SF/Fantasy Films that aren't... really

[Tabitha]

I was mulling this over the other day, several of the films we have in here are only tenuously linked to SF/Fantasy/Horror, and I was wondering about other movies that could almost be classed in these genres.

Think about Field of Dreams, The Natural, The Legend of Bagger Vance, those are just three that sprang to mind (weird how they are all sports movies), I was reminded also of Mel Gibson's early 90s stinker Forever Young. Another movie that feels like fantasy, but isn't really, is Blast from the Past.

Has anyone seen Mulholland Drive? If that wasn't part fantasy then I don't know how to describe it!
What about Pulp Fiction? Did we ever find out what was in that suitcase that Jackson and Travolta were looking for?

Do you have any additions?

 

[Dave]

Many mainstream films now seem to have some scifi element in them. 'Forever Young' is definitely scifi, unless crygenic freezing has been invented yet.

'Vanilla Ice' (sic) -- I'm sure many filmgoers would not classify that as scifi, because they still don't understand what really occurred in it.

I noticed that 'The China Syndrome' is not classified as scifi at Imdb, yet such a disaster hasn't happened (unless you count Chernobyl.) However, 'Apollo 13' is classed as scifi, but it is based upon actual events that occurred.

I personally think we should be free to just talk about good films in this forum. It doesn't really matter exactly what catagory they should be place in, because that itself is a personal judgement too.

 

[Tabitha]

Originally posted by Dave
'Vanilla Ice' -- I'm sure many filmgoers would not classify that as scifi, because they still don't understand what really occurred in it.

Dave, did you mean "Vanilla Sky"? Cos if you meant the Vanilla Ice movie "Cool as Ice" then I am worried about you :wink2:

Originally posted by Dave
I noticed that 'The China Syndrome' is not classified as scifi at Imdb, yet such a disaster hasn't happened (unless you count Chernobel.) However, 'Apollo 13' is classed as scifi, but it is based upon actual events that occurred.

What about movies like "Volcano" - is that science fiction? Are all disaster movies sort-of SF? I haven't actually seen The China Syndrome, so I can't really comment, but I guess there are a lot of movies that we haven't included here at all. SHould we get busy making forums for ALL SciFi movies that we can think of? Or should we just add them as people get interested in them and start posting about them?
On a related note, what about Horror, I came across a post somewhere in here, that I think was written by you, that mentioned that this should be a catch-all forum for SF, Fantasy and Horror, but we seem to have put Horror on the back burner.

Originally posted by Dave
I personally think we should be free to just talk about good films in this forum. It doesn't really matter exactly what catagory they should be place in, because that itself is a personal judgement too.

*nods head vigourously* I watch a lot of movies, and am often tempted to start threads in here for non-scifi. But a bit wary in case I get flamed for it having no relation to SF. I don't really want to post in General Discussions either, as threads can get lost pretty quick in there.
Anyway, I think I mentioned before that perhaps another board for "Non-SF Films General Chat" might be an idea.

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by Tabitha
Dave, did you mean "Vanilla Sky"? Cos if you meant the Vanilla Ice movie "Cool as Ice" then I am worried about you :wink2:

I think I was hungry for something in a cone :redface: :crazy:

I don't know if we can cover every film here and I just want to add forums as people ask for them because it takes some time to do.

Horror films I think are acceptable, they usually crossover into fantasy and scifi.

 

[ray gower]

Originally posted by Dave
I noticed that 'The China Syndrome' is not classified as scifi at Imdb, yet such a disaster hasn't happened (unless you count Chernobyl.) However, 'Apollo 13' is classed as scifi, but it is based upon actual events that occurred.

In the credits for China Syndrome there is the acknowledgement that the events were based around what occured at Three Mile Island incident in 1979. Indeed the film was set in the same type of Pressurised Water Reactor. There are details of this incident here http://www.wowpage.com/tmi/

Chernobyl is a steam cooled reactor. A much older design known as RBMK. Unlike TMI, where the core melted gracefully, the concept predicted by the China Syndrome theory. Chernobyl was the opposite, it overheated and exploded due to a design instability at low power. http://www.chernobyl.co.uk/

 

[Dave]

I stand corrected then, I thought that the film was made before TMI. And I confess to forgetting about TMI as well.

It was still a fictitious story. And the 'China Syndrome Theory' didn't originate with TMI.

What about 'Apollo 13' then? Why do they classify that as SciFi? I think the point that I was making is still valid

 

[ray gower]

My post was not intended as contradiction to your comments, Dave, which were apropriate.

China Syndrome appeared only months after TMI. What it portrayed was very close to what was publically explained at the enquiry.

I think Apollo 13 is ranked as Science Fiction simply because it was space based, which leads to the question of definitions of what is Science Fiction.

Others that fall into the category might be Jurrasic Park and Lost World?

 

[Tabitha]

I have often wondered about that strange overlap of SF and action movies - take, for example, the James Bond movies. There is little attempt to only show us gadgets that are definitely possible (the invisible car springs to mind). Jet packs? Cars that go underwater. The list is seemingly endless, but you would get a blank stare if you suggested Bond was scifi!