Still the best science fiction movie ever made.
>>63511378
hello reddit
>>63511378
so Solaris was 2deep4u then?
>>63511378
most unique and trendsetting perhaps
best is subjective
uh, that's not blade runner
>>63511378
Yeah, if you're from reddit.
>>63511475
books great movie sucks
>>63511997
please tell me you dont think the movie is the George Clooney one.
>it's a Solaris is Tarkovskys worst work and still better than 2001 episode
can someone start lobbing some Bondarchuks? id do it but im phone/kinda busy
>>63511378
OP your spelling is awful. You spell it "Gravity".
>>63512249
a reply, for (you)
>>63511997
Did you watch the older one by Andrei Tarkovsky?
>>63511378
It's okay, but Interstellar is much better.
>>63511378
Maybe. Most "sci-fi" movies are just fantasy, action, and/or adventure and only happen to have some future or space tech involved. Sci-fi genre is based around the tech and the tech is the major player in the story. That's something that is almost totally lost today. A few exceptions is stuff like Interstellar, Blade Runner, Contact, Primer, etc.
Now people try to separate it into "Hard Science Fiction" but that only means sci-fi that has tech that is known to be possible given current knowledge of science. Stuff like The Matrix, Back to the Future, and Minority Report are all true sci-fi but not hard sci-fi. While stuff like The Fifth Element, Star Wars, and The Hungar Games are just fantasy, action, and/or adventure.
>>63513576
i like you but
>it's a sci fi vs space opera/drama/fantasy episode
buckle up buckaroos
>tfw you don't even go there but you realize your post just went full reddit
Oh
>>63511378
Agreed.
>>63513761
he said sci fi not fantasy
>>63513675
I just want more actual sci-fi movies. Maybe some Lensmen or Skylark complete with the techno-babble.
>>63513576
They both qualify.
Whether you like it or not.
>>63511378
prometheus is better
>>63511378
2001: A Space Odyssey is the best movie ever made period
>>63511378
>Still the best science fiction movie ever made
I don't agree. It was pretty cool sci-fi to be sure, but many movie go-ers didn't "get it", which doesn't speak well for the artist, in this case Clark and Kubrick. Its message was that of "humanity is growing up, and there are aliens out there keeping an eye on us", which wasn't exactly cutting-edge thinking in 1968. Still, a classic, and I remain a fan of both Kubrick and Clark.
One sci-fi movie that has been on my mind a great deal lately is this one, Colossus, the Forbin Project. It's about a computer that takes over the world. Done in 1970. There's no post-apocalyptica, (quite the opposite). But humanity surrenders to the super computer.
....Which is what Hillary Clinton wants.
"Greatest Sci-Fi movie ever made...?" Tell us what that means, please.
>>63513866
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Man's_War
>SyFy is planning to make a TV series based in the OMW's universe.[23]
>It was optioned by Paramount Pictures in 2011.[3]
>>63513866
it's too bad that as special effects/cgi became more prevalent, more often than not story and themes were what ended up being sacrificed
id like to thank the matrix and the wachoski hacks for fucking up my favorite genre
>ywn have the experience of having fresh/new sci-fi stories with heavy thematic emphasis like in the 80s-90s ever again
blade runner becomes interstellar
gattaca becomes the island
solaris, ghost in the shell and total recall get remade
a scanner darkly bombs
starship troopers becomes sucker punch
dark city gets overshadowed
even the operas and dramas are getting worse
apollo 13 becomes gravity
star trek goes from that category to this one
star wars becomes even blander and less imaginative
the martian is done as a fucking comedy
terminator somehow loses almost all the philosophical themes and becomes a flick/shit
the era of capeshit
the era of lowest common denominator tv series
just when you think the ride is over some other assholes show up with even more shovels and the digging continues
>>63513943
Welp, that climate changes it up, cant argue here.
>>63514191
>star trek goes from that category to this one
I remember the commercial tag lines for the "new" Star Trek movies was something like, "This isn't your father's Star Trek!"
>>63513827
No. I meant HAL I that shot silly. They paying homage.
My bid for best sci-fi movie ever (if I may submit a miniseries) is The Martian Chronicles; because it frames humanity so well. It is the mirror darkly, but one that leaves a message of hope.
But still, Colossus the Forbin Project I think is quite poignant in this day and age because we in the West have reached our pinnacle and have started our decline. What do we believe in? We've killed God, and what do we base our institutions on now? Without a moral compass we may as well appoint a supercomputer to make us maximal efficient.
The Matrix touched on this from time to time, but it was so full of regurgitated tropes and symbols that the Wachkowski brothers flooded our senses and many may have missed the point.
>>63513576
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
>>63513943
If you've seen 10 movies in your whole life, maybe.
But for people with decent cinema IQ, no.
>>63514541
If magic is the center of the story and they are explaining how the magic works then it is sci-fi. It means the tech in that universe merely uses different terminology for actual science and that their universe works with different physics when compared to the real world. Hell, Harry Potter can be called sci-fi through that interpretation. There's a fine line between a sonic screwdriver and Harry's wand.
Honourable mention should go to Black Mirror.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2085059/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
and Humans was alright in that vein.
>>63514695
Agreed, but that's part of the problem for me - there is no "magic" in so much modern film. I liked the 1st 3 quarters of Interstellar until it got to that bullshit ending. Realistically "thinking" movies don't sell.
It's looking dire for sci-fi releases next year, unless there's some indie-gems that pop out.
