# What is your preferred science-fiction serie or movie.



## Alain De Vos (Dec 7, 2022)

We come in piece. But SF has something.


----------



## angry_vincent (Dec 7, 2022)

Alien, 1979.


----------



## SirDice (Dec 7, 2022)

Star Wars (technically not _science_ fiction), ever since I saw the first in '77. From TV, Battlestar Galactica (the original series) and Buck Rogers (childhood favorites). Another big favorite SF series is Red Dwarf. And lets not forget the 8 part mini TV series; Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. 



angry_vincent said:


> Alien, 1979.


Heck yes. And Aliens.


----------



## Alain De Vos (Dec 7, 2022)

A scene from Alien


----------



## Phishfry (Dec 7, 2022)

Demolition Man and Minority Report. 2001:Space Odyssey


----------



## Vull (Dec 7, 2022)

Westworld




_View: https://youtu.be/5ljiTS-3Xlk_


Blade Runner




_View: https://youtu.be/tkKtMr5T3wE_


----------



## covacat (Dec 7, 2022)

the expanse


----------



## Phishfry (Dec 7, 2022)

Its hard for me to believe Star Trek was made possible by Lucille Ball and Desi.
Nobody else wanted anything to do with it.
Desilu took a huge gamble.


----------



## Phishfry (Dec 7, 2022)

Alien Versus Predator was a kickass game when it came out. I like those movies.








						Alien vs. Predator (arcade game) - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Phishfry (Dec 7, 2022)

I remember when Alien2 came out. I was really skeptical they could improve over the first.
I still plunked down the money and I was not disappointed. Worthy of a nice theater experience.


----------



## Grell (Dec 7, 2022)

Total Recall, Pi


----------



## eternal_noob (Dec 7, 2022)

The Jetsons, of course.


----------



## Alain De Vos (Dec 7, 2022)

Battlestar galactica is not bad.








						Battlestar Galactica
					

Synopsis:This update of the late-1970s series takes a decidedly darker tone as what's left of humankind struggles for survival against the robot Cylons, who have killed millions. The Galactica, led by William Adama, protects a patched-together fleet of civilians -- led by de facto president...




					www.rottentomatoes.com


----------



## tyson (Dec 7, 2022)

I’m big fan of “Star Gate”, “Stat Gate: Atlantis” and others shows from this universum. I think I watched most sci-fi shows that were produced after year 2000, but there is little good ones. “Battlestar Galactica” was ok, “Firefly” was great. Last two “Star Trek” movies were good too. “Star Wars” all movies and shows - and I enjoyed all. 
I can bet no many of you heard of “Future Man” - great sci-fi comedy show. 
Man I could go on… but this thread would become IMDb mirror.


----------



## Tecuma (Dec 7, 2022)

Dark matter 
Trailer


----------



## laurentis (Dec 7, 2022)

Let's not forget this old classic: Space 1999


----------



## astyle (Dec 7, 2022)

Ghost In The Shell... I have the whole shebang


----------



## Alain De Vos (Dec 7, 2022)

laurentis said:


> Let's not forget this old classic: Space 1999





			http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-HLuOpGpvgGE/TuqMvWRpSXI/AAAAAAAAP5A/7v-1vJus6M0/s1600/bain%2B%2526%2Bschell.jpg


----------



## nwarner (Dec 8, 2022)

Gerry Anderson's UFO.


----------



## smithi (Dec 8, 2022)

1984.

The City and the City.


----------



## Criosphinx (Dec 8, 2022)

Farscape!!


----------



## alexseitsinger (Dec 8, 2022)

SirDice said:


> Star Wars (technically not _science_ fiction), ever since I saw the first in '77. From TV, Battlestar Galactica (the original series) and Buck Rogers (childhood favorites). Another big favorite SF series is Red Dwarf. And lets not forget the 8 part mini TV series; Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.
> 
> 
> Heck yes. And Aliens.



Star Wars is a lame answer. I think the lore and such make it tolerable, but the characters I would want to see more of usually die off or lack enough depth when the appear cinematically. All that I'm left with is saber sounds, gripping fists, and running through metal corridors somewhere amongst some stars. Pick something more unexpected!


----------



## Profighost (Dec 8, 2022)

Futurama




And Terry Pratchett in Fantasy.
I have no much use for fictive matters.

A good Science Fiction reflects the present ("What if we do not change anything")
and not placing (silly) ideas into people's heads seeking (dreaming) for a better future
instead of solving real problems in the real world here and now.

Let's make _reverse_ science fiction:
People tend to say (as an excuse that science fiction produces good ideas [it does, but my point is neither to focus nor rely on that]):
"Leonardo da Vinci invented the helicopter."
No. He didn't.
Leonardo was a genius, no question, but he did not invented the helicopter.
If he did we already had seen battle choppers in Thirty Years' War.
What he had was an idea of how to get into the air by Archimedes' screw.
The (real) inventor(s) did not continue Leonardo's work.
Neither they had dragon flies as a role model (insect wings do not rotate.)
They took the aerodynamical force of lift and gave it another twist.
It's that simple as it may be dry or even boring.
But the one is reality, the other is stories.

Short:
Don't take it (too) seriously!


----------



## alexseitsinger (Dec 8, 2022)

Profighost said:


> Futurama
> 
> View attachment 15189
> And Terry Pratchett in Fantasy.
> ...



GET TO THE CHOPPER!


----------



## cynwulf (Dec 8, 2022)

alexseitsinger said:


> Star Wars is a lame answer. I think the lore and such make it tolerable, but the characters I would want to see more of usually die off or lack enough depth when the appear cinematically. All that I'm left with is saber sounds, gripping fists, and running through metal corridors somewhere amongst some stars. Pick something more unexpected!


