Good SF Movies Strike Back

The old thread was getting a bit long and took a while to load...

Film adaptations very definitely improve the sales of books. Not only are film tie-in editions published (and the book may very well have been out of print until the film's marketing machine went into overdrive), but people who liked the film buy the books. Of course, this doesn't necessarily hold true for small, independent films...

Some films now seem to be made to move other merchandise; effectively being very expensive advertisements for games, soundtracks, books, comics, toys, and anything else that can be sold. This was the biggest change Star Wars engineered in the film industry - the dawn of 'the plastic age' of movies.

...something else we can thank George Lucas for:

Plastic toys, plastic movies...

I dunno. I think it's the studios and their blockbuster mentality that is to blame for all the crap plastic movies. Granted George Lucas gave them the roadmap, but that first Star Wars movie of his wasn't a plastic movie, just a reaction to what was popular at the time.

...and I don't like Walt Disney either...

I was watching a short making of the new Pixar film Wall.e and thinking how much Walle looks like Johnny five in Short Circuit.

Did any body else like Batteries not Included and The Flight of the Navigator?

My family loved "Wall-E" when they went to see it last weekend (curmudgeon here stayed home and edited). Nice to see Pixar back on track--I'll rent "Wall-E" when it comes out on DVD later this year.

I recall "Flight of the Navigator", showing it to my lads when they were young 'uns. Had its moments and the FX were pretty good...

#5-- Really? I loved The Lion King 5 3/4. Next month, I'm looking forward to the straight to DVD animated musical version of Macbeth. After that, they're taking on James Joyce! Finally, an accessible, family friendly version of Ulysses.

What is wrong with me?

#6-- I loved Batteries Not Included and Flight of the Navigator when I was little! I probably used to watch them over and over again. I haven't seen them in years, but I remember them with fondness.

What about The Last Starfighter? I don't remember seeing that one until I was a teenager, but I liked it. It's good fun.

I liked Flight of the Navigator (how could you not like Pee Wee Herman as a robot?), but man I couldn't stomach *Batteries Not Included.

Robot spaceships saving the people in an old building? It reminded me of a feature length version of one of those 'very special episodes' that were so rampant on sitcoms back then.

To show I'm not too much of a crank, for heartwarming sci-fi, I do like Starman and Cocoon

Conversely, I couldn't watch Cocoon. Maybe I shoud give it another shot, but I just couldn't stand it. Then again, it is Steve Guttenberg.

I also liked 'Fiight of the Navigator' apart from Pee Wee Herman! The science was not too unsound, the fx looked cool and in particular the "time-travel" sequence at the film's climax matched very closely Iain Banks' description of hyperspace in his Culture novels - by my reckoning, he was probably writing Consider Phlebas at the time this came out, so that may be where the imagery came from! (In case some weren't aware, Banks wrote CP some considerable time before it got published and hawked it around publishers for years before making his breakthrough with The Wasp Factory - but I digress.)

I have mixed feelings about 'The Last Starfighter', mainly because its plot is one I thought up about five years before the film came out (inspired by my lack of motor skills demonstrated by my crapness at video games) but failed to write down anywhere. (Grit teeth.) A group of us reasoned that the reason why all us (then) late twenty-somethings were useless at video games when the kids lapped them up was that they were being used by advanced aliens as recruiting tools for star pilots and we didn't make the grade...

#12 nah..i sucked at Pong when it came out in the early 70s and then sucked at every videogame since - though my wife and son were/are both v. good at them. There's a hand/eye/spatial relationships thing that - if you have it - is a great advantage, no matter how much you practice. And a scale thing..i was an passable tennis player..certainly much better than at pong!~

I kind of liked the Last Starfighter way back when. No interest in Wall-E. But something usually bugs me about both Pixar and Disney animations. although i'm fine w/ a lot of anime and, say, Persepolis, which i thought was the best animated movie i'd seen in a long time and was way, way better, albeit less slick that Ratatatatoulie (sic) - which, to be fair, i liked more than i'd expected i would., (and it's not like i hate disney product on principle..really enjoyed PoTC and its sequels)
And i'll get in another plug for Serial Experiments Lain, as the best sci-fi animation and best take on AI/the net the interface between man/machine on film. Pity the (legit)set is so expensive.

#8 - I could have lived with the animated musical version of Hamlet with talking lions, but Elton John? Not the sound track I was looking for. Maybe if it had been a Midsummer's Night Dream...
I am voting for The Last Starfighter. Didn't Alan Dean Foster do the book for it? Then again, I was raised on Doctor Who and a library full of Science Fiction Book Club stuff, not all of which was worth reading (and only half of which actually qualifies as science fiction).

#13 Pirates of the Carribean was the first Disney movie that I enjoyed in years. It used big words and didn't treat the audience like under-educated idiots. I was smitten. The sequels, by contrast, had very little dialogue of any kind.

#14

Pirates of the Carribean was a good Disney movie because it disregarded so many of the cliches that plague the other movies by that company like lice - childish plot, simplistic characterisation, and the moral always being that the good guys always win in the end. Come on, most of us grew out of that rubbish many years ago.

And most of that came back in the second movie. No longer were characters complex and three-dimensional. The plot was still adult, but only through violence and adult themes, rather than good writing. I haven't even bothered to watch the third one, myself.

Pirates of the Carribean was a good Disney movie... I haven't even bothered to watch the third one, myself.

Man, don't. I have a theory that any time a movie is so successful that a second and third movie are greenlit (or made) at the same time those movies will be crap.

For example I offer Back to the Future, The Matrix, Pirates of the Carribean and Spider-Man. There are others but I'm drawing a blank.

My theory is that since the studios were so pleased with the first film they trust the director/crew and give them free reign. This usually results in the director/crew wallowing in their own crapulence.

(I give The Lord of the Rings a pass on this since all three movies were hatched at the same time and were following their source material.)

Pirates of the Carribean was a good Disney movie... I haven't even bothered to watch the third one, myself.

Man, don't. I have a theory that any time a movie is so successful that a second and third movie are greenlit (or made) at the same time those movies will be crap.

For example I offer Back to the Future, The Matrix, Pirates of the Carribean and Spider-Man. There are others but I'm drawing a blank.

My theory is that since the studios were so pleased with the first film they trust the director/crew and give them free reign. This usually results in the director/crew wallowing in their own crapulence.

(I give The Lord of the Rings a pass on this since all three movies were hatched at the same time and were following their source material.)

I think it's more a matter of the studios trying to cash in on a franchise, rather than putting their faith in a certain director/cast/crew. If Sam Raimi had dropped Spider-man after he'd made the first one, I'm sure they'd still have made at least one more. It's the success of the title or character that leads them to order the sequels, and it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the creative talent behind it.

Look at 28 Days Later. Enjoyable survival zombie-ish movie, despite numerous plotholes. 28 Weeks Later, which I haven't seen and don't care to, has little if anything to do with the creators of the first one. The cinemas and DVD racks are peppered with similar examples.

#19 - NightSmoke,

I'm not talking about generic sequels. I'm talking specifically about movies where the studio is happy with the director, cast, etc. and orders two sequels back-to-back, immediately (like Pirates of the Carribean for instance).

This almsot always makes the second movie nothing but a long commercial for the third movie and as stated earlier the freedom given usually reults in a mess that is tough to like. (Who really liked the second or third Matrix?)

The third, in particular, was a crime against cinema.

The notion of Reeves' Neo being some kind of Christ-like figure, even shown being drawn into a divine light at the end--(shudder).

Why weren't religious loonies picketing this flick? Keanu as Christ? If that ain't blasphemy...

Please don't take post #20 as an implication that I enjoyed the first Matrix BTW. I didn't. But compared to the follow-ups...

#21 - Cliff,

Keanu as Christ?

In the words of Keanu himself 'Woah!'

#14 - anneh wrote, "I am voting for The Last Starfighter. Didn't Alan Dean Foster do the book for it?"

Alan Dean Foster did the book for almost EVERYTHING in the 1970s and 1980s...

As my touchstone shows: Last Starfighter

Yes indeedy, Alan Dean Foster did the novelization of that movie.

i wasn't so wild about the 2nd PoTC but I did enjoy the last one, esp. Keith Richards, a lot - though the multiplicity of Johnny Depps/Jack Sparrows got overdone.

Keith Richards was funny, but man, was that oversold. He was in the movie for what... ten minutes... maybe?

Watched "Capricorn One" last night. They sold it as "see how NASA could have faked the Moon landings", but all it really demonstrated was they couldn't have faked them.

