2 or 3 other people are the ones throwing a hissy fit over the whole thing,you have called people stupid in this thread(not just me either) for useing sci-fi instead of science fiction or sf,and because i don't agree with you about sci-fi and science fiction being the same thing i am a slow learner,get a life

The phrase Sci-fi has ingrained itself in the american language as just a shortened version of science fiction.You seem to think that just because you dont see it that way and told us so in this thread that from now on we must refer to sci-fi and science fiction as two diffrent things,well who the hell are you,get a clue, most of us dont care what you think,if a couple thousand fanboys want to put on airs and think they are true science fiction devotees and superior to millions of other casual fans because they refuse to call science fiction sci-fi well more power to them if it makes them feel better about themselves,as far as i am concerned sci-fi is science fiction,got that,i hope so,but i am sure i will have to explain it to a slow learner like you 3 posts from now

You have a bad habit of makeing a statement and thinking that your word is law and no more discusion is needed and you fail to see your hand in front of your face,i do not get the impression at all that most people in this thread agree that sci-fi is not science fiction,you say i cannot grasp what you are saying,don't make me laugh mr ego,i just don't agree with you,but you go on being rude to everyone and insisting your viewpoint is the only viewpoint

DVDho78DTS
05-18-04, 06:42 PM
NEUMANN, I don't know if you are aware but you can click the http://ads.kleinman.com/images/quote.gif icon in the upper right corner to quote someone. Makes it easier for those of us reading. :)

NEUMANN
05-18-04, 07:04 PM
Thanks DVD will have to use that from now on

mgbfan
05-18-04, 09:26 PM
Originally posted by NEUMANN
My god are you some kind of self absorbed,ego driven idiot,pretty much every one in this thread has been useing sci-fi as a abrevation for science fiction
I suggest you re-read the thread. Not that it'll do any good. You seem adept at seeing only that which you choose to see.
Originally posted by NEUMANN
The phrase Sci-fi has ingrained itself in the american language as just a shortened version of science fiction.
And "irregardles" has ingrained (sic) itself into the american language as a real word. Doesn't mean that it is. Never underestimate the ability of the American people to butcher the meaning of a word. And never fool yourself into believing that just because a LOT of people misuse a term that the meaning of the term somehow changes. If that were the case, the word "unique" would have no meaning whatsoever.
Originally posted by NEUMANN
most of us dont care what you think
You spend an awful lot of time for not caring.
Originally posted by NEUMANN
You have a bad habit of makeing a statement and thinking that your word is law and no more discusion is needed and you fail to see your hand in front of your face,
LOL. Are you for real?
Originally posted by NEUMANN
i do not get the impression at all that most people in this thread agree that sci-fi is not science fiction,you say i cannot grasp what you are saying,don't make me laugh mr ego,i just don't agree with you,but you go on being rude to everyone and insisting your viewpoint is the only viewpoint
Feel better now? I'm curious, was your mouth actually foaming during your little rant?

NEUMANN
05-18-04, 09:55 PM
Originally posted by mgbfan
I suggest you re-read the thread. Not that it'll do any good. You seem adept at seeing only that which you choose to see.

And "irregardles" has ingrained (sic) itself into the american language as a real word. Doesn't mean that it is. Never underestimate the ability of the American people to butcher the meaning of a word. And never fool yourself into believing that just because a LOT of people misuse a term that the meaning of the term somehow changes. If that were the case, the word "unique" would have no meaning whatsoever.

You spend an awful lot of time for not caring.

LOL. Are you for real?

Feel better now? I'm curious, was your mouth actually foaming during your little rant?


Well as to your first point,you better re-read the thread because everyone was saying sci-fi like they always do,until you made a big deal of it,you seem to be the one with blinders on

As to your second point never underestimate the ability of a small group of fanboys to get upset and throw a hissy fit over the way america uses a phrase.

As to your third point i do not spend hardly any time caring on you calling me stupid (or other people for that matter) because we say that sci-fi is science fiction,as far as i am concerned you are just an egotistical idiot who gets off on this kinda stuff and has nothing better to do

As to your fourth point,yes i am real,thank you for asking

As to your fifth point,i feel fine,i was never feeling badly,and no i was not foaming at the mouth,because i could care less what people like you think of me and no matter what you say i would not get upset so go ahead and bad mouth me and everyone else that uses sci-fi for science fiction because we will take it in stride once we consider the source

mgbfan
05-18-04, 11:15 PM
Originally posted by NEUMANN
As to your fifth point,i feel fine,i was never feeling badly,and no i was not foaming at the mouth,because i could care less what people like you think of me

So you tell us. Again. And again. And again.

