From: boyajian@ruby.enet.dec.com (The Man from Another Place)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Premiere's Top Ten SF Movies
Date: 24 Jul 92 15:20:21 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation

In article <5582@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>, mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner) writes...

}}} 9.  A Clockwork Orange
}} Wrong category. 

} Why?

Why indeed?  We've had this argument in here before. A CLOCKWORK ORANGE
is as much science fiction as NINETEEN EIGHTY-FOUR.

}}} >10. Alien
}} If you say "Alien" you have to say "Aliens"!

} Ha! Definitely not. If Alien is #10, Aliens must be somewhere around 15-20.

We've had this argument before, too. :-)

} Yes, I'd gladly exchange Invasion of the Body Snatchers for Solaris.
} "Dark Star" is missing as well (not artsy, but a must in the top 10).
} Personally, I would also put Zardoz somewhere in there (though I guess
} hardly anybody will agree with me).

I wouldn't, but not because I think ZARDOZ is a terrible movie, as most
people seem to think. On the contrary, I like it quite a bit, but I
don't think it comes even close to being in the Top 10.

Same with DARK STAR. An amusing film, yes, and reasonably well made, but
certainly not Top 10 material.

On the other hand, I don't understand what people have against INVASION
OF THE BODY SNATCHERS. I think it's *the* best science fiction movie of
the 1950s.

Keep in mind that there are two ways to parse "best science fiction movie":

	1  (best science fiction) movie
        2  best (science fiction) movie

The first way makes comparisons among movies based on their science
fiction value. Therefore, a film in which the science fictional
element is more in the background has less weight than one in which
the sf element dominates the picture. 2001 is therefore a "better
science fiction movie" than A CLOCKWORK ORANGE.

The second way just assumes that all movies that fall into the genre
have equal science fictional value, and therefore the comparison is
made based on how good a *movie* it is. A CLOCKWORK ORANGE is therefore
(in my opinion) a "better science fiction movie" than 2001.

I prefer the second parsing method.

In article <3456@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>, seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes...

} Y'know, the other thing about that list that bothered me...

} There is some Space Opera out there that's better than even Star Wars,
} but no one ever mentions it... because over here only a very few people
} have seen it.

} ANIME. Like most things, a lot of it is garbage, but there are some
} REALLY good pieces which should be contenders in "best" lists for SF or
} Fantasy.

Certainly they should be considered. I *do* consider anime. But I would
never put any in a Top 10 list because I don't think any anime film
qualifies. Once again, it all comes down to opinion, but though some
anime is very good space opera (such as MACROSS), I don't think it's
as good as STAR WARS, either as space opera or as a movie.

Likewise, I love NAUSICAA and LAPUTA (and anything else by Miyazaki),
but I wouldn't put them in the Top 10 sf movies. Not so much because
I don't think they are worthy, but because I think there are at least
10 films that are better.

On the other hand, though, I'd probably include TONARI NO TOTORO in a
list of Top 10 Fantasy Films. (I plan to follow-up on Jim Mann's spin-
off thread once I've had the time to sit and think through a list).

In article <692@tdat.teradata.COM>, swf@teradata.com (Stanley Friesen) writes...

}} I must admit that `Forbidden Planet' does not ring a bell, shame, shame (?)

} Shame indeed, go right out to the video store and rent it!

I disagree. The movie on videotape (or on broadcast TV) is only a rough
(very rough) approximation of what FORBIDDEN PLANET should be.

What one *should* do is find someone with a laserdisc player and rent a
copy of the letterboxed disc.

}} How about `Back to the Future'?  I think it's SF, very well made, [...]
}} Maybe `Timemachine' should be up there as well, as well as `The Fly'
}} (Cronenberg version).  I also like `Westworld' a lot, [...]

} Some good films here.

But that's the point. A Top 10 list should not be a list of "good" films.
It should be a list of *great* films at the very least, and more a list
of masterpiecces.

In article <BD.92Jul23131104@fluent.UUCP>, bd@fluent@dartmouth.EDU (Brice Dowaliby) writes...

} re Close Encounters...

} This movie was, for the most part, great.  But the last few minutes
} really sucked, IMHO.

That depends. Which "last few minutes" are you referring to?  Keep in
mind that there are two versions of the movie. In the original version,
Roy Neary walks into the mothership, and it takes off for the wild
black yonder. In the "Special Edition" released three years later,
there's a sequence in which we see the inside of the ship.

Me, I prefer the original version. Spielberg considers the "Special
Edition" to be a truer version of what he intended, although he also
has said that he didn't want to show the inside of the mothership.
He agree to film that only to convince the studio to give him the
money to reedit and rerelease the film.

-- 

	"She's my radiation baby.
	 She's my teenage fallout girl."

--- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian, DEC, "The Mill", Maynard, MA)

    boyajian@ruby.enet.dec.com