I liked the second and third Matrix movies, but only in terms of "hey, look at how good computer-generated stuff can be." In terms of the ideas in the movie, there was nothing philosophical there, and the producers tried to make too much of it, (compared to the first, which was actually fairly intelligent for a popular movie). In terms of plot, there was nothing there, expanded with special effects and action sequences. In terms of characterisation, it was even worse than the first movie.

If only they had put a tenth of the effort the creators put into the CGI was also directed into the movie plot...

#28

I honestly don't know how anyone could take that idea seriously. Quite apart from Russia and several other countries watching the launch, and would have gained quite a great deal politically from being able to prove that the launch did not happen, there is an American flag up there...

You'd be surprised. Didn't they do a poll recently, and a surprising number of people felt it might be possible the Moon landings were faked? Charlie Duke said it best in "In The Shadow of the Moon": "We went there nine times. Why would we fake it nine times?"

#31
I am not surprised at how many people fail to do research on ideas they disagree with, to see whether their disagreements have any real basis, or to find new facts that may dissuade these people of their initial assumptions.

I would be interested in finding out how many people thought a moon landing was impossible, and would be far more interested to hear the reasoning behind their assertations.

There are books on the subject, allegedly "proving" how they were faked. Their "evidence" is suspect, to say the least -- the US flag "flapping in the wind", incorrect shadows, etc.

If you're interested in some of the weird crap that people believe, check out the titles published by Adventures Unlimited Press.

The English teacher at the high school I attended, this was 1971-75, did not believe we had landed on the moon. She seemed to think "Capricorn One" was a documentary. She also referred to William Shakespeare as Bill.

I quite enjoyed Capricorn One, but for proper enjoyment it may be necessary to ignore any connection it may have to moon landing conspiracy theories.

#21

Cliff,

Scary part is that there is a book out comparing the first Matrix to many Christian ideological theorums. Neo as Christ was supposed to be the big thing in the first movie. The pickets didn't commence, because this is what they expected.

(I think the book is something like the Matrix and Philosophy that has whole chapters related to the concept... Girlfriend devoured the book.)

#6

I remember watching *Batteries Not Included after reading the book. Neither one impressed me, though the book was much better than the movie. As usual. I think that was my teenage cynicism talking at the time.

Isn't there already a book about the Christian motifs in Star Wars?

This thread is getting weird and unsettling.

Keanu = Christ
Threepio = John the Baptist

I really must do something about expanding my social circle and finding a better quality of person to associate with. Maybe Facebook is the answer. And hope for fewer theologically inclined nerds lurking about there...

You have a social circle?

Er...well, perhaps not a circle, more like a--

By the way, Sales, if that was in any way a snarky comment, I shall thumbtack your lower lip to your eyebrow.

I don't know how to be sarcastic.

have you tried the "Catholicism and Sci-Fi" group on LT?

I'm no left footer.

...have you been working with mercury a lot lately, by any chance?

I've tried Facebook: it probably isn't the answer. A lot of my Leftist cronies use it for keeping in touch with the latest campaigns - but as most of them are based in London, posts like "Support the London Underground cleaners' strike" are of limited use to me. It does enable me to see who my niece in Australia is getting drunk with, though.

You think you have a limited circle? Right now (10:20pm British Summer Time), the most exciting thing for me is seeing how the police and the local garage are going to extract a broken-down bus from in front of my house. My other half suggested I get pictures for the local paper, in that this constitutes "news" where I live.

Oh for the normality of sf film...

Robert - i dunno..small towns are kindof universal..to wit.
this week's edition of the Chatham Record features some of the following stories on the front page:
"Chicory crops up along local roads"
"'Dukes' fans crazy over car" (evidently the car featured in the dukes of hazzard is in town.)
"Hospital on target to move despite road" ????
"Pittsboro may get new hotel" (anticipation is mounting)
and, of course, there are the regular columns: "Kitchen Kapers" et al.
I'm sure your photo of the bus being towed would be on the front page.

This reminds me of the skit with the Monty Python guys sitting around and comparing their increasingly abject childhoods.

"My family lived in a cardboard box..."

I live in a town with about seventeen thousand people, one movie theater, a combination bookstore/coffee bar and nary a spark of the cosmopolitan to be found.

I hate you guys.

#46

Someone is towing a bus away? That sounds like an afternoon's entertainment to me.

Pittsboro is actually really a nice little town..pop ~ 5000...but our paper is a joke. Spell checkers were the paper's doom since no one bothered to check for homonyms, grammar or anything else ever since, The truly awful thing is that the paper keeps on winning awards for "best paper in its class" (ie circulation under 10k) in NC.

Then you can open the paper up and discover:"authorities arrest 10 for DUI over holiday period." That's entertainment. Of course nothing can touch the theft of ~ 1 ton of pot that had been "disposed" of in the county landfill; and there was a good bit of civic pride when a greenhouse pot farm was busted and the sheriff allowed as how "high tech" the operation was. (Got discovered when the power company wondered why an abandoned farm was generating $5,000/month electric bills..need to go solar guys-orders of magnitude).

Not to further divert the topic of this thread, but I felt I had to throw this in: I live in a small to medium sized city, and I had to marvel at the front page coverage given to the planned demolition of a river-spanning bridge in the area. I want to shake the hand of the person who came up with the headline "Stewart Street Bridge Goes Kaboom!"

Of course, they don't cover all of the "slainings" (sic) of the weekly paper.

The most popular newspaper in the United Arab Emirates was - and probably still is - the Gulf News. Most of the editors and subeditors were British, and they knew most of their readers weren't. So, for the headline on a piece about a gold shop destroyed in a gas explosion in Tehran, they used the headline "Golden Shower".

Watched the original "RoboCop" with my sons last night. Holy crap! I had forgotten about how ultra-violent the show was! My wife covered our youngest's eyes on a couple of occasions. Still an impressive flick after all these years, good performances from the supporting players, especially Ronny Cox, who I've always liked.

One last note: I was watching "Syriana" last week (good flick) and thought I recognized one of the oil company board members.

"Who IS that guy?"

Checked the credits and it was Robert Foxworth, remember him? "The Questor Tapes" and many other films and TV series. Haven't seen the guy in ages...and the role was very, very small. What happened to him?

#53: The first cut of Robocop was so violent it was slapped with an X. The theatrical version was trimmed to secure an R, but apparently the X cut is floating around somewhere. Sadly, it has not entered my orbit.

7>My family loved "Wall-E" when they went to see it last weekend (curmudgeon here stayed home and edited). Nice to see Pixar back on track--I'll rent "Wall-E" when it comes out on DVD later this year.

Wall -E is a great SF cartoon -could be one of the best ever. It is sweet, without being too cloying, and has it's share of social commentary without being too cynical. Beautifully designed. There are plenty of scenes that deliver the "sensawunda" we all jones for.
Loved it -I highly recommend ****1/2 stars.

Bad news, folks. I usually read or hear about these things, but this one had slipped by me until I saw the trailer before The Dark Knight last night.

They're coming out with a remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still.

With Keanu Reeves.

NightSmoke - It slipped by me, too! The Day the Earth Stood Still is a great SciFi classic in my opinion. Can a remake ever do justice to the original?

My instinct is to say no, but maybe we'll get extremely lucky. I'm sure I'll find myself watching it out of sheer curiosity, the way the eyes are drawn to the wreckage.

Same here. I'll have to watch it.

I mentioned this in the original "Good SF Movies" thread, on Post 34. Someone had brought up the original movie being good, and I replied there was a remake coming out, and added that I should have mentioned this in the "Good, Bad, Ugly... and Forget the Good" SF thread.

Could someone please tell me what "The Day the Earth Stood Still" is about, and what role a wooden, unemotive actor like Keanu Reaves might play?

well..it's not as if there was a whole lot of emoting going on in the original..It's a classic and all, w/ a very early cold war moral, and a Good Thing (cf(1066 and all that) but not esp. complex. Maybe Reaves can pull that 50s thing off ok. ( i hated all the matrix movies).

Trailer is here. Reeves looks rubbish, but some of it looks quite cool. Mind you, so did Spielberg's "War of the Worlds"...

Don't forget: Michael Rennie was ill the day the earth stood still, but he taught us where to stand.

"Day the Earth Stood Still" is a dignified, over-serious and stilted SF movie but it was made with care by all involved--and let's not forget, it was directed by Robert Wise. This was no "D" picture", it had production values, solid actors and a script that wasn't incredibly stupid.

The new version will have (wait for it!) really good CGI effects...and that's about it. Pass!

#18 "Man, don't. I have a theory that any time a movie is so successful that a second and third movie are greenlit (or made) at the same time those movies will be crap.

For example I offer Back to the Future, The Matrix, Pirates of the Carribean and Spider-Man. There are others but I'm drawing a blank."