In any event, the message I get from you is that, rather than learn something, you'd rather live in ignorance and place your own intellect at the level of the general public.

Be my guest. If you aspire to be Joe Six-Pack, by all means. Don't let something so pedestrian as facts stand in your way. But also don't expect to have your opinions taken seriously.

dave-o
05-19-04, 12:10 AM
Sci-Fi, SF, Science Fiction, A fictional story with scientific based plot points, Science-Fi, Sci-Fiction, whatever you choose to call the genre, Star Wars is still not science fiction...Spaceships and laser guns do not define the genre. Think if we categorized all movies based on a couple of superficial objects that happened to be in the film.

NEUMANN, its interesting that you refer to the people with a different definition of Science Fiction as Fanboys. In my experience, I tend to think of the people who become ultra-defensive when you say anything about Star Wars as the fanboys (even though calling it a fantasy is by no means a negative IMO).

Also, I tend to define all of the genres more by the ideas and plot points involved in the story than by the setting and the objects that may appear in that setting, if this makes me a "fanboy", so be it, but if I am, I am one of all the genres.

Hokeyboy
05-19-04, 02:37 PM
Originally posted by NEUMANN
... i could care less what people like you think of me... Wait a minute.


You could care less what people think of you?

That means you do care more about what people think of you.

Unless you meant "couldn't care less."

My point? Just because you say the former doesn't mean you intend the latter. That's kind of like, I dunno... saying "Sci-Fi" and meaning "Science Fiction"... or something...

Seriously, I'm not picking on you Neumann. You seem like a nice guy, and if I had some cake I'd gladly share it. But there is a difference, that's all. "Sci-Fi" is zap guns, space fights, googly-eyed aliens, flying saucers, and space opera. Think "Independence Day", "Men In Black", "Wing Commander" (*shudder*), etc.. Basically comedies, action films, or westerns transplanted into a gosh-pow-gee-whiz environment.

Science Fiction is a speculative look at the present or future, generally extrapolating scientific concepts, philosophies, or technology from the present and presenting them in a more advanced milieu, using the evolution of said concepts, philosophies, or technologies to re-examine contemporary (or classic) mores.

Think "2001", "Blade Runner", "Brazil", "Dark City", "Gattaca", "Minority Report", "AI", etc..

One isn't inherently better than the other. I'd watch "Men In Black" a dozen times before I watch "AI" again.

NEUMANN
05-19-04, 09:29 PM
Originally posted by Matt Millheiser
Wait a minute.


You could care less what people think of you?

That means you do care more about what people think of you.

Unless you meant "couldn't care less."

My point? Just because you say the former doesn't mean you intend the latter. That's kind of like, I dunno... saying "Sci-Fi" and meaning "Science Fiction"... or something...

Seriously, I'm not picking on you Neumann. You seem like a nice guy, and if I had some cake I'd gladly share it. But there is a difference, that's all. "Sci-Fi" is zap guns, space fights, googly-eyed aliens, flying saucers, and space opera. Think "Independence Day", "Men In Black", "Wing Commander" (*shudder*), etc.. Basically comedies, action films, or westerns transplanted into a gosh-pow-gee-whiz environment.

Science Fiction is a speculative look at the present or future, generally extrapolating scientific concepts, philosophies, or technology from the present and presenting them in a more advanced milieu, using the evolution of said concepts, philosophies, or technologies to re-examine contemporary (or classic) mores.

Think "2001", "Blade Runner", "Brazil", "Dark City", "Gattaca", "Minority Report", "AI", etc..

One isn't inherently better than the other. I'd watch "Men In Black" a dozen times before I watch "AI" again.

Wow a nice post that does'nt belittle me when i disagree with someone lol,could use a few more of these lol,ok Matt i know what you guys have been saying all along,i just don't agree with you.I mean you would have to eliminate half of the films that people consider science fiction,could you imagine the fights on diffrent threads if you kept popping in on discussions on say starship troopers,aliens or star wars and told people to quit calling them science fiction because thats not what they are, that they are in fact sci-fi.

