Movies: Must see science fiction

saluki

Registered User
Nov 18, 2017
730
397
Another one that just sort of popped into my head is Pandorum.

I had fun watching that movie. The beginning is literally a movie representation of System Shock 2, and homages to the classic game echo throughout.

It has a neat twist at the end that ties everything together nicely.
 

Eisen

Registered User
Sep 30, 2009
16,737
3,101
Duesseldorf
I liked the casting, and the visuals and atmosphere of Dune were memorable, but the story deviates too far from the book to be palatable.



It is also difficult to follow if you haven't read the book.

Yeah, that was a weird thing to do to the weirding way. I don't know if that was to make it easier for the screen. And don't forget the end. Rain on Arrakis? That kills all the worms right there. Apparently, they didn't want to do a sequel.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: NyQuil

alko

Registered User
Oct 20, 2004
9,348
3,064
Slovakia
www.slovakhockey.sk
Pretty much everything The Expanse. As for something else.....

Currently it's not at the "Must see" stage, as there is no material to view (Unless you count Minecraft Machinima, which actually isn't half bad) , but I would HIGHLY suggest reading the Remembrance of Earth's Past trilogy (aka: The Three Body Problem Trilogy). It's considered by far the best science fiction ever to come out of the eastern part of the world. Easily up there with Roadside Picnic (aka: Stalker). It's an epic tail that I highly suggest you go into blind.

The Chinese film industry has been trying to get the thing into movie form for what seems like forever now. They did make a motion picture out of the first book back in 2015, but it's been indefinitely tabled as by all accounts the final product is a complete and utter clusterf***. The Chinese see the trilogy as their Tolkien/Star Wars, and are taking their time with it. There is an animated works in production as well, though it's hard to find news in English on it.


SPOILERS!!!!!!


(Concept trailer for animated work)

(Actual Trailer for animated work)


I think the Chinese are going to skip right past the first book as it contains a ton of criticism on the Chinese cultural revolution.


This Books deserves a A+ Hollywood production. And i think, 3 movies were too small project. A good TV Serie with at least 5 seasons.
 

NyQuil

Big F$&*in Q
Jan 5, 2005
95,340
59,233
Ottawa, ON
Another one that just sort of popped into my head is Pandorum.

I had fun watching that movie. The beginning is literally a movie representation of System Shock 2, and homages to the classic game echo throughout.

It has a neat twist at the end that ties everything together nicely.

Pandorum was a nice little surprise of a film, good pick.
 

JetsFan815

Registered User
Jan 16, 2012
19,119
23,868
I also have the utmost respect regarding Shane Carruth's approach in Primer but he lost me with the scientific jargon.

I agree with you. I used to be a huge fan of Primer and think it was awesome but now I think Primer is just a not greatly told story. The fact that the storyline is so incomprehensible is a bug not a feature esp because I have seen other time travel movies with stories as complex or more than Primer that still were understandable by the audience. The main issue of the movie is that the characters are so far ahead of the audience in understanding what's going on that it makes for a frustrating experience. Compare Primer to other Time Travel movies like Time Crimes or Predestination or even the tv show Dark which has a much more intricate and complex storyline than primer but is still fully understandable and it's night and day.

I enjoy Primer for the atmosphere and the first 2 acts which are absolutely brilliant but the movie loses the audience in it's 3rd act (basically everything that happens after the "party").

I think Shane Carruth's followup "Upstream Color" is a much superior movie that doesn't leave the audience twisting in the wind.
 

EXTRAS

Registered User
Jul 31, 2012
8,867
5,295
I'm gonna toss a new-ish tv show into the mix:

Dark

It's German with sub titles, or dubbed(horrible), but the show is super good and does some really cool timeline stuff (kind of like edge of tomorrow sorta thing, but more developed storyline).

Is on Netflix now.
 

Lshap

Hardline Moderate
Jun 6, 2011
27,274
24,845
Montreal
This might be painfully obvious to the sci-fi nerds in this thread, but Star Wars isn't sci-fi. I know there's no exact measure for true sci-fi, but I'll impose one anyway. IMO, the "Science" part of Science Fiction requires the story to connect the science behind what we are to the science behind what we become. Want to feature alien life forms? Give them some science-based technology that allows us to meet, and some science-based reason for them to make the effort. In other words, show your work. Make us believe that, holy cow, this could happen.

Bottom line: It ain't sci-fi without some legitimate 'sci' mixed into the 'fi'. The spaceships and aliens in Star Wars are part of the same fantasy world as the white walkers and dragons in Game of Thrones. They exist in their own universe without any need for science or any connection to our universe*. Place Star Wars in Westeros and GoT in space and both stories could remain almost identical.

