Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 181 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 67
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 67
Originally Posted By: BrianPatrix

And what are you on about Star Wars? It soooo had a plot, there's a decaying Evil Empire and the local farm boy discovers he's a destined hero, to save the beautiful princess. We call that Space Opera, see Niven's the Mote in Gods Eye.


Check back on what I read...I didn't say Star Wars had no plot, I said that the movies that tried to copycat it decided that all they needed was special effects, and they didn't bother to have interesting plots!

I agree that Star Wars had a plot, but stand by my statement about it being a Western with Ray Guns. Watch the original Star Wars, then watch John Wayne's "The War Wagon" and see if you don't agree!

Don't get me wrong, I loved the original Star Wars trilogy and still like them a lot.


Mike B in OKlahoma

"Never confuse with malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence."

.
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,940
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,940
"The Day the Earth Stood Still" was a great movie for its time. The theme was something that should resonate with religious people - don't worry about "stuff" cause there's a higher power looking out for the welfare of the galaxy. I keep a copy at home and watch it from time to time, but my kids aren't fond of it.

I like Metropolis better, but I'm not sure how much it affects current SF.

Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 264
W
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
W
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 264
At the time of its release I thought that "Blade Runner" would create a wave of films dealing with Artificial Intelligence, but it never happened. That was also adapted from a little Phillip Dick novel, "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?". I read that in a single sitting, as a High School Junior on a Basketball trip on a bus. It really makes you think, especially the last 60 pages or so. Not a good way to get "psyched" to play Ball!

Strangely, a few years later I was travelling South-North in Germany by train. I noticed a passenger sitting in a seat just ahead of me reading "Traumen Androiden Von Elektrisken Schafen?"

I was dissappointed in the film version because it omitted so much. In the book, Deckard was married to a woman named Iran. They lived out a rough existence on a small salary (in San Fran, not LA) and. like most Americans, resented the flow of immigrants into the country. There were so many immigrants that the common language on the street was a mish-mash of English/Japanese and Arabic. Real animals are almost completely extinct so people keep android animals. Deckard himself has an Electric Sheep that he keeps on the roof of his building. He was offered $6,000 to terminate 6 Replicants. Errr... 6 large was a lot of money in 1968! The film also deleted two minor characters who I thought were pivotal The first was named Buster Friendly, a Game Show Host who gave peole hope. The other was Mercer who had established a new religion after the Nuclear War. I kept waiting for one of them to show up. Nope. But THE OWL showed up! That was Deckard's dream, to one day have enough money to buy an Electric Owl. After the War radiation was killing everything, people were leaving for the Off World Colonies.

In the end Deckard retreats to Oregon with his wife. Climbing a path on a hill, he finds a toad, and is ecstatic that he actually has a real, living animal, something only the very priviledged could own. But that night his wife realizes that it too is a replicant. Decckard goes to bed happy, deluded, but happy, and his wife orders android flies for the toad, to keep him happy.

Oh, it's an incredible Book, it makes you think about things like the Human Condition, Technology and Religion. Very few books do that.

Last edited by Wolfman; 08/07/07 12:01 AM.
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 334
K
Kate Offline OP
Senior Member
OP Offline
Senior Member
K
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 334
Speaking of Phil Dick, have you read "Lies Inc" or "Counter-Clock World"? CC World is a real head-trip and would make a great film.

Unfortunately though, while his concepts are mind-blowing, his writing can be a bit crap - well, a lot crap actually. It's a pity he didn't have better narrative skills to complement his grand ideas. Just my 0.02c.

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
E
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
E
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
Why do I feel that in the Androids/ Sheep book the Deckard character was also left questioning his own human status? I liked both the film and the book, but they are both very different really, (but the book is more interesting). And stop getting stuck into Star Wars (esp the first, the original and best), it was a western, it was fun, I would have made that movie if I could have... BUT nothing on this planet will convince me that Luke and Laia were ever intended, in the future, to be found to be to be brother and sister in the way they were portrayed in that first episode!!! No Way!!!

Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,840
R
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
R
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,840
I'll take the liberty of stretching the thread a wee bit.

This was the most influential sci-fi for me, but it wasn't a movie, it was a radio broacast: Journey into Space

First broadcast in 1953, in the UK it was the last radio programme to attract a bigger evening audience than television. It could even have served as a model for Star Trek (and 'Q' in particular). From Wiki:

Although Journey Into Space was primarily an entertaining science-fiction adventure, it often touched on deeper moral issues, many of which were very thought-provoking. A recurring theme throughout all three series was the lack of respect which humans often demonstrate towards the Earth and each other. At times, a non-human intelligence (such as the Time-Traveller or the Martian), being much older and more advanced than mankind, would rebuke the main characters for mankind's selfish and destructive tendencies.

In Operation Luna, a good example is the diary entry which Doc unintentionally writes while being influenced by the Time-Traveller on the Moon:

... We should never have come. Man has no right here, no right to carry the secrets of this planet back to Earth, back to terrestrial beings who can neither understand them nor appreciate them, and in consequence will only attempt to destroy them, rip them to pieces, tear them apart, as they have already begun to destroy their own planet ...

Another example is Mitch's speech while possessed by the Time-Traveller on the Moon:

... Why do you interrupt the peace of your sister planet? ... Already you are tearing your own planet to pieces, destroying it, and now you mean to do the same here ...

http://www.jeton.themoon.co.uk/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journey_Into_Space

----

Wonderful stuff, even for a 4yr old.


"Time is what prevents everything from happening at once" - John Wheeler
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 10
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 10
Star Wars is a classic hero myth, like the Potter films, but I doubt it would have been made if not for 2001. Does Dr. Strangelove qualify?

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
E
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
E
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
Why do you think that 2001 is so influential? Star Wars is definitely the archetypal quest myth- it has all the features including the maimed hero, as does Harry Potter, but so do many other novels and movies. 2001 may have influenced the setting by popularising the notion of science fiction film, but I think it had a different message entirely. While 2001 was a sort of history of humans of Earth and looked to its own future- Star Wars was set on 'a galaxy far, far away' and the action does not intend to apply specifically to Earth. This is important as imagination runs free in Star Wars, fantasy is given full flight and ideas are limited only by the budget!

Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 67
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 67
2001 was influential partly in making science fiction movies "respectable". Kubrick was a major director, and if he was going to make a science fiction film, it was more difficult to dismiss science fiction as a fringe genre suitable only for teen-aged movie goers. A lot of later science fiction movies wouldn't have been able to get funded if Kubrick hadn't ventured into the field.

And I think it is a pretty cool movie, though by being set in the "near future" it hasn't aged well. A common risk of doing that.


Mike B in OKlahoma

"Never confuse with malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence."

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 194
R
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
R
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 194
I voted for 2001: A Space Odyssey because I was a child then and remember how it sparked the minds of my classmates who were allowed to see it. My family was poor so I didn't go to theaters to see movies then. I am sure Metropolis was a fine motivator of its time since I think it was the original sci fi movie, but it was too far before my time to know for sure. The Last Star Fighter was a fun movie and I own a copy for my personal library, but I would not say it was all that influencial.

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 97
B
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 97
why isn't star wars on the list? lol star wars was the funniest ever(entire series) i loved it.


seize the day
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,696
M
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
M
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,696
Originally Posted By: Mike Kremer


Its been a long time since we had a worthy update to Sci-Fi Movies. There is an update to one of the most famous films of all time, Fritz Lang's 'Metropolis'
It was always a difficult film to understand, but now everyone will be able to see this film in its entirety and understand it.

For one fifth of the original version of this silent film was edited and shortened by the American Paramount Co: back in 1927.
Ever since then the original has been lost for over 80 years.
Until the original was found an Argentinian Museum in 1992.

