 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: 20 Most Influential SF Movies Of All Time (In Order). posted by AudioHead on October 28, 2002 at 07:40:53:
... and I would place it at number ONE since, arguably, it influenced all serious SF which came after it.BTW, I wouldn't consider any of the Mad Max movies for a Top Twenty spot on a critical SF film list; even though I like both and they are technically post-apocalyptic science fiction, they seem a bit more deeply rooted in the heroic adventure film genre than SF. Also, I would place the first Flash Gordon serial, as terribly campy as it must look to our more discriminating 21st cetury tastes, somewhere on that Top 20 list and well ahead of Star Wars! My rationale is that Star Wars, while quite entertaining, is still very derivative. Not only does Star Wars and it's sequels borrow heavily from other genres (i.e., the western, the slapstick comedy, the teen angst film, the patriotic war film, Oriental philosophy, etc.), but it's painfully obvious at times just how much of George Lucus' "vision" owes to Flash Gordon and other serials. So, if we're talking about "influential movies" ...! :o)
Those minor caveats aside, you posted an excellent list, IMHO. There are several films I would in all liklihood substitute if I wanted to get nit-picky (i.e., dropping the 2nd Terminator film and Aliens only because they're sequels albeit arguably better than the originals preceeding them), but everyone has personal favorites. That being the case, my suggestions would perhaps include films such as A Clockwork Orange and AI-Artificial intelligence. And if the list were extended I would probably add the Abyss and possibly one or two others you may have overlooked.
Finally, I think that John Carpenter's version of the Thing is somewhat truer to the original story on which both films are based; I find the 50's version less shocking as SF (i.e., in retrospect the original movie is more of an allegorical tale reflecting McCarthyism and the Red scare paranoia of the times).
Cheers,
AuPh
Follow Ups:
for the first time in years, and I must say that it still holds up well after all this time. Just goes to show you don't need a computer, just a lot of imagination---something lacking in most recent films.It deserves to be right up there with "2001" and "Star Wars"---a 3 way tie in my book...
I believe the 1986 Metropolis (with the color-tints and the disco-
rock Moroder soundtrack) reflects the preference
of the predominately youthful Cinescape readership. Also, believe you've already read my
comparative evaluation of the two "The Things" here at this site's
archives, year 2000 I believe; also with my other reviews at
www.imdb.com. -AH
I'll try the other site you mentioned; I probably read those reviews awhile back, but before discussing the specifics I need to refresh my memory regarding your opinions upon comparing both versions.Cheers,
AuPh
you can get to it through the archives manually, the post is entitled,
"The Thing": 1951 Original vs 1982 Remake, posted on October 04,
1999 at 12:36:02; IP 204.196.180.90 - AH
I tend to agree with your perspective. I will shortly be co-writing a column on sci-fi films at another site and was not even going to mention the Mad Max stuff. My definition of sci-fi for this purpose is limited to films that are based around advances in science and technology beyond what was available at the time the film was made. Thus, while the Mad Max films take place in the future, they're not fundamentally dependent on technology that was scientifically impossible when they were made. Rather, the bizarre goings-on are just a consequence of a post-apocalyptic event.One can also frequently run into an overlap with the horror genre when discussing science fiction films. Frankenstein has science fiction elements but was predominantly intended as a horror film. There are many other examples of films in which the sci-fi is not paramount but is instead secondary to the primary purpose of frightening the viewer. I would tend to classify most or all of these as horror films. Alien is suspenseful, scary, and occasionally gruesome, but seeing as though it heavily involves space exploration in the future, I think it can be classified as a sci-fi film if one so chooses. One could also easily describe it as "sci-fi/horror."
I'm not sure I would rank the Flash Gordon serials ahead of Star Wars, but apart from Metropolis, IMO these serials were the best science fiction put to film in the first half of the 20th century. However, they aren't "movies" per se but rather, movie serials, so technically, they should perhaps not be included on this particular list.
Todd
Speculative Fiction (Spec-Fi) and detests Forrest Ackerman for
coining the Sci-Fi phrase. (And now probably me too, for using it to
preface his name!) - AH
"films that are based around advances in science and technology beyond what was available at the time the film was made"In the mad max series..it is a futuristic world we have never experienced, based on events we have never experienced. The technologies they used are based on that which is available to them in the future, and they create a whole new style of world, different from our own.
Planet of the apes is sci-fi and they don't use any technologies that are beyond what was available at the time the film was made....futuristically primative. Also based on a freak event or occurance.
I guess it's all a matter of perspective, but I would consider any film that illustrates an alternate universe (so to speak) sci-fi. Horror comes into play when you add mystical or mental elements and horror/gore to the alternate universe theme.
Ever read the book doomsday...very good sci-fi, set in the dark ages, very interesting.
mp
It's probably an academic argument, but Planet of the Apes actually involved two things that were not and still are not scientifically possible--time travel and apes evolving within a few thousand years to have essentially human intelligence. Personally, I would not consider every story of alternate universe or reality to be SF (Fatherland, for example), but I do find such tales extremely interesting.Todd
based on individual ideas. I find Mad max to be sci fi, because they do use all the technologies they have available to them in this futuristic fictitious world. Some could call it action and adventure, some may even call it fantasy.In the Time After Time, for example, The machine to propell them through time, was created in the past, with material from the past,
but the film primarily centers on the past and present, no futuristic technologies, aside from the fictitious time machine itself.So I agree, there is a high level of subjectivity in the categorizing of sci-fi films.
mp
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