On the other hand, a film like Her is excellent sci-fi without a single space battle or alien, because it builds a beautiful story on the science of A.I. and society's adaptation to it.

How much thought have I given this? A full 12 minutes, so my argument is obviously air-tight.

*Just thought of Asimov's Foundation Trilogy, which isn't connected to our universe. However, the entire story is a monumental metaphor anchored in the sciences of sociology/psychology.
 
Last edited:

Pranzo Oltranzista

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
3,826
2,669
This might be painfully obvious to the sci-fi nerds in this thread, but Star Wars isn't sci-fi.

To be fair, a lot of the films named in this thread wouldn't really be sci-fi to a purist. As for Star Wars, you're absolutely right, it is fantasy and the only thing making it maybe look like sci-fi are the spaceships - but last time I underlined that fact I almost got crucified.
 

Tawnos

A guy with a bass
Sep 10, 2004
28,815
10,380
Charlotte, NC
This might be painfully obvious to the sci-fi nerds in this thread, but Star Wars isn't sci-fi. I know there's no exact measure for true sci-fi, but I'll impose one anyway. IMO, the "Science" part of Science Fiction requires the story to connect the science behind what we are to the science behind what we become. Want to feature alien life forms? Give them some science-based technology that allows us to meet, and some science-based reason for them to make the effort. In other words, show your work. Make us believe that, holy cow, this could happen.

Bottom line: It ain't sci-fi without some legitimate 'sci' mixed into the 'fi'. The spaceships and aliens in Star Wars are part of the same fantasy world as the white walkers and dragons in Game of Thrones. They exist in their own universe without any need for science or any connection to our universe*. Place Star Wars in Westeros and GoT in space and both stories could remain almost identical.

On the other hand, a film like Her is excellent sci-fi without a single space battle or alien, because it builds a beautiful story on the science of A.I. and society's adaptation to it.

How much thought have I given this? A full 12 minutes, so my argument is obviously air-tight.

*Just thought of Asimov's Foundation Trilogy, which isn't connected to our universe. However, the entire story is a monumental metaphor anchored in the sciences of sociology/psychology.

Blah blah blah.

Science fiction isn't one thing. Within science fiction, you have movies that could also be categorized as thriller, horror, action, drama, and even comedy. Many of the movies listed in this thread don't "show their work," not just Star Wars. So why be exclusionary? Why can't fantasy be part of the science fiction genre? Star Wars contains advanced technology and, ipso facto, belongs in the science fiction genre. Sci fi? Yes. Fantasy? Yes. Sci fi fantasy? Yes. There's nothing mutually exclusive about the genres, so it's possible to be both. Any claims otherwise are pure snobbery.

Foundation *is* connected to our universe, by the way. The first trilogy isn't on the surface, but as the entirety of the series unfolded, Asimov connected the robot stories to Hari Seldon and made it clear it's all part of one future history. Since the robot series represents our own future, so does Foundation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JabbaJabba

Pranzo Oltranzista

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
3,826
2,669
Blah blah blah.

That's your most compelling argument and really identifies you as part of the Star Wars crowd. At least it's an honest start.

There's nothing mutually exclusive about the genres

On the contrary, Fantasy and science-fiction are mutually exclusive. To try and make stuff like Star Wars kind of sound like acceptable science-fiction, you need to come up with subgenres that inherently contradict the purest understanding of what science-fiction is.
 

Tawnos

A guy with a bass
Sep 10, 2004
28,815
10,380
Charlotte, NC
That's your most compelling argument and really identifies you as part of the Star Wars crowd. At least it's an honest start.



On the contrary, Fantasy and science-fiction are mutually exclusive. To try and make stuff like Star Wars kind of sound like acceptable science-fiction, you need to come up with subgenres that inherently contradict the purest understanding of what science-fiction is.

Purity is soooo boring.
 

Lshap

Hardline Moderate
Jun 6, 2011
27,274
24,845
Montreal
Blah blah blah.

Science fiction isn't one thing. Within science fiction, you have movies that could also be categorized as thriller, horror, action, drama, and even comedy. Many of the movies listed in this thread don't "show their work," not just Star Wars. So why be exclusionary? Why can't fantasy be part of the science fiction genre? Star Wars contains advanced technology and, ipso facto, belongs in the science fiction genre. Sci fi? Yes. Fantasy? Yes. Sci fi fantasy? Yes. There's nothing mutually exclusive about the genres, so it's possible to be both. Any claims otherwise are pure snobbery.