I object. The middle Back to the Future movie might be disposible, but I think the final movie was a delightful romance. Even if it didn't add anything new to the science fiction of the first movie, it carried it through in an entertaining way. I actually find myself enjoying rewatching the 3rd movie more than the first one, though maybe I'm just a softie that finds pleasure in seeing the doc finally happy in love.

#60:

rojse: you asked "what role a wooden, unemotive actor like Keanu Reaves might play" in the remake of TDTESS.

It's obvious,really - Gort...

BTW, it's being reported here that there have been audience walkouts from "Wall-E" in the US because of the ridicule poked at the obese in the film...

66>
BTW, it's being reported here that there have been audience walkouts from "Wall-E" in the US because of the ridicule poked at the obese in the film...

It's handled with a great deal of good natured tact in the movie, but it's obviously a commentary on the "fast food nation".
There's a fat activist group who have been protesting the movie.

BTW, it's being reported here that there have been audience walkouts from "Wall-E" in the US because of the ridicule poked at the obese in the film...

At least they're walking...

Thank you! I'll be here all week!

#65 - Gwen,

The middle Back to the Future movie might be disposible, but I think the final movie was a delightful romance.

Yeah, maybe. And the train at the end was nifty. But is it worth sitting through that second one to get to the third one?

Sorry. To me Back to the Future as a whole is still a good example of why two sequels shouldn't be greenlit after the success of a movie.

#61

I do agree that the second and third Matrix movies, any and all Matrix merchandise, and the Matrix videogame were absolute rubbish, but what was wrong with the first movie? Before watching that movie, I had only been into serious science fiction or comedies, but that introduced me to quite Dickian ideas about how the way we perceive the world might not be the way the world actually is. Yes, it owes quite a lot to Philip K. Dick, but still made these ideas about shifting realities accessible to a wider audience. It also helped that the movie was intelligent without being so overtly pushy about it, and that it was quite an atmospheric and well-realised world.

The only problem that I have with the first movie was that it's success led to the second and third Matrix movies.

#70 - rojse,

I guess it was just that I saw the very similar Dark City about a year before The Matrix, so The Matrix just seemed like an overly stylized copy.

The very first time I watched it I got tired of the 'pause, then pan the camera around' effect. And knowing not a whole heck of alot about science I realized that the idea of shutting down the machines by blocking sunlight was stupid as it would also kill off all life on planet Earth. It wouldn't effect the machines who could always turn to nuclear or geothermal power. If I could figure that out by watching PBS and The Discovery Channel, why would the folks that did this not think of it?

I was also wondering: are people any better off being yanked out of the matrix (where life in general seems to be okay) to be thrust into living on a dead planet? Seems to me the machines aren't doing too bad by humanity all things considered. (I had a similar problem with a book with a similar theme; The Traveler.

I liked the Wachowski's earlier movie Bound, but I can see that they have a weakness for chronically hip underground types.

The second and third Back to the Future movies were hardly all that drastically inferior to the first one, and certainly worth watching if one liked the first one (unlike, say the Matrix). And I completely don't understand the part about Spider-Man. The second movie was superior to the first movie. (And I'm not the only one who thought so - the imdb rating is 7.8 for the second and 7.4 for the first. Rottentomatoes also has a higher rating for the second.) On the other trilogies, I'd agree the sequels were a waste.

I think there was something fresh and hip and cool about the first "Matrix" movie but then the Wachowski Bros. lost their heads. A lot of strange stuff going on in their personal lives as they made these movies too--read an article in ROLLING STONE about them and hoo-hoo-hoo, freaky fellas. The second and third films just don't work on ANY level...unfortunate because the concept was likely big enough to sustain any number of sequels (for a change)...

#72 - Ben,

The second and third Back to the Future movies were hardly all that drastically inferior to the first one, and certainly worth watching if one liked the first one.

Different strokes for different folks I guess. The second one just seemed to lack the brain and the heart the first one had. Back to the Future was a movie that really didn't need a sequel anyway, but the one it got mostly served as a very long trailer for the third movie. The third was better than the second as Gwen pointed out, but that first one is a classic with two inferior and unnecessary sequels.

As for Spider-man, I loved the first one. It perfectly captured the old Stan Lee Spider-man reprints I enjoyed so much as a kid. The second one just seemed to have lost that flavor and meandered. I didn't bother with the third.

Did you folks see the trailer for the new "Terminator" movie? Talk about hype, they're not releasing this flick until next summer. You gotta think this baby is gonna have an absolutely VIRAL ad campaign.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRw3AkbtJhQ

Any news about the latest "Trek"? Last I heard, they moved back the release date from Christmas until summer '09.

Buckeroo Banzai uber alles! or at least any of the "back to the future" or terminated flics. Rock and Roll, Rasta Aliens, Dr. Lazaro (sic) and his astounding hair..It needs the Criterion edition treatment! Along w/ "The Harder they Come" one of great music movies ever.
"May I pass along my congratulations for your great interdimensional breakthrough. I am sure, in the miserable annals of the Earth, you will be duly enshrined. "

Buckeroo Banzai uber alles! or at least any of the "back to the future" or terminated flics. Rock and Roll, Rasta Aliens, Dr. Lizardo (sic) and his astounding hair..It needs the Criterion edition treatment! Along w/ "The Harder they Come" one of great music movies ever.
"May I pass along my congratulations for your great interdimensional breakthrough. I am sure, in the miserable annals of the Earth, you will be duly enshrined. "

All the aliens were named John!

I always thought (still think) that Buckaroo Bonzai could have made a terrific TV show. Sci-Fi Channel, where are you when we need you?

Just ordered my copy yesterday--another one of those flicks that dropped off the radar. Too bad. Such an incredibly ODD film...

#78 - you are so right! The premise is perfect for a tv series along the lines of "The Wild Wild West" (was there another Wild?) in any event that was one of the few shows i really liked back in HS; or , i guess, really more like "Firefly." That is really a no brainer.if i only had a brain.

Rob-ert...

Leave the name-calling to us.

Just got finished watching "Ed Wood" for the first time in five or six years.

Ian, I know you're not a big fan of Tim Burton's (to say the least) but this is one you've always had a liking for, right? Martin Landau's performance is a masterful piece of work. There are some good bonus features to this edition, a "making of" featurette and two short docs, one re: Landau/Lugosi, the other on the theremin.

Landau was quite candid at one point, saying that he saw some similarities between the ups and downs of his career and Lugosi's. I'm sure there were some bad moments on the set of "Space: 1999" when he thought "what the f--- am I doing here".

Ed Wood is a great movie regardless of your opinions on Tim Burton. My favorite part of the movie is right as Lugosi is going to fight the squid. 'All right, let's shoot this f*cker!'

...and Bela's epithet-filled tirade against Boris Karloff.

This movie was made with a lot of intelligence and affection. For frustrated artists everywhere. The "mediocrities" Salieri salutes at the end of "Amadeus"...

I'll concede that "Ed Wood" is quite good. Although I've only watched it the once, and Burton's films don't really stand repeat viewings.

Actually decent science fiction movies are made pretty regularly, though mostly as independents. Here are a few recommendations:

Code 46 (http://imdb.com/title/tt0345061/)
Futuristic dystopia thing by Michael Winterbottom.

Primer (http://imdb.com/title/tt0390384/)
A good treatment of the time travel theme.

A Scanner Darkly (http://imdb.com/title/tt0405296/)
Stylish rotoscoped adaptation of the A Scanner Darkly.

Renaissance (http://imdb.com/title/tt0386741/)
French-british noir SF. Also rotoscoped.

Sunshine (http://imdb.com/title/tt0448134/)
Heart of Darkness meets Solyaris on a very sunny day in space.

"Code 46" was partly shot in Dubai. Which I found amusing, because it made out some Northern Pakistani village was Jebel Ali. Other than that, I thought it less successful than Wenders' "Until the End of the world".

"Renaissance" succeeds in spite of its black/white rotoscoping. There's a quite good story in there, but the presentation is one artistic choice too far...

"Sunshine" is bobbins. Disney's "The Black Hole" was better.

i think we've agreed that there ARE a number of good sci-fi movies..just that most of them are stand-alones rather than adaptations from books (although they are often novelized afterwards).
Or, more rarely, adapted from tv series..w/ my favorite, as i know i've mentioned long ago, Serenity, taken from Firefly./(in that specific genre)..
Pi, Primer, Alien, Buckaroo Banzai, Brother from another planet, Repo man...lots of good movies. Anime - cowboy bebop, Lain...are a few of mine.
maybe it's the rotoscoping that i find alienating - i haven't seen any movie done in that fashion that i've enjoyed. I think if Scanner Darkly hadn't been rotoscoped i'd have liked it a lot more.