The film was taken to Germany, where it has been restored. It will soon be available for the public to see, and understand, for the first time ever.
The new added scenes now make sense of the film, and show the fights of the bizarre "gynoid" robot. Love scenes between Freder, (the leaders idealistic son) and the underworlds beautiful leader Maria, are also new. It also brings in the "thin man" who is paid to spy on the leaders son, and Freder's mother.
The full techno-sexual violent imagery has been restored, the reasons that this epic film was cut, in the first place.

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/film/2008/07/lost_metropolis_footage_could.html




Last edited by Mike Kremer; 07/05/08 01:10 AM. Reason: URL added

.

.
"You will never find a real Human being - Even in a mirror." ....Mike Kremer.


Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 67
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 67
http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/article/images_and_descriptions_of_found_metropolis_footage_online

The above site claims to have stills of some of the discovered footage. Quality leaves something to be desired, though I suspect they will work wonders on this using the video equivalent of Photoshop to clear it up.

I'm a big fan of this film, and am quite excited. Maybe the full plot will now actually make sense!!!

Last edited by MikeBinOK; 07/06/08 01:53 AM.

Mike B in OKlahoma

"Never confuse with malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence."

Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 7
A
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
A
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 7
"I wanna root for THX 1138"
I just *grinned* so big that something fell off. While possibly not being so influential for latter works, it was somewhat 'prophetic' (IMO) and a nice dystopia. On that note, I recommend Terry Gilliam's Brazil or, for lighter viewing, the forever-considered-a-B-rate futuristic Cherry 2000.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092746/

That one fits very well, considering some of the current news blurbs.

Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 7
A
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
A
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 7
Subtopic? I check this topic months later and not one has mentioned The Quiet Earth.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089869/

Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,840
R
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
R
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,840
Hi, Arcturus66. I'm ever on the lookout for engrossing sci-fi movies, but they do seem few and far between - I have a deficiency, i.e. a complete inability to appreciate the Star Wars type. I visited imdb.com, and The Quiet Earth looks promising. What did you like about it?


"Time is what prevents everything from happening at once" - John Wheeler
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 17
Y
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
Y
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 17
I am a big fan of 2001. The other books would have made awesome movies.

I'm actually going to put my vote in for Star Trek. Sure there are outragous ideas but the point is it was/is a huge for modern technology, like the flip phone, and it has a realistic time line for how we got there. It's long which is very real.

Star Wars was cool but little science.

Alien is cool, but the plot kind of covers the science be hind it.

The Day the Earth Stood Still is coming out with a remake. I hope it's good.




I think therefore I'm MAN.
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
E
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
E
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
Unfortunately it's not! It's just an arcade game for most of the movie, and Keanu Reeves, who I think is very attractive indeed, is beyond expressionless. I know the role demands it, but he is supposed to be acting it!

( Plaintive whine here) -- Why do they remake really good movies? The original in black and white is a truly remarkable movie.

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 9
Q
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
Q
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 9
2001 set the standard stylistically and broke-away from the V2/UFO spaceship design paradigm that dominated all through the 1950s/60s. Spaceships became Deep space-ships that looked functional, instead of like missiles or hub-caps.

Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,840
R
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
R
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,840
Yes, I think you're right qraal. Although the Star Trek craft combined hub-cap with missiles; but they can be excused, as they also served as landing craft!

Which brings me to mentioning that I've recently finished watching the entire Star Trek Voyager series, which I think is brilliant. One could attack the program on the grounds that it isn't agonisingly realistic. But why be concerned over that? It's a visual delight, thoroughly absorbing as the central characters develop throughout the 26 episodes, and all-in-all excellent entertainment. This is the kind of space soap that I like. The end titles of the final episode were a sad sight.


"Time is what prevents everything from happening at once" - John Wheeler
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokÂþ»­¾W
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5