# Ten Sci-Fi Flicks for the Thinking Man



## MontyCircus (Jan 21, 2009)

ROTTEN TOMATOES: Ten Sci-Fi Flicks for the Thinking Man

ROTTEN TOMATOES: Movies - New Movie Reviews and Previews! (great movie review site that takes all the critics' reviews and compiles them to get a percentage approval rating), recently had a feature listing 10 great sci-fi movies; "thoughtful pieces on what it means to be human."

Here's the list (I sorted it chronologically):


*Planet of the Apes (1968)*

Not sure I've actually seen it in its entirety.  Would probably enjoy it though.  My sister bought the whole series on VHS a few years ago...I don't think I even took off the cellophane.


*2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)*

This might be my mother's favourite film.  And it might be my father's most hated film.  I should hate it.  It's long'ish.  It's very slow.  And the ending is notoriously vague and "What the ****???"-inducing.  But...I think the effects are cool.  HAL is cool.  I usually go into it reminding myself that the ending makes no damn sense...and that lets me appreciate it.  I've read "the explanation" on this forum from Clarke's book, and it sounds interesting.  I think the movie would be a lot less hated if the ending was more coherent.

*@@@* / @@@@@


*Solaris (1972)*

Haven't seen it.  Is the newer Clooney version crap?


*Sleeper (1973)*

A Woody Allen flick.  Never heard of it before this list.


*Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)*

Saw this when I was very, very young.  My memories of this and *E.T.* intertwine.  I really should see it again.


*Blade Runner (1982)*

Was supposed to see it at a friend's birthday party about 15 years ago...don't think we ended up getting around to see it.  So...I've never seen it *ducks everything thrown at me and bravely runs away*.  Which is better?  The Ford voiceover version or non-voiceover?


*Gattaca (1997)*

Was disappointed when I saw it in theatres.  Saw it again today and was underwhelmed...again.  It's a pretty boring movie.  One rule of thumb I use, a tip off that I won't like a movie, is when critics spend over 90% of their review talking about how "pretty" the movie is, and using the word "cinematography" more than 12 or 13 times.

*@@* / @@@@@


*Dark City (1998)*

I remember it being interesting and confusing.  Would like to give it another go.  Kind of like the "unsuccessful" version of the *Matrix*.  Actually, I'm sure if the *Matrix* trilogy hadn't tanked that the first movie would definitely be on this list.


*Primer (2004)*

Oh my god.  Heard Ebert (and maybe Siskel...was he still alive?) gush over this so I rented it.  Hated it, hated it, hated it.  The characters just kept repeating technobabble from the first frame to the last...not only that, but the technobabble could barely be heard because the movie was so damn low budget apparently they couldn't afford decent mics.  Anyway, the story is about a couple of guys that invent a time machine by accident (I think), and they keep experimenting and paradoxes start happening and things get really complicated.  Of course, they don't bother explaining why all these complicated things are happening, and frankly, I never cared.  Basically the movie is a lot like Charlie Kaufman's *Being John Malkovitch*, just without ANY of the fun.  *BJM* is every bit as complicated as this film...but *BJM* takes the time to be coherent.  Something I appreciate in a film.

*@* / @@@@@


*Children of Men (2006)*

Very disappointed by this one too.  Had one great poignant moment towards the end (when a battle briefly stops...thought that was brilliant stuff), but nothing about the rest of the film grabbed me at all.  Michael Caine's crazy weed growing character was just bizarre, like it was from a different movie.

*@@* / @@@@@


So, of 4 I've seen enough to rate...I like one.  Man I've got to see Blade Runner...


----------



## littlemissattitude (Jan 21, 2009)

I'm not a Woody Allen fan, but I have to admit that Sleeper is one of the funniest movies I've ever seen.  Not for the kiddies, though.

Otherwise...the original Planet of the Apes is a classic.  One cannot be considered educated about science fiction films if one hasn't seen it.


2001 is also a classic.  I don't think it would be if it didn't have the ending it does.

Close Encounters isn't the best first-contact film there is (the original The Day the Earth Stood Still is), but it is very close.  One of the few films I stood in line to see first day, first showing.

I've never been able to sit through all of Blade Runner; not sure why.  And I hated what I saw of Gattaca and turned it off before it was over.


----------



## Michael01 (Jan 21, 2009)

*Blade Runner* is and always will be one of my all-time favs. Okay, it may not be quite as interesting as the book, *Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep* (which is really really good), but I love it. If you do get the chance to see it, Monty, try to catch the director's cut.

I've seen all of *The Planet of the Apes* and can agree that they're worth watching, and I'm really not much for the older films (usually).

*2001* is a classic, and I sorta kinda didn't exactly _mind_ watching it  ... but I must admit that I liked *2010* a lot more.

And Littlemiss, I couldn't agree more about first contact films: *The Day the Earth Stood Still* was _extremely_ well done for such an old movie. I find myself wanting to ask Rotten Tomatoes why it's not in their list, and why they didn't mention "Super Carrot" either (just in reference to old but good sci-fi films, not necessarily first contact) ...  *Close Encounters*?  I guess I need to catch that one again.  Don't remember getting into it all that much.

I did watch *Gattaca* all the way through, but to this day I still wonder why.

Oh, yeah, I did really enjoy *Dark City*. Great movie.


----------



## Connavar (Jan 21, 2009)

I liked Gattaca, i kept thinking that they finally made a new Sci-fi movie that actually is like a SF book.   Not action blockbuster in space or the future but a thinking man's sci-fi movie.

One of the last good Sci-Fi movies imo.   Interesting issues,characters in that movie and nice visuals.

I cant disagree with the list.  I have seen most of them except Solaris,Sleeper,Primer.


----------



## iansales (Jan 21, 2009)

MontyCircus, by your own admission none of these films were going to appeal to you. They're for the "thinking man" and you clearly prefer more action-oriented films. Hence your dismissal of cinematography (which is actually pretty important - film is a visual medium, after all), and your complaint that Primer was all "technobabble".