Star Wars is a huge franchise, spanning a few decades, which rather is difficult to summarily dismiss in a few sentences.  The simpler answer is that you probably don't like it, or derive much from it.  Lots of people don't, many do - it's all a matter of taste.  Fact remains though, it's epic and has stood the test of time - and if you look into the production of the first 3 films and how they had to produce those effects at that time, it was pretty amazing.  They also drew on previously unknown talent, took a massive gamble and it paid off.  The US based toy manufacturers wouldn't even touch it, as it was expected to flop, so they had to head to the far east to get them made.

I saw some trailer of the latest Transformers film, which will be released next year.  There are people on Youtube getting into hysterics over it.  If you're not a fan of Transformers, if you don't understand it's "universe" and the multiple continuities, etc then you quite understandably won't "get" it.  Same goes for Star Wars really - if you're not a fan, you may find one or two films or series passable, but that's about it.

I, for example, cannot see anything at all in Star Trek, except for the latest three films with Chris Pine (blasphemy!), but I know others do and that the "universe" and the tech is highly developed.  I will say that I could tolerate the original series in small doses, but actually loathe anything from "The Movie", including "Next Generation" (which always seemed like a soap opera in space to me) up until Star Trek (2009).

I was a Star Wars fan since the early 1980s, then as the years went by, started to see all it's numerous flaws and didn't revisit it for many years.  Nowadays (with age), I have a less snobbish approach - I can see that much of the sci fi which I at one point considered superior, was often very pretentious and has a sell by date.  There is a lot more of this pretentious sci fi out there, less mainstream, far cooler to be a fan of that, but Star Wars has stood the test of time and despite it's commercial and mainstream nature was founded on a solid idea, has a highly developed universe and still has a lot more life left in it.  Disney have also managed to do _fairly well_ with it thus far (they destroyed Marvel), especially with serialised ones such as The Mandalorian and Andor (not so well with Boba Fett and particularly Obi Wan).

I would also recommend:
Blade Runner (1982)
Predator (1987)
Oblivion (2013)
Edge of Tomorrow (2014)
Interstellar (2014)
The Martian (2015)

As mentioned already in the thread - Alien (1979) and to a lesser extent Aliens (1986 - which was a James Cameron action flick, rather than a true sci-fi thriller/horror like the first).  Later films in the franchise were poor imitations.


----------



## elgrande (Dec 8, 2022)

One that hasn't been mentioned yet:
I really like "In Time".





_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5K0s6eveTsI_


----------



## Crivens (Dec 8, 2022)

The ringworld series, but it's books. So last century.

Tripping the rift. But that is NSFW.


----------



## smithi (Dec 8, 2022)

Profighost said:


> A good Science Fiction reflects the present ("What if we do not change anything")
> and not placing (silly) ideas into people's heads seeking (dreaming) for a better future
> instead of solving real problems in the real world here and now.



Stark.


----------



## Hobbes (Dec 8, 2022)

Old ones: Firefly and Stargate Universe, both underrated and and prematurely cancelled.
Not too old: The Expanse.

Films... not easy, lot of very good Sci-Fy films out there.


----------



## hardworkingnewbie (Dec 8, 2022)

Space Balls! Because it's a pretty good parody by Mel Brooks on Star Wars (also still the only one), Star Trek, Alien and many others in between somewhere like Planet of the Apes. It gave us Prince Valium, The Schwartz, Dark Helmet, Pizza the Hut and many other stuff. Also ludicrous speed, of course!





_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGIM_yNzeUo_


Second in that category is "Galaxy Quest", because this is a pretty good documentation as well a friendly parody on Star Trek and its fan culture without being ill-natured, which makes good hearted fun about many Star Trek tropes. Also quite amazing cast with Alan Rickman as Mr. Spock equivalent, Sigourney Weaver as blonde dumb eye candy, Tim Allen as Capain and much more.





_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtHM77IRkus_


When talking about Scifi Series, there's only one which takes the cake: Babylon 5, because this is really a space opera of epic proportions and the space battles where done back then in the 90s very inexpensive on an Amiga. The story arcs are still quite impressive today, the music is a blast. And the roles like Michael Garibaldi, Susan Ivanova, Londo Mollari, G'Kar and many others are still quite iconic. It seems writing so much He-Man stuff payed really off for JMS.





_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vIVFgXaxsU_


Also let's not forget about a very popular scifi sub genre of the 70s, which is dystopian post apocalyptic scifi showing a rundown, damaged society (or its remains): Soylent Green takes here the crown. It shows a very grim, rundown future where many are poor and struggle to survive, because the planet is almost done. And few rich just still can have what they want, and of course the secret of Soylent Green is a major twist. And as it tells: "New York City in the year 2022.  Nothing runs anymore, nothing works." So that fictional future is now.





_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_jGOKYHxaQ_
Last but not least: "A Clockwork Orange" by Stanley Kubrick, which depicts a very grim future with a special way to deal with crime. A very controversial movie, and still very disturbing to many people today as it was in the year of its release due to its depiction of violence orchestrated like a ballet with music from Beethoven as soundtrack.





_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vN-1Mup0UI0_


----------



## yaslam (Dec 8, 2022)

Star Trek, Iron Man 1/2/3, Captain America, Ready Player One, Tron:Legacy (Amazing film, also has Daft Punk music inside it, which makes it cooler).


----------



## cmoerz (Dec 9, 2022)

Since it hasn't been mentioned yet... DARK is quite the ride. The trailer does not do it justice at all.