I think rotoscoping is an excellent technique for SF films. It makes it possible to combine real actors with special effects that don't seem "pasted on" in any way, to make a completely integrated image.

A lot of viewers have been put off my films like A Scanner Darkly and Beowulf (admittedly you don't have to stray far from the main stream to put off most movie goers). However, I think that if film makers persist it is a matter of time before the technique is accepted, similar to how it is now, after the efforts of mainly Pixar, again possible to make animated films for an adult audience.

"Beowulf" would have been just as rubbish if it had been live-action. Well, perhaps not so much - there was far too much "look how clever we are, we can do this with CGI" shots in it. But it was rubbish.

I don't really get that aversion towards visual effects. I mean, what would film be without an aspiration to make beautiful or engaging imagery?

Anyway, if you read the original poem, you'll notice that it is not devoid of extraordinary action not strictly necessary for the plot either.

Basically I found the movie to be a pretty good adaption of the story into a contemporary action film with a Grendel kind of reading of the poem.

You might then have a healthy bit of contempt for contemporary action films (I do). Regardless, when you get by the visuals (which I didn't find that hard), the script is pretty good for its genre.

I don't have an aversion to visual effects. What I do have is an aversion to gratuitous shots in which a spear, er, spears out of the screen... which was clearly included just to show how good the director thinks his CGI is.

The poem is an historical document and, AFAIK, Dark Ages Vikings did not build great fantasy castles in the middle of frozen wastelands. I've also been to Denmark, and its pretty damn flat - no vast mountain ranges or enormous abysses. "Beowulf" might as well as have been some sword & sorcery film, and not an attempt to adapt an Old English epic poem.

It's when ALL the attention to detail and energy and the budgets are put into creating lovely visual tableaux...and absolutely not one brain cell expended in creating well-crafted characters, a script that is at least literate. THAT'S why I find today's movies so utterly superficial and devoid of intelligence.

Very few SF/fantasy/horror films in the past decade appeal to me. The Nintendo generation of film-makers have taken over, they have little interest in text (sorry, WORDS), it's the graphics and cool stuff they can do with special FX that hold the most appeal to these vapid arseholes.

And there ain't no end in sight...

Cliff,

I agree there is a dearth of good sci-fi lately. But fantasy is flourishing. Granted, it's mostly kids fantasy, but The Lord of the Rings, The Golden Compass, Stardust, The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe, The Water Horse, the Harry Potter movies, the first Pirates of the Carribean and even Eragon were all (to varying degrees) good movies. (Okay, Eragon in particular might be pushing it...)

Things are dying down on the horror front, but there was some pretty good stuff out there too. The first Saw was great (ignore those sequels, but that's always true for horror), Strangers was incredible. Frank Darabont's The Mist was true to the book (until the end) and used CGI the way it should be used. A very good, character-driven movie. Even the remake of The Hills Have Eyes was good and was one of the ultra-rare cases of the remake being better than the original (which was pretty crummy to be honest).

On the sci-fi front things aren't so hot. The excellent Children of Men deserves a mention. A Scanner Darkly was good though not my cup of tea. I haven't seen Renaissance yet, though it is in my list.

Sunshine tried to be a good movie. I have to give it credit for that. But in the end, it wasn't good.

I do have to mention a great animated movie called Paprika. Very well done and brainy (which I'm not used to in anime). That's one movie even Cliff could watch without finding much to bitch about.

#94

That's one movie even Cliff could watch without finding much to bitch about.

What have you been smoking? Of course he could!

#95, Yeah, I thought of that too. That's why I had to write finding much...

i really want to see Paprika - i kept looking for it and never saw it in the theaters here. Thanks for reminding me, i'll get patty to put it on our netflix queue.

One bit of warning about Paprika, you have to watch the whole thing. For a while there you may just think the whole thing makes no sense. It is worth it though.

no problem, Lain is like that too.

I find that with a lot of anime (and Japanese films, as well). They seem to have their own peculiar structure and sense of time.

Re: "That's one movie even Cliff could watch without finding much to bitch about..."

This is exactly the sort of petty slander that we've worked so hard to remove from LT. And yet certain people take it upon themselves to zap me with the conversational equivalent of a Taser shot, just looking to provoke me. But, no, I shall rise above this and merely say that I shall put "Paprika" and "Lain" on my To be Seen list and hope for both your sakes that they turn out to be acceptable fare.

And, gentlemen, I have a very long memory...

Cliff!

I was wondering why there was no response earlier. I was gettin' worried.

I'd recommend you check out Paprika and I don't recommend much anime.

I just this minute got back from "The Dark Knight". Wow! If this movie comes to your town and you don't go see it you are missing something special. Best movie of any kind I've seen in probably five years. The first action hero movie that was more than an action/adventure bang-bang shoot-'em up filled with action and over the top acting. I can't sing it's praises highly enough. GREAT MOVIE!

Heath Ledger really nailed the Joker. I hope it wasn't the Joker's nihilism that nailed Heath Ledger.

This movie was action/adventure for grown-ups, not that the little kiddies won't enjoy it, if their parents let them see it, way lots of violence, but no sex so it should be okay. But anyway, this movie is not for the "Hurl" crowd or the viral backyard lunatics that show up in the obituary columns or the Darwin Awards, but for people who aren't afraid of BIG questions regarding Truth, Justice, and the American way.

I cannot praise this movie highly enough!

how full was the cinema? We're planning on seeing TDK but were waiting for the crowds to thin out.

It was pretty full. I was actually surprised. We got there about thirty minutes beforehand and did not have trouble getting good seats at all, but people who arrived just a few minutes early did have a problem getting seated. I had a single next to me that remained empty.

Don't miss it in the theater. I think it might lose some of it's visual punch on the small screen.

I've just seen it as well - it is good but not great. It is too cluttered and consequently too long (and even then it can't wrap everything up - no doubt there will be a 3 hr special extended edition).

I enjoyed The Dark Knight immensely. And even though I still found it a bit predictable as I find most American films, I would watch it again. It had a good combination of drama, dark comedy, little romance (I hate romance) and dare I say horror (Joker). Loved the FX, love the look into the human character, and loved Joker. Definitely best seen on a large screen.

Sorry, folks, not this guy, I've had it up to here with comic book adaptations, stylish or otherwise. To me, this is a case of some really talented people--Chris Nolan, Bale, Oldman--wasting their time on a popcorn flick. I know, I know, it's better than most but is "Dark Knight" really anything more than a clever, well-crafted piece of entertainment? Are there great depths to the flick that can be discussed and debated for hours afterward? Somehow, I doubt it...

>107 CliffBurns: - I object to that: The Dark Knight is neither particularly clever nor well-crafted (the editing is pretty appalling, which is becoming an increasingly common fault among blockbusters - they appear to be edited by people who put together video games, rather than films).

"Edited by people who put together video games..."

Yup.

And films are (increasingly) written, directed, designed and VIEWED by geeks with big thumbs and poorly developed imaginative faculties, who like purty pictures and the minimum of words.

Remember the dialogue in "300"? I wish I didn't...

I strongly disagree with the previous three posts. Please elaborate on the 'appalling editing.' I found that the movie flowed well, and most scenes followed each other appropriately. Yes, Cliff, I believe it is more than a clever, well-crafted piece of entertainment. That is an accurate description of it, but I found it to be something more. I'm not going to claim that it's a great art film with a thousand levels of deeper meaning, but I would argue that it could be called a piece of art in the film medium. It takes pre-existing characters and settings and uses them to stage a dark tale of morality. The character of Batman is treated not as some comic book hero, but as some of the more literary (yes, I said it) interpretations of the character have treated him: as a human being. His motives and personal morality are central to the story. He has to maintain the image of asshole playboy Bruce Wayne, who is liked by most only because of his wealth, while in the shadows he dons what is closer to his true persona: a vigilante, an agent of justice, but a hated one. He is trying to do what he believes is right for the city, but he is driven and constrained by his own set of rules. Unable to kill, he struggles to find a way to eliminate the greatest threat facing Gotham City, a man who is interested only in chaos, anarchy, peeling away the skin of society and revealing what he believes to be the animalistic, every-man-for-himself heart of civilization.

On the most basic level, it's chaos versus control.

I'll try to qualify all of this by stating that, while I am a Batman fan, I was excited about this movie more because it was made by Christopher Nolan, a filmmaker I've been a fan of since I saw Memento, a masterpiece of editing.

Bad editing: the fight scenes/the chases - they are just badly cut. most scenes followed each other appropriately? What about the scene where Batman rescues Rachel leaving people at a party unprotected? What happened there? The next scene is the following day but if the Joker was so crazy, wouldn't he have killed all the guests? No comment on it. Nothing. Nada.

At least I found out what the Joker's super power is - the ability to suspend logic.