As for the list, I agree with most of them - Tarkovsky's *Solaris* is far superior to Soderbergh's remake; I thought *Gattaca* was a bit dull; can't stand Woody Allen; both *Dark City* and *Children of Men* are excellent; and the Planet of the Apes films vary too much in quality to belong on the list.


----------



## Connavar (Jan 21, 2009)

iansales said:


> MontyCircus, by your own admission none of these films were going to appeal to you. They're for the "thinking man" and you clearly prefer more action-oriented films. Hence your dismissal of cinematography (which is actually pretty important - film is a visual medium, after all), and your complaint that Primer was all "technobabble".
> 
> As for the list, I agree with most of them - Tarkovsky's *Solaris* is far superior to Soderbergh's remake; I thought *Gattaca* was a bit dull; can't stand Woody Allen; both *Dark City* and *Children of Men* are excellent; and the Planet of the Apes films vary too much in quality to belong on the list.



Planet of the Apes really only the first are of quality.


Gattaca was far from perfect but it was good to me.  My real complaint about the movie is you didnt see much of the world.  Almost too much focused on the characters.


----------



## Happy Joe (Jan 21, 2009)

I rather like the first "Planet of the Apes" movie (and prefer it to the remake) the rest of the flicks in the list; while classic are not much, IMO.  Iansales & Connavar are correct the quality of the Apes movies goes downhill rapidly after the first one.
I was disappointed in all of the movies on the list while still in the theater; except Planet of the Apes (it is also the only one on the list on my movie shelf).

Enjoy!


----------



## Ghost Of Gernsback (Jan 22, 2009)

Loose Solaris and substitute with Quiet Earth. Other than that not bad, if not a touch predictable


----------



## MontyCircus (Jan 22, 2009)

iansales said:


> MontyCircus, by your own admission none of these films were going to appeal to you. They're for the "thinking man" and you clearly prefer more action-oriented films.



Yeah that's probably true.  I don't mind thinking though.  I do it from time to time.  

For example, when *The Island* went from interesting plot and cool ideas to big, expensive chase & explosion scenes...I wanted to shoot somebody.  Same goes for *I, Robot* too.

So...I like to think...at least hypothetically...that I could enjoy a "thinking man's" flick (oh, I liked the original *The Day the Earth Stood Still* too).

[/quote]Hence your dismissal of cinematography (which is actually pretty important - film is a visual medium, after all)[/quote]

But it shouldn't be the focal point of a review, or the one thing you take from a film.  I mean, *Road to Perdition* is another great example.  You show a couple of crane shots of some green fields and critics wet their pants.  I'd rather see some interesting characters and a riveting plotline myself.

That said, I enjoyed watching the *Citizen Kane* bonus features (or maybe it was commentaries) about all the ground-breaking camerawork.  It was cool how they broke it all down and explained "why this is amazing and why it was important in the history of film".

But anyway, call me crazy, I don't pay $10 for a great "set lighting and camera choices" experience.  And I'd like to suggest that anyone who does is out of their god damn mind 



> and your complaint that Primer was all "technobabble".



Umm...it most definitely is technobabble..............did you watch the film?  I doubt it, especially since you just mentioned how important cinematography is to you ($7,000 production budget...and my god does it show).

From Ebert's review (he liked it):



> Shane Carruth's "*Primer*" opens with four techheads addressing envelopes to possible investors; they seek venture capital for a machine they're building in the garage. They're not entirely sure what the machine does, although it certainly does something. Their dialogue is halfway between shop talk and one of those articles in Wired magazine that you never finish. We don't understand most of what they're saying, and neither, perhaps, do they, but we get the drift. Challenging us to listen closely, to half-understand what they half-understand, is one of the ways the film sucks us in.



I could quote other critics that actually use the word "technobabble" in their reviews, but I think you get the point.

Compare the horrible bore of *Primer* to something like *Being John Malkovitch*, which had me positively giddy in the theatre.  It was like brain candy.  Watching it was like downloading awesomeness through your eyes and directly into your brain.  Both answered outlandish "what-if" questions in stories that are...essentially...about magic holes that go somewhere.  Both had very complicated scripts.  One was boring and confusing ON PURPOSE.  The other was endlessly fun and imaginitive and rewarded the viewer's "what would happen if..." thoughts.

I'll lump *Primer* in with movies like *Donnie Darko*, where people like it (or more likely only "say" they like it), because it's confusing and impossible to understand...so therefore it must be deep.

*Primer* is not deep...it's a movie with cheap cameras (actually I think just camera...singular), bad sound (honestly, at times I had my system cranked and couldn't friggin' hear the lines)...and probably bad everything else quality-wise.  It's boring, and confusing on purpose.  On purpose.

I could write a mystery novel and delete every fifth word in it and call it *The Fifth*.  Some people might like the challenge of figuring out the plot of a book like that and call it "challenging" and "inventive".  I'd probably call those people retarded, gullible fools myself.

*Primer* sucks.  Hard.  In every conceivable way.  You've been warned y'all


----------



## iansales (Jan 22, 2009)

MontyCircus said:


> Umm...it most definitely is technobabble..............did you watch the film?  I doubt it, especially since you just mentioned how important cinematography is to you ($7,000 production budget...and my god does it show).



Yes, I've seen it. In fact, I have the DVD. And I thought it was a good, cleverly-done film. The so-called technobabble established characters, plot and the film's central premise.

But if you hated it, nothing I say is going to make you like it.



MontyCircus said:


> Both answered outlandish "what-if" questions in stories that are...essentially...about magic holes that go somewhere.  Both had very complicated scripts.  One was boring and confusing ON PURPOSE.  The other was endlessly fun and imaginitive and rewarded the viewer's "what would happen if..." thoughts.