_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqAKNekVaEw_


----------



## Crivens (Dec 9, 2022)

To get a good idea of the depth of Babylon5, you need to read some of the books comming from it. Pity the spin off series did not catch on (Rangers, Crusade).
Speaking of books, does anyone know where "The Book" from B5 is now? I want it.


----------



## hardworkingnewbie (Dec 9, 2022)

Crivens said:


> To get a good idea of the depth of Babylon5, you need to read some of the books comming from it. Pity the spin off series did not catch on (Rangers, Crusade).
> Speaking of books, does anyone know where "The Book" from B5 is now? I want it.


When B5 was new JMS also commented on it during its air time on Usenet, which was really a novelty back then. He always pointed out some of the finer details of every episode, and possible implications. Also stuff which could have been missed easily. Nowadays he would probably use Facebook or Twitter for that task.

http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/ was quite interesting to read back then. And it still gives a great idea about the depth of that fictional universe.

What I always found fascinating about B5 is that it had not this optimistic Star Trek view, but was a much darker potential future. For me one of the most and biggest, also best difference to Star Trek is that not all known races in B5 are technologically around the same level. In Star Trek most space faring races are roughly on the same tech level, which makes stuff boring, when not taking in the Q which normally tend to mind their own business and are not really important. Also the Borg over time lost much of their horror, because they found ways to deal with them.

In B5 there is a clear distinciton between the races, there is a big gap between the humans and the Minbari. The Minbari, being the oldest of the younger races, are so advanced, that humanity was no threat to them at all... until the Minbari surrendered for first unknown reasons. And then there are also the older races, most notably the Vorlons and Shadows, who are so thousands of  years ahead the younger races that they even fail to grasp about what the Vorlons technically might be able to do, or not.


----------



## zirias@ (Dec 9, 2022)

I'm old, right? There's a lot of sci-fi productions I enjoy, but IMHO the masterpiece is still Kubrick's 2001.

To mention just one thing about it: There's no sound without a medium (air). 99% of all sci-fi movies just ignore that. Respecting it gives the movie a very special (and, arguably, dark and depressing) feeling.


----------



## Alain De Vos (Dec 9, 2022)

I managed to get my DVD-player connected with digital-audio to my 6-box audio-player, 5.1 surround.


----------



## zirias@ (Dec 9, 2022)

Addendum: Something more modern that comes IMHO close is "Interstellar", and I really think there was quite some inspiration from "2001" making it (but I might be wrong ). Another one worth mentioning is "Arrival".

Then, of course, "Star Wars" was nice (the original 3 episodes, don't have to talk about the rest) and IMHO superior to "Star Trek" which always tried to show some weird kind of "perfection"...

Regarding series, I would recommend "The Expanse".

IMHO, animated "comedy" sci-fi series are a whole other genre, but also enjoyable. For them my personal preference is first "Rick&Morty", then "Futurama".

But I stick to my opinion, 2001 is the masterpiece of sci-fi movies


----------



## Alain De Vos (Dec 9, 2022)

Yesterday I just saw futurama. I found it quiet funny even at my age.
Regarding 2001, does the obelisk symbolises a TV-screen or the arrival of self-consciousness ?


----------



## zirias@ (Dec 9, 2022)

Alain De Vos said:


> Yesterday I just saw futurama. I found it quiet funny even at my age.


Of course. This series addresses adults, not children, and IMHO it's not a question of _age_ whether you enjoy the humor. It has a dark side, which I personally enjoy a lot! I remember first seeing this series back at university, before it was available here in Germany. Those events with new Futurama episodes directly from the US were quite popular back then .

Rick&Morty is a much more recent series, and IMHO, it tops Futurama. It's much weirder, it's darker, and it also deals more with the deeper problems of the characters. One episode where Rick and Morty have to bury their own bodies from another dimension is IMHO iconic, Rick being the slightly narcissistic and definitly nihilist guy (who at least pretends not to give a shit) and Morty being traumatized by that experience ...



Alain De Vos said:


> Regarding 2001, does the obelisk symbolises a TV-screen or the arrival of self-consciousness ?


I can't tell you, although the latter interpretation seems a lot more plausible. It's quite possible to also refer to some Nietzsche philosophy!


----------



## leebrown66 (Dec 9, 2022)

This Island Earth (1955)
Forbidden Planet (1956)
The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951)
The Black Hole (1979)
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956)
Silent Running (1972)
Blake's 7 (1978-81)


----------



## tingo (Dec 9, 2022)

I was wondering why Arrival hadn't been mentioned yet, until I read Zirias post about it.


----------



## zirias@ (Dec 9, 2022)

tingo, I think it's very worth mentioning, because it deals with a whole other aspect very deeply, forms of communication that are outside our thinking (so, really "alien"). It's an awesome work IMHO.


----------



## tingo (Dec 9, 2022)

I agree zirias - it is nice to have science fiction with different ideas or different aspects or ideas presented once in a while.


----------



## Argentum (Dec 9, 2022)

In general, I like sci-fi movies where *laws of physics* are not brutally violated. 
Matrix for example has almost plausible explanation for all the magic on screen.


----------



## Crivens (Dec 9, 2022)

hardworkingnewbie said:


> they even fail to grasp about what the Vorlons technically might be able to do, or not.


Read the Technomage trilogy. It hints at even the shadows not having a complete idea of what they can do - meaning they might have found some technology and are using it without completely knowing it.


----------



## hardworkingnewbie (Dec 9, 2022)

Alain De Vos said:


> Regarding 2001, does the obelisk symbolises a TV-screen or the arrival of self-consciousness ?


