By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - IGN: Top 25 Sci-Fi Movies

darthdevidem01 said:
dystopia said:
darthdevidem01 said:
sapphi_snake said:
darthdevidem01 said:

WHERE IS EPISODE 3 AND EPISODE 1?

{explodes}

O_o. This is their list of best sci-fi movies ever. WTF would Episode 2 be included???

Fixed

____________________

I don't get why Jurassic Park is there......its not "really" sci-fi 


Why would they put any of the new trilogy on a best of list? They really aren't that good of a collection of films, in terms of production values sure, but acting and story? no way.

Jurassic Park kind fits, due to it involving the scientific technoligy created to clone dinosaurs. It could be taken off though and I wouldn't complain.

Acting was good in the Original Trilogy? lol


Not so much in A New Hope or Jedi, but Empire wasn't bad, nothing awards worthy but overall I would say there were several good performaces in Empire. Compared to the acting in the new trilogy though (which I thought was just soooo awful, I would say it has more to do with acting the entire film against a green screen than anything) the acting in the original is leagues better.



Around the Network
darthdevidem01 said:
dystopia said:
darthdevidem01 said:
sapphi_snake said:
darthdevidem01 said:

WHERE IS EPISODE 3 AND EPISODE 1?

{explodes}

O_o. This is their list of best sci-fi movies ever. WTF would Episode 2 be included???

Fixed

____________________

I don't get why Jurassic Park is there......its not "really" sci-fi 


Why would they put any of the new trilogy on a best of list? They really aren't that good of a collection of films, in terms of production values sure, but acting and story? no way.

Jurassic Park kind fits, due to it involving the scientific technoligy created to clone dinosaurs. It could be taken off though and I wouldn't complain.

Acting was good in the Original Trilogy? lol

Sorry but if you think Jurassic Park is not really sci-fi, you simply dont know what sci-fi is really. =)



Zones : I still don't understand all the love for Blizzard, what was the last game they developed worth playing?

Being a pedant I would question - if SF is about probable impact of science and technology on our society and us ourselves - whether all those films are really SF.  Star Wars sure isn't SF (sorry Darth) but some of those fall more into the 'kinda' that really.

TBH Terminator 2 is probably way too high, Star Wars shouldn't even be in a list like this and Wrath of Khan (much as I love it - KHAAAAAAN etc - ) probably shouldn't be either.

Top 2 are spot on although arguably 2001 should be top but I love them both so much who cares around 1/2.  But Moon, etc. are all far better, more specific SF films than say Terminator 2, which is more of a fan favourite (a favourite of mine, too, but not that high against real, hard SF films).

Lists, eh, you can never agree with them!

EDIT: speaking of which, as others have said films like Gattaca should be on that list instead of Terminator, etc.



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

dystopia said:
darthdevidem01 said:
dystopia said:
darthdevidem01 said:
sapphi_snake said:
darthdevidem01 said:

WHERE IS EPISODE 3 AND EPISODE 1?

{explodes}

O_o. This is their list of best sci-fi movies ever. WTF would Episode 2 be included???

Fixed

____________________

I don't get why Jurassic Park is there......its not "really" sci-fi 


Why would they put any of the new trilogy on a best of list? They really aren't that good of a collection of films, in terms of production values sure, but acting and story? no way.

Jurassic Park kind fits, due to it involving the scientific technoligy created to clone dinosaurs. It could be taken off though and I wouldn't complain.

Acting was good in the Original Trilogy? lol


Not so much in A New Hope or Jedi, but Empire wasn't bad, nothing awards worthy but overall I would say there were several good performaces in Empire. Compared to the acting in the new trilogy though (which I thought was just soooo awful, I would say it has more to do with acting the entire film against a green screen than anything) the acting in the original is leagues better.

The Acting in Episode 3 is better than the one in 4. Even Hayden improved.

And Episode 2 was the one with bad acting.

Episode 3 is the ultimate star wars movie with the best soundtrack, battles and the most emotional scenes. It should be on there.



All hail the KING, Andrespetmonkey

darthdevidem01 said:
dystopia said:
darthdevidem01 said:
dystopia said:
darthdevidem01 said:
sapphi_snake said:
darthdevidem01 said:

WHERE IS EPISODE 3 AND EPISODE 1?

{explodes}

O_o. This is their list of best sci-fi movies ever. WTF would Episode 2 be included???

Fixed

____________________

I don't get why Jurassic Park is there......its not "really" sci-fi 


Why would they put any of the new trilogy on a best of list? They really aren't that good of a collection of films, in terms of production values sure, but acting and story? no way.

Jurassic Park kind fits, due to it involving the scientific technoligy created to clone dinosaurs. It could be taken off though and I wouldn't complain.

Acting was good in the Original Trilogy? lol


Not so much in A New Hope or Jedi, but Empire wasn't bad, nothing awards worthy but overall I would say there were several good performaces in Empire. Compared to the acting in the new trilogy though (which I thought was just soooo awful, I would say it has more to do with acting the entire film against a green screen than anything) the acting in the original is leagues better.

The Acting in Episode 3 is better than the one in 4. Even Hayden improved.

And Episode 2 was the one with bad acting.

Episode 3 is the ultimate star wars movie with the best soundtrack, battles and the most emotional scenes. It should be on there.

I agree with this. Episode 1 and 2 however do not belong in this list.



Around the Network
darthdevidem01 said:
dystopia said:
darthdevidem01 said:
dystopia said:
darthdevidem01 said:
sapphi_snake said:
darthdevidem01 said:

WHERE IS EPISODE 3 AND EPISODE 1?