First, *Primer* was not about a magic hole - if that's what you think, you've misunderstood it. Second, it was not boring on purpose. In your opinion, it was boring. That doesn't mean the film-makers deliberately made it that way.

Second, I've also seen *Being John Malkovich*. And I didn't like it.



MontyCircus said:


> I'll lump *Primer* in with movies like *Donnie Darko*, where people like it (or more likely only "say" they like it), because it's confusing and impossible to understand...so therefore it must be deep.



*Donnie Darko* is a lot more straightforward than *Primer*, and not difficult to understand at all. Just because you failed to understand it doesn't mean that people who do are liars. The fault is yours, not theirs.



MontyCircus said:


> *Primer* is not deep...it's a movie with cheap cameras (actually I think just camera...singular), bad sound (honestly, at times I had my system cranked and couldn't friggin' hear the lines)...and probably bad everything else quality-wise.  It's boring, and confusing on purpose.  On purpose.



It's a low budget film. It was not made by a major studio. That has nothing to do with the quality of the script or acting. And again, to claim it was made "boring and confusing" on purpose is stupid.



MontyCircus said:


> *Primer* sucks.  Hard.  In every conceivable way.  You've been warned y'all



If you like films that make you think, _really_ think, that aren't just some muscle-bound oaf with a gun running round shotting things, then you might enjoy *Primer*. It's a fiercely intelligent film about time paradoxes, and towards the end, when paradox builds on paradox, it can get confusing. But it's worth persevering.


----------



## Michael01 (Jan 22, 2009)

Um ... okay.  Getting a little hot in here, isn't it?  Here, first let me open a window...

Never seen *Primer*.  I saw *Being John Malkovich* and wasn't very impressed, I must admit.  I'm usually the odd man out on these things (really - I liked *Catwoman*), but I thought *The Island* and *I, Robot* were both great movies - especially *I, Robot* (even thought the movie was a big improvement on the book).

Still ... it's all in fun right?  Besides, anyone who likes *The Day the Earth Stood Still* is okay in my book...

Ooh, is there anyone here who likes the Super Carrot?  It's not as much of a "thinking" movie as the others we've mentioned, but I thought it was cool.  I am _so_ going to start reading "Who Goes There?" tonight.

If you haven't noticed, I'm being deliberately obtuse.  I can't help it; I just really really love that line.  "Super Carrot..." [rolls around on the floor laughing uncontrollably like an idiot]


----------



## Ursa major (Jan 22, 2009)

I think (yes, really ) we're allowed to like more than one type of film.

I enjoyed *I, Robot* for what it was, a CGI sci-fi romp. I knew before I'd seen a single frame that it wasn't going to capture much of Asimov's SF work.

I'm more bothered about remakes that, basically, trash the original. I haven't seen new *The Day the Earth Stood Still*, but from what little I've heard, it shares only its title with the original.

My reasoning (not very deep, I'm afraid) is that if you go into a bookshop and want Asimov's work, you're not going to be given anything to do with the film (unless there's a newly written tie-in, heaven forbid, that "captures" the film). Look for the film, though, and the ignorant** will probably end up with the remake, not the classic, which would be more than a shame.



** - I'm not trying to be perlorative here, merely realistic.


----------



## Michael01 (Jan 22, 2009)

No, please don't scare me like that.  As much as I prefer the movie to the book, it just wouldn't be right.  A tie-in like that would be a different book.  The book does have its moments, and it would be a shame to miss them.

In most cases I'd say that's true, though, about remakes, but I like the remake of Super Carrot almost as much as the original.


----------



## iansales (Jan 22, 2009)

Ursa major said:


> My reasoning (not very deep, I'm afraid) is that if you go into a bookshop and want Asimov's work, you're not going to be given anything to do with the film (unless there's a newly written tie-in, heaven forbid, that "captures" the film).



Don't scoff too much. Philip K Dick's story 'We Can Remember It For You Wholesale' was adapted for film as *Total Recall*, and then the film was novelised by Piers Anthony. So it does happen.


----------



## Ursa major (Jan 22, 2009)

I know that it happens, Ian; I was simply hoping that it had hadn't happened in this case.


(And sorry, Michael01, I didn't mean to scare anyone. )


----------



## Michael01 (Jan 22, 2009)

iansales said:


> Don't scoff too much. Philip K Dick's story 'We Can Remember It For You Wholesale' was adapted for film as *Total Recall*, and then the film was novelised by Piers Anthony. So it does happen.



Oh, you're not kidding, are you?  I read the Piers Anthony novelization, and I was okay with it since I like Piers Anthony.  Now I'm disappointed, and I will have to find the original story.  If *Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep* is any indication, I'm betting "We Can Do It For You Wholesale" is pretty good.  Incidentally, do you also know the name of the story on which *Minority Report* was based?


----------



## iansales (Jan 22, 2009)

Same title.


----------



## Moonbat (Jan 22, 2009)

*Planet of the Apes (1968)*

I have seen this and have to admit that it is a classic, it was kind of tainted by the other three, but still as a stand alone film, very good. What a beard that Heston has 


*2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)*

Always a classic, but slower than a trip to Jupiter. I have watched it start to end once, when I was younger, but I don't think I could handle it all again. I do want to see 2010 though.


*Solaris (1972)*

Not seen this, I have seen the remake and I didn't like it, too much of an event horizon type thing, and just got a bit boring. Not enough beards for my liking

*Sleeper (1973)*

Brilliant, if somewhat odd film. I did like this alot, but I usually like Woody's films, especially the older sillier ones.

*Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)*

hmmm, never really liked this, it was too, ET(ish) kind of all lights and sounds and little action, also it is long, but saying that the communication with musical notes if genius, it's just the whole people coming off the ship at the end I didn't like.

*Blade Runner (1982)*

A classic, but have been flooded with directors cut, directors newer cut, directors final cut, directors final never to cut anymore cut. But still a classic and looks great even without the recent developments. 