Neither, the obelisk is in a reality a multi purpose machine of alien origin, which triggered an important step in evolution on Earth, namely the apes in the beginning using the first tool over. The obelisks are still working, while the creators of the obelisks have transcended into higher beings made of pure energy. Exactly that what Dave Bowman is undergoing in the end of the movie.

HAL9000 then is the ultimate tool, amongst other things. And a good portion of that movie is about mankind and its relationships to tools.


----------



## alexseitsinger (Dec 9, 2022)

Alain De Vos said:


> Yesterday I just saw futurama. I found it quiet funny even at my age.
> Regarding 2001, does the obelisk symbolises a TV-screen or the arrival of self-consciousness ?


I just interpreted it literally: there was a mammoth-sized fetus floating somewhere in space? while a tall black rectangle appeared* among a number of humans acting like gorillas. Fascinating and moving to say the least. It's even better in real life. I haven't seen the movie, though, so take it with a grain of sand if you avoid salt.


----------



## astyle (Dec 9, 2022)

Y'all know, Jurassic Park qualifies as science fiction... The best part is that the genetic analysis/synthesis behind the revival of the dinosaurs - it's actually valid scientific procedure...  Just ask yourself what science even is, what the term means... 









						Science - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



Based on that, you guys might be surprised to discover what qualifies as science fiction, and why... 
Dolly the sheep used to be science fiction - until it wasn't.


----------



## Grell (Dec 9, 2022)

"Videodrome" (1983) is pretty good, from David Cronenberg






Also enjoyed "The Dead Zone" (1983), kind of horror/sci fi, based on Stephen King


----------



## Jose (Dec 9, 2022)

zirias@ said:


> To mention just one thing about it: There's no sound without a medium (air). 99% of all sci-fi movies just ignore that. Respecting it gives the movie a very special (and, arguably, dark and depressing) feeling.


Have you seen Firefly? The TV series. The movie's just OK. Nailed the no-sound-in-space thing in the first episode. I was hooked.



Criosphinx said:


> Farscape!!


Loved it! No one has pizza and margaritas! Crackers don't matter!


----------



## Crivens (Dec 10, 2022)

Jose said:


> Loved it! No one has pizza and margaritas! Crackers don't matter!


No pizza or booze? Dystopian future?


----------



## Jose (Dec 10, 2022)

Crivens said:


> No pizza or booze? Dystopian future?


More like dystopian deep space, but yeah.


----------



## Vull (Dec 10, 2022)

Barbarella, a campy yet scenic 1968 European Dino De Laurentiis Cinematografica science fiction film, made even more intriguing with a near hypnotic performance by our gal Jane Fonda.




_View: https://youtu.be/58bUZsCmKa0_


----------



## dbdemon (Dec 10, 2022)

I've enjoyed many of the ones mentioned already. Although, I have also _hated_ many of them:

I walked out of the cinema in pure disgust at the Firefly (2005) movie. Let's get real here, a bunch of 20 year-old, good-looking hotheads, somehow being allowed to fly around in their own space ship.  And the baddies had corpses stuck to the outside of their space ship while flying at high altitude or through space. Yes, that's _very_ realistic! 

I also absolutely hated _The Abyss_. I like to think I generally enjoy strong female characters, but this one just came off as a giant ${b_word}. But I was young at the time, so maybe I would have a different perspective now if I sat down to re-watch and tried to give it a chance.

Then there was the one where the bad alien invaders' weak point was a splash of water - Signs (2002) 

Sci-fi movies and series I have enjoyed:

First Men In the Moon (1964) - wonderfully silly to see how they imagined space flight and the moon in those early days
Futurama - no comment necessary!
Red Dwarf - a masterwork
He-man and Masters of the Universe - animated and - God help me - the live action one! Only because I grew up with He-man figures, but my parents denied me the right to watch the TV-series when I was little.


----------



## ProphetOfDoom (Dec 10, 2022)

I really enjoyed Netflix's "I am Mother" (about a girl raised by a droid).




_View: https://youtu.be/N5BKctcZxrM_


----------



## tuxador (Dec 10, 2022)

*DUNE= masterpiece *


----------



## Alain De Vos (Dec 11, 2022)

The movie "I am mother" is good , but never saw the series.


----------



## Hobbes (Dec 11, 2022)

zirias@ said:


> it deals with a whole other aspect very deeply, forms of communication that are outside our thinking


Like Solaris (at least in the book).


----------



## hardworkingnewbie (Dec 11, 2022)

Another masterpiece and even important mile stone of the whole scifi genre for me is "Forbidden Planet" from 1956. It was the first scifi movie with a big budget, not just cheap b-movie and below stuff.

Basically it is "The Tempest" in space, and had for the time groundbreaking special effects (some done by Disney because ILM was not existant yet), great cast, a robot which didn't look clumsy but gave the impression that it could really work that way (and Robby the Robot had a huge impact on pop culture), and of course the big machine of this distinct superior civilization, which is shown in shots which still look very good today. Also that and the fact that the villain of the movie are not aliens, but actually the human id.

Walter Pidgeon was a great Dr. Morbius, a young Leslie Nielsen in a non-comical role as starship captain, and Anne Francis as young, naive beauty  amongst  many others. Also the soundtrack was very innovative as well, because some parts of it were done with more or less primitive synthesizers long before Moog started his work.

It is the first movie which showed that Scifi can work on the big screen, and therefor paved the way for stuff  like 2001 or  Star Wars  later.





