You are viewing grrm

Previous Entry | Next Entry

The Best Science Fiction Film of All Time?

Spain
So, it's been thirty years since we first saw STAR WARS. Hard to believe.

Amidst all the hype and hoopla of this anniversary, I keep seeing people calling STAR WARS "the best science fiction film of all time." Uh... really? I don't think so. The original STAR WARS was a good movie, and EMPIRE STRIKES BACK was even better (Leigh Brackett wrote that one, so there's good reason), but RETURN OF THE JEDI went downhill, and you really don't want to get me started about those three wretched prequels. Even the original triad hasn't aged as gracefully as one might have hoped. It has become apparent that much of the charm of the first movie came from the novelty of seeing favorite tropes from classic SF books realized on the screen for the first time... but that charm wears off on repeated viewings, and once it does you realize that neither the story is, well... not all that it could have been. You also realize how much retrofitting and backfill has gone on since the movie's first release. I don't care what Lucas says, I will never believe that Darth was meant to Luke's father from the outset, or that the romantic pairing was always supposed to be Leia and Han (it is plainly Luke and Leia)... and damn it, Han shoots first!

Never mind about all that. STAR WARS is what it is, and it had a profound effect on both SF and on film, for both good and ill... but it is not even close to being the best SF movie of all time.

What's better? Try 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY. Try THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL. Try the first ALIEN, or even better, ALIENS (but never mention the third installment in my presence). Try CHARLIE (the film version of the classic "Flowers for Algernon"). All worthy. Try George Pal's wonderful adaptation of H.G. Wells' WAR OF THE WORLDS (a better film than the Spielberg remake, in my opinion), or Pal's version of THE TIME MACHINE (a MUCH better film than the really truly abominable recent remake).

The best, though?

MGM, 1956. Leslie Nielson, Anne Francis, Walter Pidgeon, Robbie the Robot. FORBIDDEN PLANET. Also known as the Tempest on Altair-4. Inspired by Shakespeare, in turn it inspired Gene Roddenberry, who borrowed heavily from it when coming up with STAR TREK. State of the art special effects (for 1956, admittedly), gripping story, some fine performances (especially by Walter Pidgeon, whose performance as Morbius beats anything ever seen in any of the STAR WARS films). Unlike STAR WARS, this is a film that only grows richer every time you watch it. A monster that makes sense, characters with a little psychological depth, science that isn't just empty technobabble, a sexy heroine, a tragic hero, the awesome caverns of the Krel... FORBIDDEN PLANET has it all.

Winner and still champion.

The best science fiction film of all time.

Comments

madbard
May. 30th, 2007 09:57 pm (UTC)
Hold your horses. You thought 2001 was better than Star Wars?

The book was enjoyable, and the film had some interesting visual/auditory juxtapositions. But in the end, Kubrick loves taking mystery and making it defiantly unintelligible to the audience. The glacial pacing of his films isn't "artisict" but sheer self-indulgence, and breaks the contract of the filmmaker with audience to tell at least a visually coherent story. (Even the opening of the film, with Kubrick's name on the crescendo, lets us know that this is the autheur theory writ large.)

Plus, monkeys fondling giant rocks is not cooler than spaceships chasing after each other in a hail of laser fire.

madbard
May. 30th, 2007 09:59 pm (UTC)
(That would be "artistic", and not "artisict".)
harrytheheir
May. 30th, 2007 11:16 pm (UTC)
Also, auteur, not "autheur".
madbard
May. 30th, 2007 11:17 pm (UTC)
I like the edgier side of the speed/accuracy tradeoff.
bizzleburp
May. 31st, 2007 04:05 am (UTC)
huh, 2001 much better
Hey, I'm as lame a fanboy as the next guy, but wtf? 2001 has it all over episode IV (and yes, I do love ep. IV over all the other ST films).
Then again Lucas destroyed all the films for me in a way. Martin may do the same for Fire and Ice.
madbard
May. 31st, 2007 04:21 am (UTC)
Re: huh, 2001 much better
>Martin may do the same for Fire and Ice.

That's crazy talk now. The only thing GRRM could do to harm the series it not to finish it.
bizzleburp
May. 31st, 2007 12:20 pm (UTC)
Re: huh, 2001 much better
That's how I've been feeling, waiting so long for the next book.
Hope 'A Dance With Dragons' is finished soon.
rhazer
May. 31st, 2007 12:25 pm (UTC)
and i thought it wasnt possible for me to lose more respect for martin, once again he has proven me wrong. start wars was much better then any of those listed. they definitely went downhill after empire, but so did feast.

Profile

Spain
grrm
George R.R. Martin
George R. R. Martin

Latest Month

September 2014
S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930    

Tags

Page Summary

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lilia Ahner