*Gattaca (1997)*

I didn't like this much, it started well, with a welld efined future, but got a bit slow, and the whole thing sort of fell apart slowly. I think I didn't make it to the end!

*Dark City (1998)*

Now this is interesting, I tried to watch a copy of this on my PC and it stopped after 5 minutes, but I thought it looked really interesting, I might have to look for another copy now.

*Primer (2004)*

Again, I rented this out once but never got round to watch it, so might have to check it out again. Hopefully it'll be worth it.

*Children of Men (2006)*

Yeah, sort of liked it, but not great. I agree the fighting stopped scene was good, and bits of it were interesting, but I think it lacked the power it was intended to have.

What sort of arrogant person came up with this list and then suggested it was for Thinking Men? Robocop, now there's a sci-fi film,


----------



## Michael01 (Jan 22, 2009)

Moonbat said:


> What sort of arrogant person came up with this list and then suggested it was for Thinking Men? Robocop, now there's a sci-fi film,




  

You've got a point.



			
				iansales said:
			
		

> Same title.



Thanks, Ian.


----------



## BookStop (Jan 22, 2009)

*Planet of the Apes (1968)- *great film
*2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) -* at the time, I liked it, saw it years later and was bored
*Solaris (1972) -* saw the Clooney ersion and was not impressed
*Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977) - *it was good for its time, but I'm not sure how well it has held up (not that I'm suggesting a remake)
*Blade Runner (1982) -* Classic
*Gattaca (1997) -* was ok, no big complaints, but hardly a favorite either
*Children of Men (2006) -* was, hmm, ok, not my favorite, but a story I wasn't familiar with before. I think I had high hopes and left the theater disappointed. Had I not been looking forward to it, I might've enjoyed it more.
*Being John Malkovich* - Nope, didn't care for it at all
*Donnie Darko* - this is one of my favs, and I'm being sincere. It's not difficult to understand if you actually watch.
I enjoyed *Minority Report* and *I, Robot*, though I would hardly call either a thinking man's film.**
*Total Recall* - excellent movie, although the outdated special effects now look cheesy, and the acting isn't all that great.

**What exactly is it that makes a film ideal for the 'thinking man'?
There are plenty of Sci-Fi films out htere that cause one to pause and think, plenty more that mix that thinking with high action, and some that are all about the idea with little plot. I quite enjoyed *The Abyss, The Arrival, The Terminator, Vanilla Sky, and 12 Monkeys,* but they aren't on the list. Would they qualify?


----------



## iansales (Jan 22, 2009)

I seem to be in a minority here: I've seen all of the films on the list. Maybe I really am a thinking man 

*Planet of the Apes (1968)* - entertaining, but I wouldn't call it a classic, or even a film that requires a great deal of thought

*2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) - *an excellent film, definitely belongs on any list of sf classic films

*Solaris (1972)* - this is a film that's going to sort the men from the boys - it's 2 hrs 45 mins long, is partly in black and white, and its pacing is typical of Tarkovsky - i.e., glacial. Worth it because Tarkovsky always is.

*Sleeper (1973)* - saw it many years ago, can't stand Woody Allen, so no desire to see it again.

*Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)* - not a big fan of Spielberg either, although this one does have its moments. I suspect it's long past its sell-by date though.

*Blade Runner (1982)* - still holds up even today. And the final cut is the best version of it available. I say "final" but who knows...

*Gattaca (1997)* - thought this was a bit dull when I watched.

*Dark City (1998) - *an excellent film that seemed to slip below most people's radar when it was released.

*Primer (2004) - *very clever, often confusing, but probably one of the smartest time-travel films ever made.

*Children of Men (2006)* - the book was rubbish, the film is a great deal better. It never quite recovers from the shock opening, however.


----------



## j d worthington (Jan 22, 2009)

iansales said:


> I seem to be in a minority here: I've seen all of the films on the list. Maybe I really am a thinking man
> 
> *Planet of the Apes (1968)* - entertaining, but I wouldn't call it a classic, or even a film that requires a great deal of thought
> 
> ...


 
Not often Ian and I agree on things! Here, however, we're pretty close. I would disagree slightly on *Planet of the Apes*, as it does require some thought, and I would call it a classic -- at least, a qualified classic. And I'd say it holds up well under repeated viewings.

*2001* is a film I've always very much liked, and frankly I find that it grows with each viewing. It also hits me more emotionally with each viewing -- something that is very rare.

I would definitely recommend Tarkovsky's *Solaris*, though it does have that "glacial" quality. Nonetheless, it impressed me mightily, and that final image simply took my breath away (not only intrinsically, but for the implications....)

*Close Encounters* -- I enjoyed it on first viewing, but it hasn't held up all that well; though I do think there are still some wonderful moments there, and it does require more thought than most such eye-candy.

I'm not a big fan of Woody Allen, but I did enjoy *Sleeper* -- and yes, it is a good satire.

*Gattaca* -- a seriously flawed film, and the pacing is slower than need be; it also has logical holes you could drive an eighteen-wheeler through. But ultimately it is an optimistic film about the triumph of the human spirit, and on that level it does deliver, I think.

On the whole, however, despite some minor differences, I have to stand with Ian on this one... something we'd better both mark down, as it's unlikely to happen again anytime soon....


----------



## Omphalos (Jan 22, 2009)

iansales said:


> I seem to be in a minority here: I've seen all of the films on the list. Maybe I really am a thinking man
> 
> *Planet of the Apes (1968)* - entertaining, but I wouldn't call it a classic, or even a film that requires a great deal of thought
> 
> ...


 
I agree with a lot of what you are saying here too, Ian. Though I have not yet seen Primer. But about Dark City: Can't agree there. I loved it right up until the end, when the producers decided to give it an ending where the main character could not lose. Right up until then, great images, cool plot, creepy characters, innovative sets. Then they make their character who was on the run the entire time a god with superpowers so strong that he only has to think of some mind blast and teh bad guys go bye-bye. Weak ending that ruined the film and everything that it stood for up until that moment. I have never understood how this one has stood up so long, with an ending that is just so epicly bad. 