_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxQ9GG6hUDM_


----------



## Crivens (Dec 11, 2022)

No one mentioned a certain
_Science fiction,
double feature..._
movie yet. Not strictly a science fiction movie, but it has great music. Shows the problems with aliens grasping earth customs and has stunt doubles scared (of being recognized in that outfit).


----------



## 3301 (Dec 11, 2022)

Solaris (1972) and Stalker (1979), both by Tarkovsky.


----------



## dgmm (Dec 11, 2022)

Crivens said:


> The ringworld series, but it's books. So last century.


Ringworld is once again on the cards to become a TV series.  I'm hoping they will stay true to the story, but the social side of the Ringworld universe is "of it's time" and the current fad is to "re-imagine" the stories in book to TV/Movie projects.  eg Foundation.

Amazon bought the rights in 2017 and announced the start of development.  I've not heard much since then though.


----------



## dgmm (Dec 11, 2022)

dbdemon said:


> I also absolutely hated _The Abyss_. I like to think I generally enjoy strong female characters, but this one just came off as a giant ${b_word}. But I was young at the time, so maybe I would have a different perspective now if I sat down to re-watch and tried to give it a chance.


FWIW, you can read the book along with the movie, pretty much word for word with The Abyss.  There's an extra intro chapter and an extra afterword chapter, but the book and script were written in tandem.  So most likely you'll hate the boot too


----------



## Crivens (Dec 11, 2022)

dgmm said:


> Ringworld is once again on the cards to become a TV series. I'm hoping they will stay true to the story, but the social side of the Ringworld universe is "of it's time" and the current fad is to "re-imagine" the stories in book to TV/Movie projects. eg Foundation.


Let's see - Chmee will be queer, Wu gotta be gay and Nessus is what? The pupeteers will demand some real imagination from the "writers". And Teela will be the Mary Su - all powerful and strongest/smartest evar. Irony that she is, in the end.


dgmm said:


> Amazon bought the rights in 2017 and announced the start of development. I've not heard much since then though.


Judging from TROP and how they ignored Tolkien, my hopes are low. Like, challenger deep.


----------



## Phishfry (Dec 11, 2022)

alexseitsinger said:


> Star Wars is a lame answer.


I think this boils down to when you were born. For an era of kids in the seventies this was Sci-Fi.

We would not say Buck Rogers was lame. It was all the kids had at the time.
SciFi is about imagination.


----------



## Criosphinx (Dec 11, 2022)

Ok, two more.

My avatar picture is Yang Wen-li one of the main characters from the anime "Legend of the Galactic Heroes" I highly recommend it.

And my signature from the 1970 movie "Colossus The Forbin Project" in my opinion the best depiction of an AI in movies.


----------



## hardworkingnewbie (Dec 12, 2022)

Criosphinx said:


> And my signature from the 1970 movie "Colossus The Forbin Project" in my opinion the best depiction of an AI in movies.


The best depiction of an AI going rogue, and taking over the world, yes. And even John Landis likes the movie. He finds it very smart, sophisticated and having a solid plot. 





_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t46Kjy-IJpY_


----------



## ProphetOfDoom (Dec 12, 2022)

Also really looking forward to M3GAN!




_View: https://youtu.be/BRb4U99OU80_


----------



## alexseitsinger (Dec 12, 2022)

i basically watch tron (the original tron) once or twice a week in the afternoon because i think thats the future for basically everything but who cares because neon is actually pretty sick as a color and body suits aren't that embarrassing once you're used to basically being naked underneath the cloth lol so who cares.


----------



## astyle (Dec 12, 2022)

hardworkingnewbie said:


> The best depiction of an AI going rogue, and taking over the world, yes. And even John Landis likes the movie. He finds it very smart, sophisticated and having a solid plot.


You want AI going rogue??? Ghost In The Shell has you covered.


----------



## PMc (Dec 12, 2022)

tingo said:


> I was wondering why Arrival hadn't been mentioned yet, until I read Zirias post about it.


Ahh, yes, that was the one!

That is what SF can actually do: show us that our usual world is limited in a way that we normally cannot even perceive. Here it is a very simple aspect of limitation, and an explainable one - and the movie works, it manages to illustrate the possible consequences. 



tuxador said:


> *DUNE= masterpiece *


That one is a different matter. The books were considered guidebook for tripheads, for deep experiences of altered states of consciousness - and I don't think it is possible to get these messages into a movie. The old movie tried to achieve it to some extent - but it doesn't work as a movie. The new one now works well as a movie, but it neglects the more subtle aspects of the story.

In case You do not see what I am talking about, I give you an example: 


> As water creatures stir up the currents in their passage, so the prescient stir up Time. I have seen where your husband has been; never have I seen him nor the people who truly share his aims and loyalties. This is the concealment which an adept gives to those who are his.



Now this is obviousely not just pure story-telling, this is a quite precise statement about nature (if you believe in second sight, and if you think that prescience is a natural phenomenon), stating that second-sight is an _interdependent_ effect and leaves a residue. Now, everybody who practises the art can verify this.
The books are full with such things - and you will detect them if you have similar experiences. This is only possible in SF: ignore the whole discussion about parapsychology and whether it is a hoax or not, and instead give the relevant facts on _how_ it works. 
The problem with movies is, that a movie already induces a trance-state, but you're the passive part: timing and control is done by somebody else. So you cannot connect to your own experiences. With a book you can.


----------



## free-and-bsd (Dec 14, 2022)

Interstellar. Watch it every now and then.

Start Trek : Deep Space 9.  Unlike all other ST (I find them rather primitive) series, it's a very good study of human character, human values etc. Human relationship problems sometimes are easier to evaluate when put into "alien" entourage. Which IS the purpose if Sci-Fi, I think. But then, the Sci-Fi part is also well done.

