The Last Good Sci-fi Film Ever Made

[DaveC426913]

"Starship Troopers" -- come on. You know you liked it.

I actually squirmed out of my seat in discomfort.

But then, at the time, I did not realize it was a spoof.

 

[maverick_starstrider]

It wasn't a spoof Paul Verhoeven admitted he never actually read the book. The book is one of my favorite books but the movie had a completely different kind of charm as well

 

[D H]

What's stupid is that the Earth system can interface with the alien system.

... or that someone who doesn't know the interface, doesn't know the OS, doesn't even know how they communicated could, overnight, write a virus.

That said, I still liked the movie. Stupid but entertaining.

Oh don't get me started on the premise of The Matrix...

Now this was just a dumb, dumb, dumb movie. 1950s grade B movies had better premises -- and better plots and better dialog -- than this movie. The aliens (or whoever) had controlled nuclear fusion but had to use humans as an energy source? We are an energy sink. This movie was a vessel for contrived action. Everything else was an illusion.


I don't demand reality in a sci-fi movie. What I do demand is something that let's me suspend my disbelief enough so that I can enjoy the show.

 

[maverick_starstrider]

I personally find the reimagined Battlestar Galactica TV series to be some of my favorite science fiction. I think it's believable, and they don't try to over-explain anything with bad science.

Honestly I think the new BSG is the most realistic show on television. Of any genre. Despite being a physicist I'm not the type who obsesses or feels that a show/movie is ruined by scientific inaccuracies but the world of BSG is so realistic on a human level. You've got leaders who actually make some really bad mistakes. You've got the death of democracy in the face of adversity and politicians exploiting people's superstition to stay in power. Self-absorbed "revolutionaries", a military that's really bad at policing, a panicky reactionary public. Water shortages, labour strikes, cover-ups, military coups, a sensationalist press, etc. I think it's a fantastic show on both a production level (excellent cinematography) and an intellectual level (I mean in the first episode a massive attack eliminates most of the leadership and like the 30th person in line, the minister of education, assumes the presidency but the military resists and attempts to assume command. The second I saw that I knew I was watching what most TV shows should be).

 

[DaveC426913]

It wasn't a spoof Paul Verhoeven admitted he never actually read the book.

I didn't mean a spoof on the book, I meant, the movie - standing on its own - wasn't a serious story; it was tongue-in-cheek.

"Let's all get tattoos."

"I'm sensing its thoughts. Yes. It's afraid."

 

[maverick_starstrider]

Other sci-fi movies I love:

-Star wars (original trilogy only obviously)
-Eternal sunshine of a spotless mind (I think it's sci-fi)
-Fifth Element
-Ghostbusters I and II (some of the funniest movies ever)
-Star Trek: First Contact (not just a good trek movie but just a great movie... period)
-Donnie Darko (kinda sci-fi)
-Patlabor (for anime lovers. I really didn't like Akire of Ghost in the Shell)

 

[DaveC426913]

The aliens (or whoever) had controlled nuclear fusion but had to use humans as an energy source? We are an energy sink. This movie was a vessel for contrived action. Everything else was an illusion.


I don't demand reality in a sci-fi movie. What I do demand is something that let's me suspend my disbelief enough so that I can enjoy the show.

Yup. Matrix lost me during the prologue. "With the skies blackened, the machines had no power..." :uhh:

But it got me back. Premise aside, it really was a good movie.

 

[maverick_starstrider]

Yup. Matrix lost me during the prologue. "With the skies blackened, the machines had no power..." :uhh:

But it got me back. Premise aside, it really was a good movie.

Amen to that, the matrix was a fantastic movie (can't say the same for the sequels). Unfortunately, if you're going to let scientific inaccuracy ruin a movie for you then there just really aren't ANY movies out there that are both good and accurate. Movies like Sunshine and Solaris that try to be accurate, IMHO, are both really lame. Now I certainly think it is very possible to make a sci-fi movie that is both good AND accurate however, I can't really think of any examples where it's actually been done.