And Children of Men (the book)? Not the best for entertainment value, but I think that she succeeded brilliantly with what she set out to do. I will probably re-read it at some point. Loved the movie. That scene where the war stops for a few moments because of the presence of a baby has literally brought a tear to my eye every time I watch it. I completely believe that babies have that power, and watching that scene takes my breath away. 

You know, I have sensed a lot of effort over the last few years to elevate Planet of the Apes, both the movies and the Boulle book; and even that monstrous piece of crap that Marky Mark (a pox on him and his ilk) made. I liked the book, but the movie never struck me as much more than camp. True, the costumes were cool. But so what?


----------



## Michael01 (Jan 22, 2009)

Well, actually, I have seen all on the list except *Solaris* and *Primer*. I find myself wanting to see them both very much now.

Sorry, BookStop. We kind of snuck in a few titles that weren't in the list. There's a couple in those stowaways that at least I think are thoughtful, and a couple that are a little thoughtful but immensely fun to watch. Others, of course, I didn't much care for at all. And all of our opinions varied on the subjects, of course, but if they didn't this thread would have become very boring very quickly.


----------



## Ghost Of Gernsback (Jan 22, 2009)

Omphalos said:


> You know, I have sensed a lot of effort over the last few years to elevate Planet of the Apes, both the movies and the Boulle book; and even that monstrous piece of crap that Marky Mark (a pox on him and his ilk) made. I liked the book, but the movie never struck me as much more than camp. True, the costumes were cool. But so what?


 
I am not sure the film needed much elevation. It was very well recieved when it was released and did manage to breakthrough the mainstream wall. It is however a film of its time, the old guard resisting new knowledge. A very interesting civil rights theme, and religious overtones. The passage of 40 years could easily dull these concepts for modern viewers

And it was immesurably better than that rubbish served up as a remake.

The novel, well I read that before seeing the film. I recall it being a good read, but I was pretty young then lol, a little less jaded than I am now


----------



## Connavar (Jan 23, 2009)

Michael01 said:


> Oh, you're not kidding, are you?  I read the Piers Anthony novelization, and I was okay with it since I like Piers Anthony.  Now I'm disappointed, and I will have to find the original story.  If *Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep* is any indication, I'm betting "We Can Do It For You Wholesale" is pretty good.  Incidentally, do you also know the name of the story on which *Minority Report* was based?



Minority Report short story is actually similar to the movie, Spielberg actually tried capture parts of the short unlike Total Recall and its short story.

We Can Do It For Wholesale is better than the lame Arnold movie but its not one of PKD stronger short stories.  

Go for Minority Report instead.


----------



## Michael01 (Jan 23, 2009)

Okay, will do, Connavar.  Thanks.


----------



## dustinzgirl (Jan 23, 2009)

I would have to replace *Solaris* (which I think is crap in the OG and Clooney versions) with ... I don't know, anything but *Donnie Darko*. I don't think there ever was a worse movie. Ever, than Donnie Darko.

*Minority Report *is OK, but I wasn't too impressed. Plus, the only Tom Cruise flicks I can stand to watch were made before my kids were born...and they are teenagers...

*Gattaca *was freaking awesome. I love that movie, and I can even get past that terrible actor kid...whatever his name is, who can't act. Actually nobody in that movie can act, but I love the story. 

There are people in the modern world who have not seen *planet of the apes*? (even the Whalberg remake?) Holy criminolies batman! There oughtta be a law. 

*2001 A Space*---No, the ending makes no sense. HAL gave me nightmares. Seriously. 

*Sleeper* I have never heard of, gasp, but I don't like Woody Allen anyways. (GASP! psst...I don't like Elvis's music, either.) 

*Close Encounters, Blade Runner, and Dark City *are all great flicks that really make you question your reality.

I never wanted to watch Primer and I won't ever watch it because it looks like a stupid movie (as was being john malchovich...seriously people, get a clue). However, the name reminds me of *Prime*, which is a freaking awesome movie, if really really really slow, and is a _thinking WOMAN"S_ movie so nananananana 

*Children of Men* made me so very sad. It also made me clutch my uterus and thank the almightyuniversalparadimensionalbeing I refer to as God that I had my babies in a hospital. 

Hmm...I'm still pondering what I would replace Solaris with. I'd rather see *Soylent Green* or *Andromeda Strain* (yes, I know it was from a book), *Omega Man* (book, yes, I know too, and no will smith version), or *Twelve Monkeys* (don't say it, I already know, but Bruce Willis can do no wrong in my eyes because I've been in love with him since I was 12). I always thought that *Fortress* was a good movie that really spoke volumes about society (Thomas Jefferson said that you can judge a society by its prisoners), but thats a b rated crap movie most people wouldn't bother watching (not the australian teacher one, I mean the Lambert one). I'd also like to submit *Day of the Animals* and *Toxic Avenger* (hey, if someone can put Darko on there....lol).

What is that movie that was like sci fi western on the other planet and there was the creepy guy with the patch over his eye? It was like, all 'how the west was won' but with aliens? That was a good flick, but didn't really make one think too much I guess so it wouldn't count, I guess, but I was thinking about thinking about the movie and now I don't know the name of it. 

Yes, I've had coffeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

PS: I wonder if it weren't for the psycho fanboy/girls, would Matrix have made this list? It had a stronger plot and made more sense than most of the movies on that list, and even tho Keanu reminds me of a creepy stalker type, it was a really interesting idea, ok well it was an interesting mingle of a lot of different ideas that they called original, but most sci fi flicks are.


----------



## MontyCircus (Jan 23, 2009)

Michael01 said:


> Well, actually, I have seen all on the list except *Solaris* and *Primer*. I find myself wanting to see them both very much now.