{explodes}

O_o. This is their list of best sci-fi movies ever. WTF would Episode 2 be included???

Fixed

____________________

I don't get why Jurassic Park is there......its not "really" sci-fi 


Why would they put any of the new trilogy on a best of list? They really aren't that good of a collection of films, in terms of production values sure, but acting and story? no way.

Jurassic Park kind fits, due to it involving the scientific technoligy created to clone dinosaurs. It could be taken off though and I wouldn't complain.

Acting was good in the Original Trilogy? lol


Not so much in A New Hope or Jedi, but Empire wasn't bad, nothing awards worthy but overall I would say there were several good performaces in Empire. Compared to the acting in the new trilogy though (which I thought was just soooo awful, I would say it has more to do with acting the entire film against a green screen than anything) the acting in the original is leagues better.

The Acting in Episode 3 is better than the one in 4. Even Hayden improved.

And Episode 2 was the one with bad acting.

Episode 3 is the ultimate star wars movie with the best soundtrack, battles and the most emotional scenes. It should be on there.


I can't agree with you there, I found all three of the new trilogy to be equally average, I really felt the acting in all three was extremely average to exteremly bad. I really don't think the screenplays in general were that strong. Obviously the original trilogy isn't the model for great acting either, but in comparison they sport an overall better cast of actors and better overall performances because of that. The real strength of the original trilogy lies in the mythology though, and while the new trilogy incorporated some mythology of its own it really just doesn't come close to the strength of the original tale. Which is sad, because I wanted the new movies to be good.



Fufinu said:
darthdevidem01 said:
dystopia said:
darthdevidem01 said:
dystopia said:
darthdevidem01 said:
sapphi_snake said:
darthdevidem01 said:

WHERE IS EPISODE 3 AND EPISODE 1?

{explodes}

O_o. This is their list of best sci-fi movies ever. WTF would Episode 2 be included???

Fixed

____________________

I don't get why Jurassic Park is there......its not "really" sci-fi 


Why would they put any of the new trilogy on a best of list? They really aren't that good of a collection of films, in terms of production values sure, but acting and story? no way.

Jurassic Park kind fits, due to it involving the scientific technoligy created to clone dinosaurs. It could be taken off though and I wouldn't complain.

Acting was good in the Original Trilogy? lol


Not so much in A New Hope or Jedi, but Empire wasn't bad, nothing awards worthy but overall I would say there were several good performaces in Empire. Compared to the acting in the new trilogy though (which I thought was just soooo awful, I would say it has more to do with acting the entire film against a green screen than anything) the acting in the original is leagues better.

The Acting in Episode 3 is better than the one in 4. Even Hayden improved.

And Episode 2 was the one with bad acting.

Episode 3 is the ultimate star wars movie with the best soundtrack, battles and the most emotional scenes. It should be on there.

I agree with this. Episode 1 and 2 however do not belong in this list.

Episode 1 is my first Star Wars movie

The move had a similar effect on me that Episode 4 had on people when it released. (and on many of my friends)

If you understand what I mean by that you'll know why I want it on the list.

And yeah Episode 2 was bad



All hail the KING, Andrespetmonkey

Reasonable said:

Being a pedant I would question - if SF is about probable impact of science and technology on our society and us ourselves - whether all those films are really SF.  Star Wars sure isn't SF (sorry Darth) but some of those fall more into the 'kinda' that really.

TBH Terminator 2 is probably way too high, Star Wars shouldn't even be in a list like this and Wrath of Khan (much as I love it - KHAAAAAAN etc - ) probably shouldn't be either.

Top 2 are spot on although arguably 2001 should be top but I love them both so much who cares around 1/2.  But Moon, etc. are all far better, more specific SF films than say Terminator 2, which is more of a fan favourite (a favourite of mine, too, but not that high against real, hard SF films).

Lists, eh, you can never agree with them!

EDIT: speaking of which, as others have said films like Gattaca should be on that list instead of Terminator, etc.

It's also a critical favorite. And so are Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back. All those three movies were among the highest ranked films on Rottentomatoes.com's list of great sci-fi films (based on reviews from professional film critics) and on AFI's top 10 best sci-fi films.



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

darthdevidem01 said:
 

Episode 1 is my first Star Wars movie

The move had a similar effect on me that Episode 4 had on people when it released. (and on many of my friends)

If you understand what I mean by that you'll know why I want it on the list.

And yeah Episode 2 was bad

Episode I was my first Star Wars as well. I never understood the hype about the series until I saw the original trilogy  some years later and realised that it was just fucking awesome.

The original Star Wars was just a masterpiece of story telling, especially Empire. I wouldn't call all of the acting great but that didn't matter in the end, it was an enduring classic because of the story it told and how it told it.

 

The prequel trilogy on the other hand had, to me at least and I know to others, a fairly bland story. All the bitching about Jar Jar Binks and the actors who played Anakin aren't getting at the fundamental flaw of the prequel trilogy.

 

So yeah, my opinion they had the right two movies on the list. I would have had them the other way around personally though.

Edit: @Reasonable. Where did you get your definition of science fiction from? To my understanding all it requires is fiction with technology beyond our current capabilities. Whether it incorporates fantasy as well, as Star Wars does, doesn't really matter.



A great list for movie night inspiration. I am a SF fan, but haven't seen a bunch of the old classics (to my shame). Will correct that flaw.