Foundation *is* connected to our universe, by the way. The first trilogy isn't on the surface, but as the entirety of the series unfolded, Asimov connected the robot stories to Hari Seldon and made it clear it's all part of one future history. Since the robot series represents our own future, so does Foundation.
Thank you for your own "Blah blah blah" contribution.

Can genres blend together? Obviously. Star Wars can be sci-fi if you like spaceships, just like you can call Her a 'Romance' story. I was crystal clear that my own opinion was subjective and my post intended as a conversation starter.

But let's be clear -- while science fiction isn't one thing, it's not all things. There must be specific properties that separate "Sci-Fi" from other genres, even if they spillover into each other. As inclusive as you claim to be, I doubt you'd call Game of Thrones a sci-fi story. Does that make you a snob?

I described the properties that, for me, classify something as sci-fi. I'm hoping to read other people's opinions.
 

Pranzo Oltranzista

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
3,826
2,669
I described the properties that, for me, classify something as sci-fi. I'm hoping to read other people's opinions.

It's not exactly a matter of opinion. We can discuss and argue genre boundaries, but one can still not come in and say "in my opinion, Sergent Pepper is trash metal". As for Star Wars, there's this very blurry and almost useless speculative fiction genre where it can fit so that the fans can be almost satisfied in believing it's not kiddy flicks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lshap

Tawnos

A guy with a bass
Sep 10, 2004
28,815
10,380
Charlotte, NC
Thank you for your own "Blah blah blah" contribution.

Can genres blend together? Obviously. Star Wars can be sci-fi if you like spaceships, just like you can call Her a 'Romance' story. I was crystal clear that my own opinion was subjective and my post intended as a conversation starter.

But let's be clear -- while science fiction isn't one thing, it's not all things. There must be specific properties that separate "Sci-Fi" from other genres, even if they spillover into each other. As inclusive as you claim to be, I doubt you'd call Game of Thrones a sci-fi story. Does that make you a snob?

I described the properties that, for me, classify something as sci-fi. I'm hoping to read other people's opinions.

There’s no element of advanced technology in Game of Thrones or anything else that’s medieval fantasy. Yes, you could trade their settings and they’d be identical to what they were... but the point is that *setting* is one of the things that defines science fiction. If the setting includes advanced technology, then it should qualify as science fiction. My opinion is that there’s no real reason to set the threshold any higher.

Few people question Dune’s place as a work of science fiction, but it’s as much fantasy as it is sci-fi. You can find people who don’t consider Star Trek to be science fiction. These things just prove that these discussions tend to lead to ridiculous places.

It’s the reason why the concept of speculative fiction gained some traction in the 60s and more traction in the 00s. It makes strict distinctions somewhat meaningless. From my perspective, it’s the best way to view things, because it takes out the pretensions of being one thing or the other. It allows us to view whatever it is for it’s value as a story, without needing to judge how well it qualifies to be labeled as one thing or another.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WetcoastOrca

Tawnos

A guy with a bass
Sep 10, 2004
28,815
10,380
Charlotte, NC
It's not exactly a matter of opinion. We can discuss and argue genre boundaries, but one can still not come in and say "in my opinion, Sergent Pepper is trash metal". As for Star Wars, there's this very blurry and almost useless speculative fiction genre where it can fit so that the fans can be almost satisfied in believing it's not kiddy flicks.

Star Wars is absolutely made for kids. It’s still sci fi.
 

Pranzo Oltranzista

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
3,826
2,669
Star Wars is absolutely made for kids. It’s still sci fi.

Interesting, normally SW fans hang on to the sci-fi etiquette as a form of credibility in order to further argue that it's not for kids. But still, it's not sci-fi, if it was, it would be terribly bad science-fiction - any respectable work of sci-fi wouldn't put up with any of that Force magic.

The first Google link on a Star Wars science-fiction search quotes the emperor himself:

“Well, I had a real problem because I was afraid that science-fiction buffs and everybody would say things like, “You know there’s no sound in outer space”. I just wanted to forget science. That would take care of itself. Stanley Kubrick made the ultimate science-fiction movie and it is going to be very hard for somebody to come along and make a better movie, as far as I’m concerned. I didn’t want to make a 2001, I wanted to make a space fantasy that was more in the genre of Edgar Rice Burroughs; that whole other end of space fantasy that was there before science took it over in the Fifties."
- George Lucas

Again, a science-fiction work that would want to "forget science" would only be an absolutely terrible one.
 