Please don't see *Primer*............I never should have created this thread  

Actually, okay fine.  Let's make *Primer* the next Sci-Fi movie club flick.  Go out and see it everybody, then come back and tell us all what you think.  I'd love to see those poll results! 

Moving onnnnn...

I still can't get over Sci-Fi fans on a dedicated Sci-Fi forum lauding *I, Robot* and *The Island*.  I just don't understand that at all...

I did like *Minority Report* very much though.  Just caught the second half recently...those jetpack scenes looked really bad to my 2009 eyes...but the rest was still a lot of fun.

*Total Recall* was great in its day.  A lot of the effects were and are really cool.  But a lot of the animatronics and mutant alien stuff looks horrendous now.  A lot of cool gadgets, a great concept, and still a pretty decent sci-fi thriller bloodbath.

Speaking of sci-fi bloodbaths.  I love the hell out of *RoboCop* and remember *RoboCop 2* fondly (though it's been a long while since I saw the 2nd).  RoboCop actually did have a couple of cool ideas inbetween the awesome violence and humour.  

And then...I was really appalled when I saw the end battle of *Iron Man* blatantly BLATANTLY AND COMPLETELY rip off the end battle of *Robocop 2*.

So I'm watching as...little unarmed bi-ped cyborg guy battles big bi-ped cyborg guy with gatling guns on his arms.  Hand-to-hand action ensues.  Little unarmed bi-ped cyborg guy ends up on big bi-ped cyborg guy's back.....and then I just went into a fit of "what the hell???".  It was alright up until then, mostly because of Robert Downey Junior's humour.  Really great stuff from him.  Also, the movie took forever to get going.  Felt like they were in that cave for an hour.  Not to mention...I understand they want a PG rating and everything; but it seemed like there were SO many "just off-screen kills" to the point that it was distracting to me.  

*RoboCop* > *Iron Man*

*Twelve Monkeys* was awesome.  Haven't seen that in a long time.  It's on the DVR though, so that's good news to me.  It's the only non-Python film I didn't hate from Terry Gilliam.  *Brazil* I almost like but can't quite...and *Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas* I think was fun for a while before it spirals out of control until it's just a big unwatchable mess, as all Gilliam films are.  He should have been a camera guy or special effects guy.  His films always look cool, but he's a **** director.  I like to think Guillermo del Toro is what Gilliam has spent his career trying, and failing, to be:  someone who makes really strangely beautiful looking films...that people enjoy watching.

And now it sounds like he's going forward with his Don Quixote movie?  Note to Mr. Gilliam:  Wake up man!  God himself destroyed your chances the first time.  Take the hint!  Please step away from the camera!!!


----------



## iansales (Jan 23, 2009)

MontyCircus said:


> *Total Recall* was great in its day.  A lot of the effects were and are really cool.  But a lot of the animatronics and mutant alien stuff looks horrendous now.  A lot of cool gadgets, a great concept, and still a pretty decent sci-fi thriller bloodbath.



We agree on something. Good film, although the effects have dated badly. Not sure I'd describe it as a "bloodbath", though.


----------



## K. Riehl (Jan 23, 2009)

_*Dark City*_ is getting re-released with an additional 14 minutes and director commentary. I liked the original and will probably pickup the new version too.

Would _*Forbidden Planet*_ make anyone's top ten list for the thinking (wo)man?


----------



## Ursa major (Jan 23, 2009)

K. Riehl said:


> Would _*Forbidden Planet*_ make anyone's top ten list for the thinking (wo)man?


 
In his essay, _The Heart in Conflict_, G.R.R. Martin says that his favourite science fiction film of all time is, as he calls it, _The Tempest on Altair-4_.

(And it certainly has a lot of thinking _in_ it. )


----------



## Ghost Of Gernsback (Jan 24, 2009)

K. Riehl said:


> _*Dark City*_ is getting re-released with an additional 14 minutes and director commentary. I liked the original and will probably pickup the new version too.
> 
> Would _*Forbidden Planet*_ make anyone's top ten list for the thinking (wo)man?


 
I think the oldest film on the list points to a bit of bias from the people who created it. Forbidden Planet most definately, the original "Day The Earth Stood Still as well"

The original Thing has a lot to recommend it as well. The script and direction, special effects aside, is simply brilliant


----------



## dustinzgirl (Jan 24, 2009)

I thought Fear and Loathing in Vegas was a movie about dropping too many hits of acid? 

*Thing* definitely has to be on my top ten. I love that movie. 

Oooooooooh I know what definitely has, absolutely HAS to be on there...

*The Abyss. 
*
Absolutely marvelous film. Its got psycho military dudes, an unknown environment, new sciences, water breathing rats, and big weird creatures.


----------



## MontyCircus (Feb 6, 2009)

dustinzgirl said:


> I thought Fear and Loathing in Vegas was a movie about dropping too many hits of acid?



Yeah it was.  I was just going off on a tangent while going off on Gilliam.

There's an awesome Sci-Fi/Fantasy site I just found:

Sci-Fi Lists - Top 100 Sci-Fi Films

It has poll-based top 100 lists for Sci-Fi and fantasy movies, books, short stories and tv shows.  And none of them look silly!

The top 10 Sci-Fi movies list looks like this:

1.) *Blade Runner*
2.) *Star Wars Trilogy IV-VI* (1977-1983)
3.) *The Matrix*
4.) *Alien*
5.) *2001: A Space Odyssey*
6.) *Aliens*
7.) *The Terminator*
8.) *Terminator 2: Judgement Day*
9.) *The Fifth Element*
10.) *The Day the Earth Stood Still* (1951)
11.) *Twelve Monkeys*
12.) *Planet of the Apes *(1968)

I added *Twelve Monkeys* and *Planet of the Apes* because I don't think it's fair for the *Terminator* and *Alien* franchises to take up 2 spots.