 

[maverick_starstrider]

Actually I suppose Contact is a good movie which is mildly accurate. And a lot of people like Space Oddysey though I was never a fan.

 

[DaveC426913]

Unfortunately, if you're going to let scientific inaccuracy ruin a movie for you then there just really aren't ANY movies out there that are both good and accurate.

There was nothing wrong with the scientific accuracy in Matrix. What was wrong with Matrix is the premise that made no sense.

However, that's what 'suspension of disbelief' is all about.

(can't say the same for the sequels).

Yes. Like Highlander: there shood bhe ohnly one!

 

[edward]

From way back in 1974 I remember a TV pilot conceived and produced by Gene Roddenberry.
It was to have become a TV series, but like Star Trek was killed by the networks.

The concept was also well ahead of its time. It was canceled before it ever started.

The name of the movie was "The Questor Tapes" it was about an exceptional android on Earth that had to reproduce itself before it's power supply ran out of energy.

I have always hoped that a modern version would be made.

 

[maverick_starstrider]

yes. Although if you watch all the highlander's the continuity is hilariously nonsensical.

Highlander 1: Connor McCloud becomes the last one gains mortality and the ability to hear thoughts
Highlander 2: Much later in the future we find out that the immortals are alien exiles, Sean Connery randomly comes back to life and McCloud reverts to his much younger immortal self until, once again, he is the last one
Highlander 3: Take place before 2 and it turns out there was an immortal sorcerer trapped under a mountain during 1 who resurfaces. Evidently when Connor McCloud thought he was the last one he was really just tripping on psychotropic drugs. McCloud and sorcerer fight and McCloud wins
Highlander 4: Duncan McCloud (from the highlander tv series and the cousin of connor) is also an immortal and in case you thought this one must take place before the 1st one or the 3rd one Duncan McCloud KILLS CONNOR MCCLOUD and becomes the one...

good times, good times.

 

[D H]

Yes. Like Highlander: there shood bhe ohnly one!

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Good one.


Most movies based on a Philip K. Dick story have been pretty good -- so long as the basis exists. The last two weren't so good. Next: Next. A Scanner Darkly: Stars Keanu Reeves. 'nuf said.

Up until that, however, the Philip K. Dick stories adapted to film were Blade Runner, Total Recall, Minority Report, Impostor, Screamers, and Paycheck.

 

[siddharth]

I personally find the reimagined Battlestar Galactica TV series to be some of my favorite science fiction. I think it's believable, and they don't try to over-explain anything with bad science.

Firefly is the best series I've ever seen. And Serenity was a very good sci-fi film.

 

[maverick_starstrider]

Ya, I concur, firefly is amazing. Although I really wan't a fan of serenity.

 

[Blenton]

Yup. Matrix lost me during the prologue. "With the skies blackened, the machines had no power..."

The machines ran on solar power believe it or not. When they blackened the skies to try and cut their power off the machines turned to people for power. And yes it sounds like a silly idea, the infrastructure required for the matrix, housing of people and maintenance just to extract 1.5 volts from the brain but without it there is no movie.

 

[JaredJames]

What's stupid is that the Earth system can interface with the alien system.

Now that I agree with!

 

[JaredJames]

Honestly I think the new BSG is the most realistic show on television. Of any genre. Despite being a physicist I'm not the type who obsesses or feels that a show/movie is ruined by scientific inaccuracies but the world of BSG is so realistic on a human level. You've got leaders who actually make some really bad mistakes. You've got the death of democracy in the face of adversity and politicians exploiting people's superstition to stay in power. Self-absorbed "revolutionaries", a military that's really bad at policing, a panicky reactionary public. Water shortages, labour strikes, cover-ups, military coups, a sensationalist press, etc. I think it's a fantastic show on both a production level (excellent cinematography) and an intellectual level (I mean in the first episode a massive attack eliminates most of the leadership and like the 30th person in line, the minister of education, assumes the presidency but the military resists and attempts to assume command. The second I saw that I knew I was watching what most TV shows should be).