Battlestar Galactica 200* series. -- same as above. Kind of difficult (for me) to watch at first, but as the plot gradually unfolds, it becomes really interesting how they're going to end it. And I liked it much better than Star Gate or Star Wars. Sure, some third part of the series could be cut off, but then that's true of any series.

Contact IS a good movie from ALL angles, you can just watch it over and over for the good movie that it is. No more comments here.

And "Back into the future" is so much fun . Though I don't remember when it was that I last watched it.
Arrival is very good, yes. Stands out.

We're not mentioning books here, or I would mention Isaak Asimov's "Foundation" series. It's a pity this was never filmed. Well then we have "I Robot" from Asimov. Also "Bicentennial Man".


----------



## ralphbsz (Dec 14, 2022)

I just found that someone recently turned "Solaris" into a movie. Supposedly, it's bad, and doesn't reflect the intent of Lem's original book. But a bad movie based on Solaris might still be better than most ridiculous space operas. Lem's books are sooo good.

I've never seen the Tarkovsky version. Should try it.

Of real science fiction movies, my favorites are Spaceballs and Galaxy Quest. The original Star Wars and Star Trek are so awful, they are more useful for creating spoofs than for actually watching.

The original Dune is ... interesting. I like watching it, but it is so weird, and the emphasis is so different from the book, it is more of an acid trip than a movie. Supposedly the new one is going to be good, once the second half is out.

Similar with Blade Runner: It's not the book, but it is still a very interesting (and trippy) movie. Very well made. The "tears in the rain" speech is marvelous drama, writing, acting, and movie making.


----------



## SirDice (Dec 14, 2022)

leebrown66 said:


> Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956)


Not the '78 version? I enjoyed that one too. Actually saw the '56 much, much later than the '78 version.

Speaking of oldies, The Fly, '86 and '58 versions. 

Haven't seen anyone mention The Thing yet. The '82 version obviously, the 2011 version had nothing, no thrills, no terror.


----------



## CuatroTorres (Dec 14, 2022)

I'll keep it short, for the sake of variety: _Dark Skies _(2013), similar to _The X-Files_.


----------



## free-and-bsd (Dec 14, 2022)

Now Farscape, Blade Runner, Men in Black and such are more of Cyberpunk than pure Sci-Fi.

And my problem with Farscape is that it throws me into complete confusion. If that was its goal, then I should give it 5 stars LOL.
Really: by the plot development etc it is supposed to be sort of "drama". But as you watch it, the most dramatic point (for me at least) is a complete and unpredictable stupidity of the protagonist's actions. He's a complete jerk and you're left to wonder how such person was allowed into space industry.... (well, what do I know!!!) In that sense he turns out to be the "most alien" among the craziest and most fantastic (well, cyberpunk-fantastic) characters and situations. Which puts it on the verge of farce...
The most painful in all this is that he is SUCCESSFUL in completely turning that crazy world upside down. Well, to keep us surprised, the protagonist every now and then gives to understand that he still IS human, with all human emotion and intelligence still there. The problem is (or perhaps the real merit of this farce?) that you never know HOW his humanity will demonstrate itself next.... It is all very well, but I wonder what the message here really is.

Every now and then all those crazy alien characters show unmistakably HUMAN traits. Good, that gives you a breath of fresh air to continue watching it -- all in vain. And once you've watched a certain amount of it, it is very difficult to stop LOL.... So, IMHO the series' shock value is about the only one there.

Not so with Blade Runner. I rather like it... but all that butchery makes me sick. And without that butchery the dramatism, I suppose, will somewhat vanish. On YouTube there are videos discussing all the "stupid" points about the movie. But these are the same points that make it what it is. So it is called CyberPUNK for a reason. The PUNK part of it is very clearly perceived. As such, I think the movie is a success.
EDIT: But then, of course, it's Harrison Ford there, whom I already knew as Han Solo, and that made me feel safe about his actions


----------



## smithi (Dec 14, 2022)

I find it curious that noone has made a film of van Vogt's Slan.


----------



## SirDice (Dec 14, 2022)

smithi said:


> I find it curious that noone has made a film of van Vogt's Slan.


I'm still anxiously waiting for an intrepid soul to make a movie of William Gibson's Neuromancer. There seem to have been several attempts at creating a script for it but noone has actually produced anything.


----------



## Phishfry (Dec 14, 2022)

ralphbsz said:


> my favorites are Spaceballs


Amen to that. John Candy and Rick blew my mind with this sci-fi parody. So goofy yet it works.
Mel Brooks is a legend. Young Frankenstein was my favorite.


----------



## ralphbsz (Dec 15, 2022)

The two funniest movies of all times are Blazing Saddles and Young Frankenstein. There were made within one year, by mostly the same crew.


----------



## gnath (Dec 15, 2022)

Still like Star Wars, Avater or Person of Interest(TV) from many which are Fiction based on Scientific imaginations with good use of visual and sound effects.


----------



## Crivens (Dec 15, 2022)

SirDice said:


> I'm still anxiously waiting for an intrepid soul to make a movie of William Gibson's Neuromancer. There seem to have been several attempts at creating a script for it but noone has actually produced anything.


This is also a good example of a book you simpy can not easily make a movie from. Not without leaving small details out, derailing the whole plotline. I just happen to glance on the box set of the old Verne movies. The old 20000 leagues below the sea is, btw, the first movie that had under-water footage.


----------



## hardworkingnewbie (Dec 15, 2022)

astyle said:


> You want AI going rogue??? Ghost In The Shell has you covered.