I've seen all of those except for *Blade Runner* (will I ever get to see it???) and not sure I've seen all of *Planet of the Apes*.

I've always thought the *Matrix* was overrated.  Some pretty CGI action sequences and the rest is nonsense (and the sequels proved me right).  But I'm absolutely floored that *The Fifth Element* makes the top 10.

From that list...probably only *Blade Runner*, *2001* and *Day the Earth Stood Still* would be classified as "Thinking Man" flicks.  I guess it depends on what the hell you define it as in the first place.  I guess the opposite of an action-packed thrill-ride.  *2001* and *Day the Earth Stood Still* definitely aren't that, so I guess they're "Thinking Man" by default.


----------



## Michael01 (Feb 6, 2009)

Ghost Of Gernsback said:


> The original Thing has a lot to recommend it as well. The script and direction, special effects aside, is simply brilliant


 
Yes!  _Super Carrot_!  I'll never get over that...

Anyway, it's a great movie and I loved it.


----------



## reiver33 (Feb 7, 2009)

I actually prefer the remake of The Thing ('Man is the warmest place to hide'). But then again I like Kurt....


----------



## reiver33 (Feb 7, 2009)

Oh, oh - is it true that in Total Recall the original cut went straight from Arnie going under to get his secret-agent implant to him waking up in the JonnyCab? The rest of the film then matches his memory synopsis (Kill the bad guys, save the planet and get the girl) and the reality of it is never resolved.


----------



## ravenus (Feb 7, 2009)

The reality of *Total Recall* is never resolved in the released version of the film, and I doubt if the sort of cut you're describing exists at all. Paul Verhoeven clearly intended to shoot and use all the footage in between.


----------



## ravenus (Feb 7, 2009)

MontyCircus said:


> There's an awesome Sci-Fi/Fantasy site I just found:
> It has poll-based top 100 lists for Sci-Fi and fantasy movies, books, short stories and tv shows.  And none of them look silly!
> 2.) *Star Wars Trilogy IV-VI* (1977-1983)


Silliness right there. Star Wars has no real SF value. It's a medieval fairy tale given a futuristic paint job


----------



## BookStop (Feb 7, 2009)

I love, love, love Stars Wars, but you are right, it's not sf and it is not a thinking man's movie for sure. 

Fifth Element is a brilliantly fun film, although, also not 'thinking', but that list is just for the top movies, right, not top thinking man's films.


----------



## Connavar (Feb 7, 2009)

Heh Matrix is more of a thinking man's movie than Star Wars that for sure 

Planet of the Apes are the only thinking man's sf in that list that would make my list.

Matrix,Terminator etc are action movies most to me.


----------



## kythe (Feb 7, 2009)

No one's mentioned it yet, but one of the best philosophical movies I've ever seen was "Man From Earth".  Written by Jerome Bixby (who also wrote several Star Trek episodes), this is a discourse between a group of college professors and a colleague who claims to be an immortal 14,000 year old cave man.  They discuss history, biology, and religion from an entirely new perspective.

Man From Earth is classified as sci-fi, but lacks the action, special effects, and futuristic or other-world setting we tend to associate with stereotypical sci-fi stories.  It is an independent film that seems to have missed a mainstream audience, but it has recieved very high ratings on imdb.com.  I viewed it on Netflix instant.


----------



## Grimward (Feb 7, 2009)

I remember Sleeper as more laughter- than thought-provoking, but it has been a VERY long time since I saw it.  _*Vanilla Sky*_ is a worthy mention, although probably not with the original tier above.  Absolutely agree with the _*first*_ _*Planet of the Apes*_ (one must set aside the dated aspect of the special effects now, but they were pretty decent at time of release).

I thought the movie adaptation of _*The Andromeda Strain*_ was thought-provoking at the time....

EDIT:  Forgot to mention that, in addition to being a worthy thought-provoking entry here, _*Dark City*_ is an excellent movie for adjusting the black levels on your television, even for non-Hi-Def.  Do we give it points for technical merit?!


----------



## Michael01 (Feb 8, 2009)

*The Matrix* may be more of "thinking person's" movie for some people.  My brother loves action films but he really couldn't get into *The Matrix*.  He said it was because some parts were "too philosophical..."

Seriously.


----------



## MontyCircus (Feb 9, 2009)

Finally managed to see Blade Runner on tv.  It was the voice-over version.

Not a fan.  I was fighting to keep my eyes open actually.  I think it was my body's defense mechanism to try and save me from having to watch it.

I looked up some critic reviews.  They all say mostly the same thing.  They call it a classic.  They say how beautiful the production design is.  And then they mention that the plot (which they call thin, dull, slow and boring) and the characters (which they call cold and uninteresting), take a back-seat to the wonderful visual effects, sets and costumes.

Then they call it overrated and give it 4 stars.

.....seems like critics are just scared not to like a movie everyone "knows" is classic.  Either that or they're doing the thing I hate about critics, giving boring movies wonderful grades just because they're pretty.

I'll go with @@ / @@@@@.  I can't say I'd ever recommend it to anyone.  "Hey, there's this great sci-fi flick I just saw.  It's dull, slow (to a dead stop most of the time), it's chock-full of cardboard characters, Harrison Ford sleepwalks through the movie, and it's got a plot you'll find in hundreds of other films.  But its set design is influential as all hell!  It's incredible!"

They might as well have had Ford walk/drive/fly aimlessly through the streets.  I don't think you can make a movie about hunting killer renegade androids any more boring if you tried.

Sure hope the book is better.


----------



## Dave (Feb 9, 2009)

*Planet of the Apes (1968)*

Excellent film - yes, the series tails off in quality, but few film series do not. Excellent.

*2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)*

Long and slow, but rightly a classic. Good.

*Solaris (1972)*

I haven't seen this, but isn't it even longer and even slower? Undecided.