Not the ability to suspend logic but the ability to act illogically. I did geT a chuckle (SPOILER ALERT) when the Joker referred to himself as an agent of chaos, in light of the upcoming Get Smart film. (END SPOILER ALERT).

Both Batman and the Joker were presented here in much more nuanced ways than I've seen in the past. At least the producers allowed for some intellectualized palaver between the two. One was an ongoing conversation over the spiritual sameness they shared and the fact that while they were on opposite sides they were really cut from the same cloth. Both are essentially nihilistic - they just choose to practice their nihilism differently. These are real characters, not cartoons. Cliff, I really don't think you do yourself a favor by dismissing this move offhand simply because you don't like comic book based movies. This is much more than just a "Batman" movie, it's a look into the human psyche of the sort I haven't seen in one of these movies before.

As to the near three hour length, it just sailed by. No lulls, no dead spots, no boredom, none of the things that can kill an overlong movie. This movie did not seem overlong to me at all, every minute seemed useful and moved the conflict forward.

#111-- You still provide no examples. You've restated your opinion that the movie is badly edited, but apart from specifying fight scenes/chases, you don't elaborate. I disagree with you, but I can't make specific refutations if you're going to be that vague.

***Spoilers Follow***
***Bunch of Spoilers***

As for the fundraiser party scene, the Joker was not there to kill all of the guests, nor even necessarily any of them. He was there for Harvey Dent, as he makes very clear to both the attendees and the viewing audience. It's likely that when things didn't go as planned, he simply left. It's also very likely that, after witnessing Batman's act of foolish heroism when he saves Rachel, The Joker has seen a very human flaw in Batman's character, a flaw that he can use to his advantage, and therefore decides to change his plans. He wreaks maximum havoc later in the movie by lying to Batman, forcing him to 'save' Harvey when Bruce really wants to save Rachel. That entire sequence of events accomplishes many things for The Joker, most of which should be obvious, so I'll refrain from mentioning them here.

***More Spoilers***

The Joker may be "crazy," but he follows his own kind of logic. This is a logic only known to and understood by the Joker. If he was simply homicidal, he would have blown up the boats to begin with, instead of staging his "social experiment." He's trying to prove something. When he crashes the party, he's putting on a show. He even jokes that "We are tonight's entertainment." Killing his audience would have defeated the purpose. He could have easily kidnaped Harvey Dent in another place, at another time, when Harvey was alone, or at least not in the middle of a crowded party. He is a terrorist, and by coming for Dent at such an event, he is creating as much terror as he can. Harvey Dent is Gotham City's "white knight." He is the clean, handsome hero the city needs. He brings hope. The removal and corruption of Dent is meant to destroy that hope. Killing a room full of people would be terrible, but would not have the same impact, nor even the same kind of impact.

Whew, am I rambling?

Watched a fun one last night, the 1940 Oscar winner for special effects, "Dr. Cyclops".

Dreadful acting (natch), including Albert Dekker in the title role, but the effects were certainly impressive for the time and there were some very effective scenes.

This one doesn't get the attention of other classic horror/SF films and that's unfortunate.

Give it a look...

Just got finished watching "Seven Days in May"--wouldn't bring it up on this thread but it was scripted by our old pal Rod Serling and (except for the obligatory preachy speeches that accompany anything Serling writes) I thought he did a pretty good job.

A good, effective thriller with a bang-on cast. Burt Lancaster, a lifelong liberal, was icy and effective as General Scott. Fredric March as excellent as he always is.

One of the better Frankenheimer efforts (I'm not a fan; I think him over-rated, his direction obvious and un-subtle), certainly superior to "Seconds" (SF-ish), which I saw recently and found dated and silly...

Who is Rod Sterling?

Not sure if this belongs here or the bad films thread... but last night I watched David Cronenberg's "Crash" - the adaptation of the novel by J.G. Ballard. It was... odd. I've never really been convinced by James Spader as a leading man, although he was better than Debora Unger in the film. Holly Hunter played Holly Hunter, with moments of over-acting. And Elias Koteas pretty much dominated the film.

>113 Whatnot: - so in the party scene, Batman is able to read the Joker's thoughts and then escape with one person, leaving the rest of the guests with a psychotic killer because he knows the Joker won't kill any of them. Since the Joker gets his kicks from mayhem that is unlikely, the only reason it works that way is because the writers couldn't think of something believable.

Why can a dog bite through the batsuit when bullets can't damage it? Was this a cameo from Krypto the Superdog.

How does the Joker manage to wire up a whole hospital? Don't they have CCTV or security? Why do they evacuate all the patients apart from the one who has been in all the papers? And they the Joker makes his escape in a super-fast school bus which is impossible to stop or even track because the police in Gotham don't have any helicopters.

Why are the police forces in Hong Kong speaking Japanese?

As for the cell phones.....

#119 - jargoneer,

I enjoyed the movie, but your points are pretty dead on.

Rod Serling was the chap who created "Twilight Zone" and "Night Gallery" for television and also wrote the screenplay for "Planet of the Apes" and, yup, "Seven Days in May".

Ian: Not a big fan of "Crash" but it was better than some of the other stuff Croney had been up to at the time. I'm not a booster of Koteas or Spader either--the acting wasn't tremendous in "Crash" but the sheer weirdness of the concept, wondering aloud how they ever got the money to make such a perverse flick, that's what had me intrigued.

I've had a look for the OST of "Crash". It was one of the best parts of the film.

Cronenberg's subsequent "A History of Violence" and "Eastern Promise" were both good, though.

i'd go so far as to say both "History of Violence" and "Eastern Promises" are great films.. it seems that Viggo and Cronenberg are made for each other.

"History of Violence" had its moments, I'll grant you, and a good cast. But the scenes with Viggo Mortenson's family were absolutely terrible, totally false; Cronenberg is a kook and has no idea what a "normal" family is like, so had to fake it and it shows.
The scenes with the little girl are particularly painful. That said, Ed Harris gives a spooky performance and for once William Hurt has some screen presence.

Haven't seen "Eastern Promises" but one day...

I wonder if the family scenes were meant to be false - after all, the family was a construct. Hurt was... weird in it. Not quite sleep-walking, but not one of his better roles.

I like when Hurt says to Mortenson. "Welllll...you could DIE..."

I don't think the family were meant to be a construct. They were part of the new life Mortenson had build for himself. That first scene when the little girl is having a nightmare and the whole family (including a teenage boy) crowd around to reassure her almost had me retching in my popcorn bowl.

One of my favorite scenes was right at the beginning and was reminiscent of a bit from DePalma's "Scarface". The two killers in "History of Violence" have just left what we know is a scene of horror in a motel but one of them forgets something and has to walk back inside, the camera following, so we get a hint of what has gone on before. Similar in tone to when the camera pans out the window in "Scarface" as the Columbian with the chainsaw is about to do his grim work, lingers outside for awhile and then begins the ascent back into blood-splashed bathroom...

Rojse, Rod Sterling is a misspelling of Rod Serling, the creator of The Twilight Zone and "Night Gallery". Two of the iconic F&SF television shows from the fifties and sixties. He also wote some of the best non SF television shows of the "Golden Age of Television", such as "Requiem for a Heavyweight" for Playhouse 90, another iconic television show.

Now if you know this and were just asking a rhetorical question, having seen his name misspelled earlier, then ignore this.

***This is going to be full of Dark Knight spoilers again.***

Also, only read this if you're interested. It's fairly long-winded, and I apologise for that, but I wanted to address a previous post.

#118- No, in the fundraising scene, Batman or, more specifically, Bruce Wayne makes a very human, even stupid, mistake. He lets his feelings for Rachel Dawes dictate his actions. He makes her his top priority. He probably wasn't thinking about the rest of his guests, or even about Harvey Dent. His only concern at the time was making sure Rachel was safe. He shows the same weakness later on when he races to save Rachel. By that point, because of Batman's actions at the party, The Joker knows that Batman will attempt to save Rachel if her life is in danger, no matter what the cost. Batman must know that Harvey Dent is important to Gotham City, that he is one of the few possibilities of hope and salvation the city has, but even so, he decides to save Rachel instead. He is showing his human side. He is showing a common, stupid weakness. I can honestly say that I may have made the same decision in both situations. That is not a compliment nor an insult to myself, but instead a statement intended to reinforce or highlight the non-superhero side of the character. He is not infallible. He is a man first, a hero second.

As for the dog bite, kevlar is used mainly to stop bullets, generally not slower-moving punctures inflicted by knives or, in this case, the bite of a dog, which could conceivably apply anywhere from 200-320 pounds of pressure. It is not unbelievable that a dog could bit through the batsuit.