I agree, BSG reimagined series was a brilliant show, the most realistic I've seen in terms of everything you listed above. As I said in another thread, it's the noises you hear during battles that I like (as if you are only hearing the guns firing through the hull of the ship).

 

[JaredJames]

Amen to that, the matrix was a fantastic movie (can't say the same for the sequels). Unfortunately, if you're going to let scientific inaccuracy ruin a movie for you then there just really aren't ANY movies out there that are both good and accurate. Movies like Sunshine and Solaris that try to be accurate, IMHO, are both really lame. Now I certainly think it is very possible to make a sci-fi movie that is both good AND accurate however, I can't really think of any examples where it's actually been done.

You got to agree though, the OST to sunshine was awesome. Some good soundtracks to bad movies.

Transformers, Armageddon, Sunshine, Last Samurai, all in my opinion good films with superb soundtracks.

 

[octelcogopod]

I just want to say about realism in scifi..
I don't think there's any difference in types of realism.
I think that walking in space without a suit is the same type of realism as loading your consciousness into a matrix or AI.

I think it all comes down to how much the audience knows about the science behind it, and how much they are willing to drop their beliefs.
A human in space without a suit will die, this is something most people KNOW as a FACT.
Loading your consciousness into a matrix is just as unrealistic, because we have no technology whatsoever to do this or any kind of sign that we will.
We simply believe it might be true because it's not taken as a solid fact yet.

 

[Blenton]

Putting man on the moon didn't seem realistic for a long time...

 

[JaredJames]

I just want to say about realism in scifi..
I don't think there's any difference in types of realism.
I think that walking in space without a suit is the same type of realism as loading your consciousness into a matrix or AI.

I think it all comes down to how much the audience knows about the science behind it, and how much they are willing to drop their beliefs.
A human in space without a suit will die, this is something most people KNOW as a FACT.
Loading your consciousness into a matrix is just as unrealistic, because we have no technology whatsoever to do this or any kind of sign that we will.
We simply believe it might be true because it's not taken as a solid fact yet.

I totally agree and it's basically what I was trying to say in a previous post with the whole "to the layman it's plausible" thing.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Yup. Matrix lost me during the prologue. "With the skies blackened, the machines had no power..." :uhh:

But it got me back. Premise aside, it really was a good movie.

I didn't like The Matrix. It was just two hours of special effects. Bleh!

I liked it better the first time when Descartes did it.

 

[leroyjenkens]

I just want to say about realism in scifi..
I don't think there's any difference in types of realism.
I think that walking in space without a suit is the same type of realism as loading your consciousness into a matrix or AI.

I think it all comes down to how much the audience knows about the science behind it, and how much they are willing to drop their beliefs.
A human in space without a suit will die, this is something most people KNOW as a FACT.
Loading your consciousness into a matrix is just as unrealistic, because we have no technology whatsoever to do this or any kind of sign that we will.
We simply believe it might be true because it's not taken as a solid fact yet.

The difference is one day we may be able to do something like that. However, walking in space, just as you are, without any apparatus, without dying, is something that's never going to change.

 

[Topher925]

I didn't like The Matrix. It was just two hours of special effects. Bleh!

I liked it better the first time when Descartes did it.

There was a lot more to the Matrix than just special effects. True, Kiano Reeves and his lame kung-fu did dull the movie a bit but the theme is still there. It introduced the concept of reality and infinite recursion to a lot people who weren't ..."open minded" enough to be able to discover these things on their own or understand the philosophy of Descartes. This is a big deal when you consider that over 90% of the people in the US are religious. There were a lot of movies like Dark City that have tried to do this before but just didn't seem to capture peoples attention. The Matrix had a plot and cast that did.

And as mentioned before, the Matrix didn't steal anything from Ghost in the Shell. I believe some of the creators of Ghost in the Shell played in a big roll in the making of The Matrix.

 

[DaveC426913]

There were a lot of movies like Dark City that have tried to do this before

Truman's World - run by The Borg.