*Sleeper (1973)*

One of my all-time favourite films. Watched it many, many times. All the best Woody Allen films are his earlier ones. Excellent.

*Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)*

I liked this when it came out, but is too long and rather dated now. Good.

*Blade Runner (1982)*

Which version? Another well-deserved classic. Excellent.

*Gattaca (1997)*

I liked this too. I wish there was more science-fiction like this. Very Good.

*Dark City (1998)*

I had never heard of this before, but watched it on the strength of this list. I'd certainly been missing something. Plato's Allegory of the Cave. Excellent.

*Primer (2004)*

I had never heard of this before, but watched it on the strength of this list. I'd certainly been missing nothing. The acting and direction are awful. My son and his friends could make this in a garage and a car park. Actually, it looks like it was. Bad.

*Children of Men (2006)*

Immediately when I saw this, I knew it would become one of my favourites. Excellent.

I'd also wonder where was Terminator, Alien, Twelve Monkeys, Total Recall, Vanilla Sky, Donnie Darko?


----------



## Michael01 (Feb 9, 2009)

MontyCircus said:


> Finally managed to see Blade Runner on tv. It was the voice-over version.
> 
> Not a fan. I was fighting to keep my eyes open actually. I think it was my body's defense mechanism to try and save me from having to watch it.
> 
> ...


 
The book is better - much better. But that's just my opinion, and I think that *Blade Runner* still ranks among some of the best movies I've seen, so take it for what it's worth.


----------



## MontyCircus (Feb 9, 2009)

Dave said:


> *Primer (2004)*
> 
> I had never heard of this before, but watched it on the strength of this list. I'd certainly been missing nothing. The acting and direction are awful. My son and his friends could make this in a garage and a car park. Actually, it looks like it was. Bad.



Told ya!

The fact that it won the Grand Jury Prize at the Sundance Film Festival...tells me all I need to know about awards at the Sundance Film Festival.



Michael01 said:


> The book is better - much better. But that's just my opinion, and I think that *Blade Runner* still ranks among some of the best movies I've seen, so take it for what it's worth.



Maybe it'll grow on me someday (a definitive cut in hi-def would be nice), particularly if I enjoy the book and rewatch.  I certainly didn't set out not to like it.


----------



## Michael01 (Feb 9, 2009)

If we were to count animated films, I'd put *Ghost in the Shell* on the list.  Why not?


----------



## littlemissattitude (Feb 10, 2009)

Dusty...I only managed to get through about an hour of *Donne Darko*.  I hated it that much.

Love *The Abyss*.  Everything you said, plus it has Ed Harris, who is perfect in his role.  Love when he throws his wedding ring down the toilet and then fishes it out and ends up with a blue-tinted arm.  And the scene where he tries to revive his wife and will. not. give. up. is one of my favorites in all of film, sf or not.

Oh, and I don't like much Elvis music, either.  I make an exception for "Heartbreak Hotel", but mostly only because it came out the year I was born.


----------



## The Procrastinator (Feb 10, 2009)

I have only seen six of the films from the "thinking man's" list, but I did immediately wonder two things:
1. What would the thinking woman's list look like.
2. Why is _the Day the Earth Stood Still_ not on it?

Re the inclusion of The Matrix (first one) - there is a bit of thinking going on, but its not really a "thinking" movie overall. I like it a lot but I don't think I would put it on this list. I did wonder about _The Andromeda Strain_ and _Fahrenheit 451_ though, both very thoughtful. The first _Terminator_ and _Alien_ movies both have elements that might qualify them for this list, too, but perhaps they are not "pure" enough. 

Re Star Wars not being scifi, I think critics of this are holding it up to standards that not all scifi books/movies would meet anyway. Its _pulp_ scifi.  There's a lot of it around.

*(Another fan of the Abyss and Ed Harris raises a blue hand...)*


----------



## Michael01 (Feb 10, 2009)

The Procrastinator said:


> 2. Why is _the Day the Earth Stood Still_ not on it?


 
You're not only one to wonder this - for the original, anyway.

I don't think of Stars Wars as sci-fi at all.  Who does that?


----------



## clovis-man (Feb 11, 2009)

MontyCircus said:


> *2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)*
> 
> This might be my mother's favourite film. And it might be my father's most hated film. I should hate it. It's long'ish. It's very slow. And the ending is notoriously vague and "What the ****???"-inducing. But...I think the effects are cool. HAL is cool. I usually go into it reminding myself that the ending makes no damn sense...and that lets me appreciate it. I've read "the explanation" on this forum from Clarke's book, and it sounds interesting. I think the movie would be a lot less hated if the ending was more coherent.


 
I'm old enough to have seen this in the theater. I can remember a middle-aged man storming out of the movie during the final scenes. I think it helps to appreciate this film if you've read Clarke's *Childhood's End*. It all makes sense to me in that context.



MontyCircus said:


> *Sleeper (1973)*
> 
> A Woody Allen flick. Never heard of it before this list.


 
Funny and satirical. Imagine going to the future an learning that Twinkies and Ding-Dongs were good for you. But for thinking people??????



MontyCircus said:


> *Dark City (1998)*
> 
> I remember it being interesting and confusing. Would like to give it another go. Kind of like the "unsuccessful" version of the *Matrix*. Actually, I'm sure if the *Matrix* trilogy hadn't tanked that the first movie would definitely be on this list.


 
I think this is a highly underrated film. The only part I didn't care for was Kiefer Sutherland's over-the-top performance. Maybe he was preparing himself for *24*.

*The Arrival* was mentioned in this thread. Irrespective of what you may think of Charlie Sheen, I thought this was a provocative film. Similar theme to *Independence Day* without all the FX pyrotechnics.

Two other dystopian future films I could mention which qualify as "thought provoking" in my book are *City of Lost Children* and *Delicatessen*, both directed by Marc Caro and Jean-Pierre Jeunet.

Just my belated 2 cents worth.


----------