As for the rest, I must say that I have not seen the movie since opening night, and many of the details are starting to become a bit fuzzy. I assumed that the bombs had been planted at the hospital some time before, and I don't see CCTV being a huge impediment to The Joker, especially since, as we are shown, despite his facial scarring, he has an affinity for disguise. The clown makeup is usual but not essential to him; he's not wearing it during the attack on Gordon.

Honestly, I don't mean to keep flogging this subject, I simply disagree with you and feel that you are wrong about many of the points you've brought up. I don't really want to flood this thread with this discussion. How about we just agree to disagree?

***

Now, slightly more on topic, or possibly a future topic for the 'bad sci-fi movies' thread: has anybody heard about the new plans for a Twilight Zone movie?

HOV was set in virtual and real house of cards, fragile and a gangster's dream of what a "normal" life would entail. wtf..both Patty and i really liked it. Off to see Vicky Christina Barcelona again this weekend, if Hanna permits. One barely notices that it's a woody allen movie..more of a gorgeous playpen where some fine actors can be silly and recover from playing some v. heavy roles in recent films. Not to mention being an hymn to Barcelona itself. Still needs commas in the title tho.

We found TDK silly/sad on almost every level; i'd hate to think that the playing the joker contributed to the stress that engulfed Heath Ledger whom we loved in "I'm not There." It's odd - while my spouse and i have tastes than don't overlap all that much in music; perhaps a good bit more in books; we have very nearly identical reactions to movies. The other guy we went w/ loved it as did his daughter; his wife, her Italian friend Olga and we all disliked it.

#120
Thanks for telling me who Rod Serling is.

#126
I'm not that up-to-date with my SF television, and I wouldn't criticise a simple mis-spelling of a name.

Re new Twilight Zone movie - from what I've heard it's a proposed project for release in 2011. The company behind it is owned by Leonardo DiCaprio but what they want to do is a single story film based on a previous episode or episodes. I'm not sure that would qualify it as a TZ film or just another remake. (Another adaptation of a TZ episode is currently in production - Countdown by Richard Matheson).

I'd like to see a new Twilight Zone movie.

But you ever notice proposed movies are almost always better than what comes out at the end?

Look at what happened to the movie version of I, Robot for instance. There was the Harlan Ellison script that was floating around for years. But that was ignored and a different script originally titled Hardwired was used.

That might have been okay. The Hardwired script was praised as being very intelligent and very Asimovian.

Then the producers stepped in, brought Will Smith on and then made it a more 'Will Smith style' movie.

I understand producers step in because they feel the need to defend the capital they've invested, but it seems that for the most part they wind up dumbing things down so that those that would be most interested avoid the movie and those that see it are getting more and more tired of the same old thing.

Anymore I feel like the only way for a good sci-fi movie to be made is either as an indie movie or for the writer, producer and director to be the same person. The Star Wars movies for example. They aren't 'good' movies, but at least they are they work of one man's vision rather than a gaggle of producers.

Rojse, I wasn't criticizing a simple misspelling, I was offering a correction. I didn't know if you knew it was Rod Serling and just misspelled it, as many do, or if you didn't know the proper spelling. My comment was not meant as a criticism, but a correction. They are two wholly different things.

Have watched Zathura, a decent children's SF movie. Some children find a board game that teleports their house into outer space, and they meet up with all sorts of SF cliches - robots, lizard aliens, spaceships, an astronaut, and a bunch of other ideas common to SF. However, having so many different ideas together actually works quite well. It's about as intelligent as it sounds, but it is a fun movie.

As with nearly all Disney movies, what really annoys me are the themes about children and family common to all Disney movies. Children who argue with each other learn the values of working together, everyone becomes good friends, and pretty much every other cliche about family is present. However, that's not enough to wreck the movie.

Any other decent children SF movies out there?

Would this be a good time to point out that Zathura wasn't a Disney movie, but was based on a Chris Van Allsburg book?

I wanna see it. The scenes I've seen of the house assailed by asteroids...looked very cool. Unfortunately, as I've said, my boys are older now and think it childish. But "Zathura" is on my "to see" list all right.

I wonder at the necessity of another "Twilight Zone" movie. More recycling. Sigh.

What's this re: an adaptation of Richard Matheson's "Countdown" episode? Wazzat? Details, details, let's hear 'em.

I'm a HUGE Matheson fan...

#134

I seen that on the opening sequence, but because it's produced by Disney, I wonder how true it is to the book itself, and how much of it is edited to suit Disney's perception of the intended audience. Anyone read it and want to comment?

Bonus question - is "Zathura" worth my time to read?

I have not seen the movie, but Zathura is certainly worth your time to read, as is nearly any other Chris Van Allsburg book. He mainly writes short picturebooks, and Zathura is no exception. While his writing varies, and ranges between cute and poignant, his illustrations are invariably awe inspiring.

In addition, according to the book, (and because they're both by the same author) Zathura is a sequel to Jumanji.

#137
Reading a picture book sounds odd, but thanks for that - another author I will have to look out for.

#135
Honestly, Cliff, I'm dissapointed. I was thinking that I would have to spend an insane amount of hours browsing through obscure second-hand DVD's to find an SF movie you have not watched yet, but I find one running as a prime-time movie. Ho-hum.

As I recall the cover for the Zathura game box was truly retro, and from my perspective really cool.

Retro = cool in my eyes.

"Zathura" is relatively recent (last 5 years) so that may explain why I've not seen it. Name me a decent SF flick from the 50's, 60's or 70's I haven't seen, however, and I'll eat three spoonfuls of crow with greasy grimy gopher guts as an appetizer...

#137

I would say Zathura is less a sequel than another run on the same idea as Jumanji. I've not seen the books, only the movies, but unless both "games" are produced by the same company, nothing tangible connects them that I saw. Personally, I had low expectations for the movie and wasn't disappointed. I don't regret the time spent watching it once out of curiosity, but it's not a re-watch for me.

#133

Good question. Are there any decent SF movies specifically for kids? Many fantasy movies, I think, but SF? I liked the first half of Joe Dante's Explorers, but it kind of threw things away when the aliens appeared.

#137 - Van Allsburg is a terrific illustrator - we went thru most everything he'd drawn/written..through ~1993 by which time adam had outgrown the age level at which his books are pitched; but the illustrations could work for anyone, any age, i'd think. Jumanji was easily my favorite of his books that we'd gotten to.

Just got finished watching Godard's "Alphaville".

Ah, yes, hmmm...

HAD I seen it before? Bits of it seemed familiar and then at other times...maybe I'm mixing it up with a MAD magazine spoof or something.

But I have to put this film in with the good ones. I liked Eddie Constantine and the overall quirkiness of the flick. Silly in places, inconsistent, arty...but, what the heck, in its wacky way it was unique and original, and those aren't words I fling at SF films very often (as you bunch well know).

I know other folks have spoken well of "Alphaville" in this group and let me add my cautious endorsement. "Cautious" because, like most Godard, it won't be for everyone. I preferred it to "Breathless' and found it, on the whole, far more likable and coherent than I expected.

But, then, I'm completely mad...

Postscript:

The city of Alphaville's motto: "Silence, Logic, Security, Prudence".

Sounds like an inhumanly BORING place to me.

Personally I found Flight of the Navigator not too bad a film as far as children's SF is concerned.

I've not seen it since I was quite young, but I remember loving Flight of the Navigator, as well as Explorers. I also liked The Absent-Minded Professor (the original Flubber movie).

I'd have to check on the relative dates, but I was always struck by how the fx shot of the ship moving back through time in 'Flight of the Navigator' was very similar to the imagery of hyperspace that Iain Banks used in his "Culture" novels - I wonder if there was any influencing there?

You know, I think I've heard that before, but I'm not sure where. Probably another message board. I've not read any Iain Banks.

Ah, Banks is something. Grab CONSIDER PHLEBAS or EXCESSION and see what the state of the art in SF is REALLY about.

"Flight of the Navigator" was fun, I remember watching it with my lads when they were very small.

Allegedly I used to call it "Flight of the Alligator"...

I can see a kid saying that. Lovely...

I'll probably get savaged for this one, but I thought "Predator" was an excellent B-grade SF movie. Apart from the opening sequence, it appears like a straight military movie for the first fifteen minutes, but as the crew are heading back to base after their mission, they start getting picked off one by one. What is picking them off, exactly, is slowly revealed to us throughout the movie.

The movie builds up tension quite well, the slow reveal of the thing that is after the crew works quite well, and the approach that the remains of the platoon has to follow to take the thing down is quite an interesting approach.

"Predator" is goofy fun--a cast of bodybuilders...and Arnie's actually the best actor among them! The guy playing the Indian, Billy, is particularly dreadful...