Lshap

Hardline Moderate
Jun 6, 2011
27,274
24,845
Montreal
It's not exactly a matter of opinion. We can discuss and argue genre boundaries, but one can still not come in and say "in my opinion, Sergent Pepper is trash metal". As for Star Wars, there's this very blurry and almost useless speculative fiction genre where it can fit so that the fans can be almost satisfied in believing it's not kiddy flicks.
Yeah, definitions can be stretched, but only so far. Star Wars looks like sci-fi on the surface, but the spaceships and aliens are just props in an old-fashioned hero & villain story. You can call it 'Fantasy' or a 'Western' in space. Since there's no attempt to link any of it to science, Star Wars doesn't belong in a genre whose first name is "Science".

But there are plenty of examples of great genre-blends. Off the top of my head... Her is sci-fi/romance. Star Trek TNG's episode "Measure of a Man" was a terrific sci-fi/legal thriller; Signs by M. Night Shyamalan is religion/sociology/sci-fi. Lots and lots more...
 

Tawnos

A guy with a bass
Sep 10, 2004
28,815
10,380
Charlotte, NC
Interesting, normally SW fans hang on to the sci-fi etiquette as a form of credibility in order to further argue that it's not for kids. But still, it's not sci-fi, if it was, it would be terribly bad science-fiction - any respectable work of sci-fi wouldn't put up with any of that Force magic.

The first Google link on a Star Wars science-fiction search quotes the emperor himself:

“Well, I had a real problem because I was afraid that science-fiction buffs and everybody would say things like, “You know there’s no sound in outer space”. I just wanted to forget science. That would take care of itself. Stanley Kubrick made the ultimate science-fiction movie and it is going to be very hard for somebody to come along and make a better movie, as far as I’m concerned. I didn’t want to make a 2001, I wanted to make a space fantasy that was more in the genre of Edgar Rice Burroughs; that whole other end of space fantasy that was there before science took it over in the Fifties."
- George Lucas

Again, a science-fiction work that would want to "forget science" would only be an absolutely terrible one.

All that quote does is make it clear that sci-fi purists have been assholes since well before Star Wars came out.
 

Lshap

Hardline Moderate
Jun 6, 2011
27,274
24,845
Montreal
There’s no element of advanced technology in Game of Thrones or anything else that’s medieval fantasy. Yes, you could trade their settings and they’d be identical to what they were... but the point is that *setting* is one of the things that defines science fiction. If the setting includes advanced technology, then it should qualify as science fiction. My opinion is that there’s no real reason to set the threshold any higher.

Few people question Dune’s place as a work of science fiction, but it’s as much fantasy as it is sci-fi. You can find people who don’t consider Star Trek to be science fiction. These things just prove that these discussions tend to lead to ridiculous places.

It’s the reason why the concept of speculative fiction gained some traction in the 60s and more traction in the 00s. It makes strict distinctions somewhat meaningless. From my perspective, it’s the best way to view things, because it takes out the pretensions of being one thing or the other. It allows us to view whatever it is for it’s value as a story, without needing to judge how well it qualifies to be labeled as one thing or another.
Sure, setting is one standard to define sci-fi. Personally, I need more than spaceships, although it's a legitimate debate. Honestly, I don't see any debate about Star Trek NOT being sci-fi. That would be one of the hills I'd die on.

I do agree that the story is, by far, much more important than determining the genre of the story, but that's a different question. I'm examining definitions to see what elements make it great sci-fi, versus some other genre. Obviously each of us will have different answers.
 

Tawnos

A guy with a bass
Sep 10, 2004
28,815
10,380
Charlotte, NC
Yeah, definitions can be stretched, but only so far. Star Wars looks like sci-fi on the surface, but the spaceships and aliens are just props in an old-fashioned hero & villain story. You can call it 'Fantasy' or a 'Western' in space. Since there's no attempt to link any of it to science, Star Wars doesn't belong in a genre whose first name is "Science".

But there are plenty of examples of great genre-blends. Off the top of my head... Her is sci-fi/romance. Star Trek TNG's episode "Measure of a Man" was a terrific sci-fi/legal thriller; Signs by M. Night Shyamalan is religion/sociology/sci-fi. Lots and lots more...

Just because you could tell the same story without the technological elements of Star Wars doesn’t mean that those elements are merely props. You could tell the exact same story as Arrival without the technological or extraterrestrial elements if you set it up as the story of Aboriginal Americans encountering Europeans for the first time. Are the aliens and their technology merely props?

The Star Wars story is absolutely linked to science. It doesn’t exist without science because interstellar travel doesn’t exist without science. Because artificially intelligent beings don’t exist without science. Because planet destroying energy weapons don’t exist without science.

These things don’t need an explicit link. We understand the link implicitly. The essence of the story isn’t a scientific one, but that’s true of a vast number of movies no one would ever argue over whether it’s science fiction. I could make the argument that the essence of at least half of the movies named in this thread isn’t scientific.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->