Heck there could be 1000 threads on a 1000 films on what films qualify for your versions of SF and sci-fi,with endless debates that would never be won by either party,i still believe a movie with zap guns,space travel and bug eyed monsters like starship troopers,aliens and star wars can be considered science fiction and that science fiction and sci-fi are the same thing

mgbfan
05-20-04, 01:33 AM
Originally posted by NEUMANN
Heck there could be 1000 threads on a 1000 films on what films qualify for your versions of SF and sci-fi,with endless debates that would never be won by either party,i still believe a movie with zap guns,space travel and bug eyed monsters like starship troopers,aliens and star wars can be considered science fiction and that science fiction and sci-fi are the same thing
As I said, be my guest. Just don't be shocked when people correct you on the discinction now and then.

It's like when you say "I could care less." If you're cool with using that incorrectly, simply because others do as well, then go ahead. No skin off my back. But again, don't be shocked when someone points out to you that you're really saying the opposite of what you mean. That's just the risk you run when you choose to willfully misuse a word, term, or phrase.

NEUMANN
05-21-04, 06:52 PM
There you go,thinking you already have determined the correct definition of sci-fi vs Sf,this has never been established,so be ny guest,and don't be surprised when people correct you on the distinction that does not exist betwen the two

Buckaroo Banzai
05-22-04, 02:20 AM
Wow, somebody asks for some film recommendations and what does he get instead? A bunch of crybabies argueing semantics.

Some good Films:

Aliens
The Abyss: Special Edition
2010 (Probably want to watch 2001 first)
Equilibrium (Excellent film that passed under the radar)
12 Monkeys
The Last Starfighter
The Fifth Element

Let us know what you end up watching.

Ian

mgbfan
05-23-04, 12:36 PM
Originally posted by NEUMANN
There you go,thinking you already have determined the correct definition of sci-fi vs Sf,this has never been established,

There you go, assuming that just because you don't know the background and entomology of a phrase that there isn't one.

Believe it or not (and I'm sure it'll be "not," if history is any judge), your ignorance of the term's origin does not mean that said origin doesn't exist. Just like when you close your eyes, the rest of the world doesn't actually disappear. Most people get past that delusion after about age 3.

Flave
05-25-04, 03:16 PM
k, I'm gonna invent a new word: IdiotFi

It encompasses all of sci-fi, scifi, science fiction, Science Fiction, SF, sf, fantasy, FanSciFi, fantasy-fi, science fantasy, SciFa, Sci-Fan, and sci-fan-fi. But only if the soundtrack is in HiFi.

Semper fi.

Hokeyboy
05-27-04, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by Flave
k, I'm gonna invent a new word: IdiotFi

It encompasses all of sci-fi, scifi, science fiction, Science Fiction, SF, sf, fantasy, FanSciFi, fantasy-fi, science fantasy, SciFa, Sci-Fan, and sci-fan-fi. But only if the soundtrack is in HiFi.

Semper fi. Does this include Vanilla Sky and Bullwhip Griffin?

Talkin2Phil
08-18-04, 05:36 PM
One of my favorite Sci-Fi movies is Lathe of Heaven (1980) first broadcasted on PBS. This movie is all about the story-what would happen if our dreams changed reality? This production has limited special effects, filmed on a budget using 'futuristic' downtown Dallas and Fort Worth, and a bad video to DVD transfer. However, it is the story that matters.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081036/

Trigger
08-18-04, 05:51 PM
Hardware
Screamers
Death Machine
Starship Troopers
Fifth Element
Red Planet
Event Horizon
Dark City
Equilibrium
Juvenile
Wonderful Days
Abyss
Natural City
Avalon
Returner
Electric Dragon 80,000 Volt
Iron Man 1 & 2
Mad Max 1-3
Cyborg 1 & 2

Haven't seen yet, but these look good:
Arahan
Casshern
God*Diva

mikehunt
03-20-08, 09:56 PM
Starship Troopers! (warning, people either love or hate Starship Troopers, there is no middle ground... personaly, I think it's one of the best sci fi films ever.)

I like it, but it's not really sci fi
and you have to watch it without trying to compare it to the book

Kudama
03-21-08, 02:19 PM
Colossus: The Forbin Project!!!

Sure it looks a little dated but the story rocks and Colossus ends up looking really cool about half way through.