Predator... A movie featuring TWO future governors in the cast (both of whom also appeared in Running Man and Batman & Robin, for the record). And of course, featuring the classic movie line "Ain't got time to bleed..."

Was there a MAD Magazine version of "Predator"? That one would've been a keeper...

#154

Obviously, Arnold Schwarzneggar is one, but who is the other governor?

#156> Jesse "The Body" Ventura, of Minnesota.

I should have noted earlier than Sonny Landham ("Billy") was making a run for govenor of Arkansas, but he might not make the ballot:
http://foolocracy.com/2008/07/former-predator-actor-turned-politician-maybe-boot...

Just to rile everyone up, I watched "Total Recall" last night, and I thought it was a good SF/Action movie. Basically, a man finds out that the life he has been living was not real. There's lots of action, a good conspiracy introduced well, and some ideas about the nature of reality and our perception of it in there, too, which makes it better than most action movies set in the future.

I don't think it is not the most literal of adaptations - Philip K. Dick didn't write characters that Arnold Schwarzneggar was really suited to, and did not include lots of fighting and shooting and violence in his stories. However, if you look at the movie, you will see some ideas that definitely pay homage to Dick, either directly or indirectly. There are holograms, disfigured psychics, memory implants, and a bunch of other ideas that seem quite Dickian. If these were not in the short story, at least the script-writers were somewhat familiar with Dick's ideas and themes to make the ideas seem similar.

#158 Rojse, you won't rile me up. I liked "Total Recall" as well.

I have my own rules for rating movies that are adaptations. How good I think a movie is and how precisely I think it follows the original work are two completely different evaluations. For one thing, sometimes elements of a written story just don't translate well to the screen.

I'd rather see a great movie that departs from the original work than a movie that closely follows the original but is boring, tedious, or worse on film. Sometimes a great movie can follow a book closely and that's cool.

>158 rojse:: Rojse, add me tothe list of 'Total Recall' tolerators.

Yes, I felt there were some pure Dickian moments: the JonnyCabs, for example, are pure PKD out of other parts of his oeuvre; and the scene about half-way through where the Arnie character is confronted in the hotel room by the man claiming to be from Recall telling him that this is actually All An Illusion is real pulling-the-rug-out-from-under-reality stuff.

The imagery of the alien atmosphere reactor is rather stunning. And the sense of liberation amongst the mutants at the end of the film when they realise that Mars is finally theirs because they are suddenly free to go where they like and do whatever they want is quite uplifting. Shame about the dodgy instant terraforming itself and the cartoon death from depressurisation stuff.

Verhoeven is a great director. "Starship Troopers" is a classic. And I have this theory that one day "Showgirls" will be reassessed, and people will realise it's actually a good film... Oh, wait -- it seems that might be happening already. (Although having once caught sight of the "Showgirls" special edition DVD set, with shotglasses, a pack of cards, and pasties... I have to wonder...)

Ohhhhh. I want one of them. It would fit right in with my Fargo special edition snow globe. You know, the one with the wood chipper and the red snow.

161> "Starship Troopers" is one of the most brilliant anti-war satires ever made, and Heinlein is probably rolling in his grave.

158: Total Recall is, ironically, probably the most faithful PKD adaptation I've seen. Well, at least if you go by the spirit of the thing: Blade Runner and Minority Report were probably closer to the details of the original stories, but both managed to completely change the point of the story.

159. Indeed, Blade Runner and Minority Report both managed to be excellent movies while not at all being similar to the originals.

And you can all count me in as a Starship Troopers fan too. It's not a masterpiece but... it is definitely a very good satire of war movie-style propaganda, among other things. I don't think Verhoeven is a great director, though. He is excellent at picking good ideas for movies, but he tends to drop the ball on the execution. He is probably underrated, though.

It hasn't even been made yet, but I *hope* this one will be good ...
Announced on Haldeman's LiveJournal:

Fox 2000 has acquired rights to Joe Haldeman’s 1974 novel The Forever War, and Ridley Scott is planning to make it into his first science fiction film since he delivered back-to-back classics with "Blade Runner" and "Alien."
"Whoop," Mr. Haldeman is quoted as saying, "de do!"

this IS something to look forward to. We're pretty major Ridley Scott fans, in general, in our household and The Forever War could fairly be called a SF classic.
thanks!

#165

With Ridley Scott's track record for SF, I am excited too.

Maybe. But what has he done recently that was any good? The director's cut of "Kingdom of Heaven" but the theatrical release bombed for good reason. The one about con artists was underwhelming. As for his sf record... "Alien" and "Blade Runner", which are 29 and 26 years old respectively.

but the director's cut WAS good...that was one movie that got totally hosed by the studio honchos. I disliked the movie in the theater..but quite enjoyed the dvd when my wife bought the director's cut.

Oops. I meant to write "The director's cut of "Kingdom of Heaven" was quite good but the theatrical release bombed for good reason."

I've heard good things about American Gangster, but I haven't seen it myself. It looks like it could be pretty good.

#171

American Gangster is a good movie, but it follows the same sort of script as most other gangster movies involving honest cops out to take down the bad guys.

The Flight of the Navigator certainly bring back the good old days. those were the movies where it would inspire you to go outside to watch the stars at night and to dream of what of the possibilities to make first contact.

and those movies didn't come along with a exploitative marketing campaign aggresively pushing toys, merchandise and the rest of the plastic junk.

173: The Flight of the Navigator... didn't come along with a exploitative marketing campaign aggresively pushing toys, merchandise and the rest of the plastic junk.

Which is amazing since it was a Disney movie and they wrote the book on that.

Watched Robocop, and thought it worth mentioning on the good SF movie thread. A man gets killed, and is made into a crime-fighting cyborg. It's a good action movie, but a few fairly intelligent ideas in there, too. Particularly liked the news bulletins about what was happening around the world - not necessary to understand the story, but gave the movie much more depth than what it would otherwise have had.

I watched "The Holy Mountain" on New Year's Eve. I'd had a bottle of wine first. I needed it. I probably needed one after watching it too.

"Holy Mountain" is one of my favorite films visually along with "Prospero's Books". However my absolute favorite SF film that was never made was "Dune" with Jodorowsky scheduled to direct, H.R. Giger doing set design (this was pre-"Alien"). I did a quick search and it turns out those wonderful folks at Boing Boing had a post on it last year: Jodorowsky's Dune

I would have loved to have seen Jodorowsky's take on Dune. Some of the preproduction design work is featured in 21st Century Foss, which I have. I also have the issue of Métal Hurlant which contains the article by Jodorwosky on the film - which includes sketches by Moebius. There was apparently a booklet put together to promote the film. I saw a copy on eBay once. It went for about $500...

Ian, you can only brag about how wonderfully expensive your stuff is in the Snobs thread.

Sadly, I didn't buy it. I don't mind shelling out $500 for a copy of Lawrence Durrell's first novel but -- oops, sorry.

#178

I remember reading a rumor in some fanzine a while ago (vague enough for ya) that Moebius was going to be making an animated film with backing from Lucas or Spielbergo, but a quick search found nothing.

And, uh, you say teh COPY went for $500 (gulp)?!

Not a copy as in photocopy. It was an original. As was the Lawrence Durrell novel.

Enki Bilal has made a couple of films - "Tycho Moon", which I don't believe has ever been released outside France, and the more recent "Immortal Ad Vitem".

I didn't recognize the name Enki Bilal right away but it seemed familiar for some reason; then I remembered seeing "Immortal Ad Vitem". A strange and wonderful film: Immortal (Ad Vitam). Now I really want to see "Tycho Moon"!

He's another French Métal Hurlant alumni like Moebius, which is why I mentioned him.

My first exposure to Moebius was through Heavy Metal - I just didn't remember Bilal.

Thwap! Take that, you worthless excuse for a horse's corpse!

#181 - I remember reading a rumor in some fanzine a while ago (vague enough for ya) that Moebius was going to be making an animated film with backing from Lucas or Spielbergo, but a quick search found nothing.

Moebius did do an animated movie though. Time Masters (Les Maitres du Temps) with René Laloux. Sadly, here in the States it had very limited DVD release. A copy will set you back $100.00 or so.

There's also Taarna from Heavy Metal. It's a swipe that I don't believe he had any involvement with, but it's very pretty and Moebius-y

I watched my old VHS copy of Laloux's Fantastic Planet last week. Still a great picture though the tape is deteriorating maybe they have it on DVD.

Hey, right after I posted about Time Masters being so pricey I went to eBay and won a copy for $8.50! Looks like there is another copy up for auction as well as another movie of his: Light Years. You may be able to find a copy of Fantastic Planet for cheap as well.