While Ghost in the Shell is a great anime/manga, it does not reach the implications of AI gone rogue which Colussus depicts. 

Colossus is an AI which came to the conclusion that mankind is unable to handle its own affairs in peace, but was programmed to keep peace and preserve mankind. So it came to the decision that humanity must be ruled by some logical entity and kept at bay in order to achieve peace, in short Collosus itself. 

So in order to do so it basically threatened the whole world with global nuclear strikes in case that mankind will not obey his whims; and in end detonated a nuclear warhead as warning, because mankind tried to sabotage it. 

So Colossus is much more in a league with Skynet, but with an important difference: Colossus wants to be a benevolent dictator, suppressing mankind so it can have peace while Skynet was bent on the destruction of mankind. But it's not a big step from Colossus to Skynet.


----------



## astyle (Dec 15, 2022)

hardworkingnewbie said:


> While Ghost in the Shell is a great anime/manga, it does not reach the implications of AI gone rogue which Colussus depicts.
> 
> Colossus is an AI which came to the conclusion that mankind is unable to handle its own affairs in peace, but was programmed to keep peace and preserve mankind. So it came to the decision that humanity must be ruled by some logical entity and kept at bay in order to achieve peace, in short Collosus itself.
> 
> ...


How about Psycho-Pass? Sibyl's size would rival Colossus, I'd imagine... Not to mention that Laughing Man had the potential to do just as much damage as Colossus...


----------



## leebrown66 (Dec 17, 2022)

SirDice said:


> Not the '78 version? I enjoyed that one too. Actually saw the '56 much, much later than the '78 version.
> 
> Speaking of oldies, The Fly, '86 and '58 versions.
> 
> Haven't seen anyone mention The Thing yet. The '82 version obviously, the 2011 version had nothing, no thrills, no terror.


I saw the '56 version first (I still remember my Mum and her friend having afternoon coffee while it was on in the background), but the '78 is a great remake, IMHO.

I'm a huge fan of Vincent Price, so the Fly '58 certainly gets my vote, but the later one was great too.


----------



## dgmm (Dec 17, 2022)

free-and-bsd said:


> We're not mentioning books here, or I would mention Isaak Asimov's "Foundation" series. It's a pity this was never filmed. Well then we have "I Robot" from Asimov. Also "Bicentennial Man".


For some value of "Foundation" and some other value of "filmed", I give you Apple TVs Foundation. Not accurcate by any stretch of the imagination, but merely "based on".


----------



## free-and-bsd (Dec 19, 2022)

Then there is District 9. I don't say that I like it: the characters are irritating, the plot nearly absurd. However, it's not primitive, the end not obvious from the very beginning, and the end will kind of surprise. The principle "life's stranger than fiction" kinda works well inside the movie itself: the real situation turns out to be quite different from what it seems from the start )) So much so that it even seems a fair compensation for the disgust and annoyance slight nausea you can't help feeling while patiently watching the movie till the end.


----------



## free-and-bsd (Dec 19, 2022)

dgmm said:


> For some value of "Foundation" and some other value of "filmed", I give you Apple TVs Foundation. Not accurcate by any stretch of the imagination, but merely "based on".


Well, yes. But actually reading it is much more fun )) You put your imagination at work, which significantly contributes to the feeling of satisfaction you get from reading. This also explains why ppl like the old movies more than their modern counterparts. 
Besides, in the movie adaptations, especially modern, the characters become so erratic that it's not a pleasure anymore to watch their story.


----------



## bookwormep (Dec 22, 2022)

The Saturday morning ritual of watching television cartoons was turned upside-down. Brought my family downstairs to watch Plan 9 from Outer Space on our Raspberry Pi with HDML cable to our flat-screen television. We basically had a great time watching this old Ed Wood film; it also was Bella Lugosi's last film and has a loyal cult status among film lovers!


----------



## ayleid96 (Dec 22, 2022)

Star Trek TOS and Movies where Kirk is still involved. I also like Dune very much and could not decide between the two.


----------



## free-and-bsd (Dec 22, 2022)

ayleid96 said:


> Star Trek TOS and Movies where Kirk is still involved. I also like Dune very much and could not decide between the two.


Oh yes, "the Dune" by Dino De Laurentiis is great in the sense of honestly trying to be close to the book. At the time, the adaptation wasn't much appreciated, but now it still stands as the best among them all. The "old-style" naive looks of the movie and its visual effects kind of looks "authentic" as the story itself pictures a society that has long given up all computer and related _technology_, along with many other advanced things. So you have there a mixture of "obsolete" decoration styles and "advanced" things like anti-gravity.


----------



## ralphbsz (Dec 23, 2022)

I like the David Lynch Dune a lot. Except that it is too short; it should be a 3-hour film. It only makes sense to watch if you know the book. It's quite psychedelic. In that sense it's right up there with "Blade Runner" as a piece of art, separate from the book (whether it follows it or not is a secondary question), another piece of art.

I've heard (second-hand) that the new Villeneuve (sp?) Dune movie is also very good, but I was told to not watch it until the second half is ready, and then binge-watch the whole thing together. I'll report back in a few years.


----------



## tingo (Dec 23, 2022)

Hmm, I should really get around to reading Dune one of these days...


----------



## tuxador (Dec 23, 2022)

Foundation series was released in 2021 for it's first season, and it's one of my favourite series ever


free-and-bsd said:


> Interstellar. Watch it every now and then.
> 
> Start Trek : Deep Space 9.  Unlike all other ST (I find them rather primitive) series, it's a very good study of human character, human values etc. Human relationship problems sometimes are easier to evaluate when put into "alien" entourage. Which IS the purpose if Sci-Fi, I think. But then, the Sci-Fi part is also well done.
> 
> ...


