Slashdot Mirror
The Wired Top Twenty Sci-Fi Movies
blamanj writes "The June issue of Wired includes a list of the top 20 Sci-Fi movies, based on ranking a combination of Adrenaline, Vision, and Precision. Somehow, they came up with (yawn) Gattaca as the #2 SF movie of all time!?! Their rating system was based on one by Josh Calder, who also uses a three-point (Futurism, Entertainment, Plausibility) system, and has the same movie at #2, BTW. Clearly, I think using such a scale gives odd results, but what if it were weighted differently, e.g., Vision is worth 2x Adrenaline, would it be a better list? And, more importantly, what are the real top 20 films? And wouldn't that list have to include Forbidden Planet?"
What about Solaris? It hasn't been the same since version 2.6, I say. All of that weird skipping of versions and everything just got strange. It's unnatural, I tell you! See, first we had version one, thentwothenthreethenfourthenfive. OK, we're doing well. Then we jumped to one again, but the five was still in there. So really it was two versions. Then we had some other weirdness for a while, and 5.6 was 2.6, but... ok, I could deal with that. Then SEVEN, which was really 5.7 which was really 2.7. Huh? Where does five become 2.6 then become seven? Huh? Now eight and nine? It's unnatural! You just don't DO that. YOu may as well write parts four, five, and six, then promise seven,eight and nine, make one,two, and three and decide not to make seven, eight and nine, then decide to make ten, eleven, and twelve! It's not right! Not right, I tell you! Soylent green is JAR JAR! JAR JAR I TELL YOU!
What were we talking about again?
-- Minds are like parachutes... they work best when open.
Ed: Fuck! Readership is down, we're becoming irrelevent!!!
Guru: Write another list of top SciFi - wind em up and watch em go!
Ed: But thats so old hat!
Guru: NOT if we have a seemingly scientific rating system!
Ed: I think I've just come!
To paraphrase: "If I've never heard of it then it can't be any good."
Your logic is impeccable; judging the world this way must make your life very easy. I also salute you for declaring once and for all that a movie widely hailed as one of the best ever made isn't any good because "it's boring as hell." I suggest that you avoid the "classics" section of the bookstore - some of those books take HOURS to get through, and they don't even have any sex scenes!
The dialogues were often too pathetic and there were too many monologes of the actors.
One of the main figures was played by a bad B-Movie actor which ruined much of the fun. The figures of the "evil" side were played by much better actors but for some reason they switched over 3 different opponent figures in the whole movie, making it impossible to build up a decent character.
One can argue about the special effects. Some were rather good but others plainly sucked. Mainly because they were created by early 80ies computer graphics which were just shaded polygons floating in the infinite void.
Personally I like the old 60ies presidencies better. The H-bomb tests special effects were much better and there was more tension on the whole plot.
Owner of a Mensa membership card.
PHB: "I've been saying for years that employees are our most valuable asset. It turns out that I was wrong. Money is our most valuable asset. Employees are ninth."
Wally: "I'm afraid to ask what came eighth."
PHB: "Carbon paper."
I stopped reading when I realized the list didn't include The Fly So you stopped reading when you reached the end of the list? Me too.