(I'll be honest: Seeing that the seller seems to have multiple copies of a fairly rare DVD is making me suspicious. But their feedback is good and high and I've got my fingers crossed!)

Thanks for the heads up jseger9000! Suh-weet!

Watched "A Clockwork Orange" last week, thought it worth mentioning.

Watched 2010, the lesser-known sequel to 2001. I approached with some trepidation - would it do justice to the original movie?

Although it is not as good as 2001 (few movies are) it was still quite an interesting movie in it's own right. Some interesting ideas here, it was a fairly faithful adaptation of Clarke's novel, and some care was taken with the science and special effects.

That said, I thought that the movie felt too... rushed and simplified. Too much dialog explaining things, instead of showing them and asking you to decipher their meaning. Expanding the movie would have meant that the movie made far more sense, as I don't think I would have understood the movie without having read 2010.

I watched Akira last night, an animated SF movie. The story starts off in the aftermath of WWIII (as all good SF stories do), with a fight between two motorcycle gangs in Neo-Tokyo in the middle of the twenty-first century, then quickly goes bonkers. Still, great fun to watch, and lots of ideas.

Just ordered Charly with Cliff Robertson, based on Flowers for Algenon. I half remember it from TV many moons ago but the story kept nagging at me. Will let you know when I get/watch it.

193, do let us know. I watched it a long time ago and remember it as being quite good.

Just watched Metropolis - the 1929 B&W silent film, not the anime released in 2001. Overall, I was impressed - there's a decent story, some well-done special effects by way of models, and some rather good religious parallels drawn to the plot. The plot itself I won't spoil for those who haven't watched it.

Against the movie was the melodramatic silent acting (I know they have to get their emotions and feelings across without words, but it seems so over-wrought and unconvincing), and I suspect that the film was running faster than what was intended (which I suspect adds to my opinions of the acting). Or perhaps all inhabitants were genetically-engineered to move faster, but the viewers weren't told.

It's one of the few films that is pretty much compulsory viewing for anyone interested in SF films. Having watched it, I can see why.

I thought it good enough to want to watch the full version of this film - my DVD cut of the film went for about 115 minutes, rather than the 153 minutes of the original German cut (thanks, Wiki). I suspect some of the less-clear parts of the movie would become much clearer (and some re-inserted title cards would be removed).

Parts of the film were lost for decades and only recently discovered in Brazil (I think). A fully-restored print has yet to be released on DVD, AFAIK.

#196: I saw the restored version about 8 or 9 years ago at the Kennedy Center in Washington, DC. I thought I had some vague memory of it coming out on DVD almost immediately after that run ended.

That can't be the fully-restored one - the missing footage was only found last year. In Argentina, not Brazil.

The Kino 2002/03 release added some additional footage to bump the time up around 124 minutes but it still leaves out some "forever lost" scenes. Maybe more is forthcoming from Argentina now. There are a few cards put up describing the missing materials in the Kino version. Certainly that release has the best picture quality and completeness that I have seen so far.

When I watch Metropolis I like to play a game called "Let's count all the things Ridley Scott stole from, er, paid homage to Metropolis when he made Blade Runner." The city, the pyramid, the glasses etc., it's all in there.

#198: Well, that particular showing was special for some reason or another, including restored scenes. Some scenes that still were missing at the time were filled in with title cards.
I realize now, however, that part of this memory is crossing over into the re-release of "THX1138," which preceded that film's DVD edition by three or four days.

Wikipedia to the rescue! (For once!)

"The F.W. Murnau Foundation (which now owns the film's copyright) and Kino International (now the film's American distributor) released a 124-minute, digitally restored version in 2002, supervised by Martin Koerber. It included the original music score and title cards describing the action in the missing sequences. Lost clips were gleaned from museums and archives around the world, and computers were used to digitally clean each frame and repair minor defects. The original score was re-recorded with an orchestral ensemble. Many scenes had still not been recovered at that point and were considered lost. Among the missing scenes are the adventures of 11811, a worker who trades places with Freder; the Thin Man spying on Josephat; Maria's incarceration; Rotwang's gloating and her subsequent escape; and scenes which establish the longstanding rivalry between Joh Fredersen and Rotwang."

I just watched Flight of the Navigator. Great movie - first contact, Disney style. Thanks to all of those who recommended it on this thread.

>195 rojse: - there is a problem showing silent films on modern equipment - it shows material at 24fps (25 on NTSC) while silent films could have shot at anything from 12-30fps (usually 16-20fps - the frame speed can vary within the film itself). That's why the films run fast now. (It's not worth manufacturers making equipment that can show variable speeds so they don't now, a bit like turntables no longing being able to play 78s). The 16mm print they found in Argentina runs 210m. I imagine it will get a limited cinema release before or alongside the dvd release.

Now if they could only find an original hand-tinted print of Nosferatu....

#203

Thanks for explaining that, jargoneer. I'd definitely go and see Metropolis if it was screening at the cinema.

Watched District 9 at the cinemas - aliens land on Earth as refugees, and are forced to live in a refugee district in South Africa. One of the best new-release movies I have seen in a long while.

I would second District 9. It is an excellent movie. It's nice to see some original science fiction at the movies, and not just movies based on a comic, video game or toy line.

District 9 was certainly something different - and original - in the universe of SF movies. A huge alien craft has come to rest over Joberg, SAfrica. That, in part, the movie IS a commentary on apartheid - and that the aliens are the peoples against whom the power of the state is wielded is no spoiler, at least if one has gone to the movie's excellent set of websites that were the main (only?) advertisments. The incredible, non-stop intensity was not something i was ready for. I don't know that i've ever had such a viscerally physical reaction to a movie* - i wish i'd had my heart rate monitor on throughout! Two hours later the adrenaline pump is STILL going. Both Patty and I thought the movie terrific, and look forward to going again, to be able to concentrate on what we could easily have missed in the initial viewing. While defn. a "thriller" - there is a whole lot more going on both on and under the surface of the film. And, not surprisingly, with NZed special effects firm WETA at the CGI helm, the aliens were rendered with fantastic detail and realism. Anyway, more later, but it's hard to discuss w/out spoilers so..

Another vote for District 9. I can't say it any better than >209 bobmcconnaughey: bobmcconnaughey.

it's heartening to also see the District 9 is doing quite well at the box office though, as far as i know, it had very little in the way of major advance publicity, except for the nifty D-9 website which drew me in months in advance.

#209

We had District 9 billboards and ads on the sides of buses around my area. However, I didn't pay much notice of what it was until I'd heard of the movie online. They weren't the ordinary ads for a movie, they were warnings about District 9. And one funny billboard on the way down to the U.S. border that copied the freeway warnings about aliens coming up from south of the border and running across the freeway - the board showed a District 9 alien "family" running from right to left, just like the real warnings.

Just watched "The Incredible Shrinking Man", which I thought quite a decent movie.

Especially the ending. Few movies, then or now, stay true to the core concept all the way through.

Went to watch The Surrogates at the cinema last night. People can control robots that look human merely by thought (surrogates), so everyone lives their life though them.

And, I bet that you would never guess that there is a conspiracy afoot involving Surrogates.

The idea of the surrogates is an interesting one, but not examined as deeply as I would like, instead, concentrating on a conspiracy and lots of action scenes, and the ending is rather predictable. So, a decent SF-action movie, but nothing more than that.

Just out of interest, what is the graphic novel of The Surrogates like? Is it worth reading?

Isn't that idea ripped off from a sf novel? Tanith Lee? The Silver Metal Lover? Or am I thinking of another novel?

It is an adaptation of a graphic novel, actually (The Surrogates, which I mentioned in my post.) I don't pretend to know where the author got that idea from, though.

I just watched Dark City (which I need to thank Ian for recommending on his blog). One of the five best movies I have seen this year.

Ta. Sadly, Proyas then went on to make "I, Robot" and "Knowing"...

We all make mistakes. Some people just make more mistakes than others...

Just watched "Demolition Man". A fun action-SF movie, with some interesting ideas about whether morality should be imposed legally or not. But its mainly a story where lots of stuff blows up.

How I would love to read some dense academic treatise on post-modernist influences and Kantian subtexts in (say) Battlestar Galactica that ends after fifty pages with the heartening words that rojse gives us. Too few papers in 'Foundation' end with: "But its mainly a story where lots of stuff blows up."

Rosje, I got my wife to roll her eyes after we saw "Demolition Man" and I called it "a biting social satire". For some reason she thought it was mainly a story where lots of stuff blew up. Go figure.

I thought it was a great spoof on legislating morality, something we do all the time & stupidly already. Always have, for that matter. We say prostitution is illegal & yet it's been a thriving business since the dawn of history. "Demolition Man" just took it to a fun extreme - from the horrors of city violence to an equally horrible utopia.