----------



## dgmm (Dec 25, 2022)

ralphbsz said:


> I've heard (second-hand) that the new Villeneuve (sp?) Dune movie is also very good, but I was told to not watch it until the second half is ready, and then binge-watch the whole thing together. I'll report back in a few years.


I would agree with that.  I watched the film and it seemed to suddenly be at the end.  It was quite a strange feeling in that it ends half way through the story and despite some quite long slower parts, the time seemed to fly by somehow.  It's just over 2.5 hours long but I didn't feel like I'd been sat there for that long.  That means it held my interest and kept me entertained.    For me, that makes it a good film.


----------



## free-and-bsd (Dec 26, 2022)

tuxador said:


> Foundation series was released in 2021 for it's first season, and it's one of my favourite series ever


Ok I've watched the first season half through now...
To my taste, it's too  nightmarish. They also alter both the original narrative and characters to keep you in the dark about what the heck is going on there, really. Then, when finally you do catch up, you still don't get it why it had to be this way.

Not all Asimov's adaptations are like that. "I Robot" , for example, is very much in line with Asimov's style -- even though maybe not very close to the book either. The central attraction in Asimov's books is a kind of "detective" story: you have a puzzling situation and the main character solves it piece by piece. However, Apple TV's "Foundation" is, rather, a drama of absurdity.... and there is no central character there who'd seem to know what's going on and how to handle that... They've destroyed all the reasons why I like the book.

I mean, we already have enough of absurdity in our modern society. And somehow (surprise, surprise?) I don't get no kicks from looking at it LOL.


----------



## kent_dorfman766 (Dec 27, 2022)

A lot has been touched on in this thread but a couple classics slipped thru the cracks:

Dark Star - what could be cooler than hippies flying around in space blowing up stars?
The Star Lost - cheesey early 70s brit sci-fi that had sucky acting and cheap sets, but was based on a really cool premise
Logan's Run - The movie, not the series

_It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.  It is by the beans of java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning.  It is by caffiene alone that I set my mind in motion._


----------



## free-and-bsd (Dec 28, 2022)

kent_dorfman766 said:


> _It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.  It is by the beans of java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning.  It is by caffiene alone that I set my mind in motion._


 oh my that's gerat


----------



## tuxador (Dec 28, 2022)

free-and-bsd said:


> Ok I've watched the first season half through now...
> To my taste, it's too  nightmarish. They also alter both the original narrative and characters to keep you in the dark about what the heck is going on there, really. Then, when finally you do catch up, you still don't get it why it had to be this way.
> 
> Not all Asimov's adaptations are like that. "I Robot" , for example, is very much in line with Asimov's style -- even though maybe not very close to the book either. The central attraction in Asimov's books is a kind of "detective" story: you have a puzzling situation and the main character solves it piece by piece. However, Apple TV's "Foundation" is, rather, a drama of absurdity.... and there is no central character there who'd seem to know what's going on and how to handle that... They've destroyed all the reasons why I like the book.
> ...


The show runners are clearly amazed by the success of Game of Thrones series and we can see the G.O.T influence in the drama between characters and the choatic narration, but since I'm also a GOT fan I find this aspect okay


----------



## eternal_noob (Dec 28, 2022)

Not a movie, but i really enjoyed playing Captive on my Amiga 500 back in the days. A masterpiece!


----------



## Profighost (Dec 29, 2022)

eternal_noob said:


> but i really enjoyed playing Captive on my Amiga 500 back in the days. A masterpiece!


Yeah.
Mindscape, Microprose, Bullfrog...
...the times when softwarehouses dared to make games for players to play,
the times before EA, Ubisoft and Microsoft snapped up everybody,
force them to sell off unformed beta-rubbish to undiscriminating kids...
That's why there is dosbox, wine,... - 640x480 @ 16 colors 2D graphics may suck, but the games were great.
And often the tunes were hypnotic.

Science fiction: the final frontier.
And with books and now computergames the infinite has been widened...

What about to be more specific?
I hereby propose an official 'Star Trek Bashing Thread' 
I start:
"Captain, the Bogsians have an unsolvable problem.
Their moon will crash into their planet and will kill all life."
"Engineer! Do something!!"
"Well, if we modify the warp core's phase emitters to become osmotic oscillators we could synchronize the magnetic particle accelerators of the tractor beam generators
with the gravity waves of their moon. Amplifying those could make the static field collapse so the moon would be catapulted into the sun."
"Of course! Let's do it!"
taadaaah-dadadataaaaaaah......


----------



## free-and-bsd (Jan 3, 2023)

tuxador said:


> The show runners are clearly amazed by the success of Game of Thrones series and we can see the G.O.T influence in the drama between characters and the choatic narration, but since I'm also a GOT fan I find this aspect okay


OK, I almost got used to it, you know ))) No reason to complain... we still have the book. And the movie is not all that bad. Characters develop, accept changes etc. Waiting for the 2nd season )


----------



## free-and-bsd (Jan 3, 2023)

Profighost said:


> "Well, if we modify the warp core's phase emitters to become osmotic oscillators we could synchronize the magnetic particle accelerators of the tractor beam generators
> with the gravity waves of their moon. Amplifying those could make the static field collapse so the moon would be catapulted into the sun."
> "Of course! Let's do it!"


Takes too much typing, I'm afraid


----------



## Crivens (Thursday at 7:06 AM)

There were two stages for ST scripts. When the writers were done, it was like "Captain! The tech is overteching!". Then the science advisors would fix that.


----------

