Finally got around to seeing Gravity last night and, wow, what a movie. Such a stellar performance from Sandra Bullock. I was very surprised – I normally dislike her quite a lot – but her chemistry with George Clooney was great (although, let’s face it, George Clooney would have chemistry with a dead frog and we’d eat it up) and the entire film was just beautiful. I was so engrossed in the film I just couldn’t look away. It definitely deserves a spot on my list.
Which part felt off to you? I don’t have a great understanding of the subject, to be honest – only what I know from Kerbal Space Program, haha! – but I thought they did a pretty awesome job with a realistic presentation of what a disaster would be like in space. (I will admit, my brain kicked in when she started crying and the tears hit the camera, because of this. But drama so whatever.) What part doesn’t work?
Yeah I want to know that too. I’ve been looking forward to hearing your take on the movie in particular, Denny, and so I’m curious about your caveat. (If I’ve missed it in the other thread, I apologize.)
-xtien
“Engineering admits you warned us this would be a problem.”
Nonsense. Silent Running would feature on the top of my (and my friends who watched it with me several years back) 10 worst sci-fi movies of all time. We thought it was an extremely tedious prolonged experience that was designed to push a Greenpeace in space theme. We used to sit through any sci-fi we could fine, and this was one of the hardest things to sit through.
I’ll pop over to the Gravity topic when I have time and explain in more detail… Just stuff with orbital planes and proximity of objects. I don’t want to drop any significant spoilers here because everyone should go see this superb movie. And they should see it. In 3D, even, and I never recommend 3D. The science geek in me had issues, but as a dramatic piece of entertainment, it’s wonderful. And comparing the movie footage with the hundreds of hours of NASA TV I’ve watched, they did an unprecedented job of capturing what it must feel like to be in space.
The Abyss
Alien
Aliens
Alphaville
A Clockwork Orange
Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Dr. Strangelove
The Empire Strikes Back
The Incredible Shrinking Man
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)
The Manchurian Candidate (borderline case, but given the role of brainwashing I think it may qualify)
Robocop
Star Wars
The Terminator
Honorable mentions:
Her
Ex Machina
Metropolis
Back to the Future
The Thing (1982)
Soylent Green
Solaris
The Fly (1986)
The Fly (1950s)
Time After Time
Star Trek: The Motion Picture
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Limitless
Anyway, 2001 is far and away at the top of my list. Nothing else comes close, really. Fun fact about Stanley Kubrick: in addition to making the best SF film ever, he made two contenders for best war movie ever (Paths of Glory, Full Metal Jacket), a contender for best horror film ever (The Shining), and a strong contender for best comedy ever (Dr. Strangelove). Which, now that I think of it, should go on my list too…
Just curious, did you understand the ending the first time you watched it? Or did you just enjoy it and wonder what it meant? Did you end the movie confused as to what just happened?
In subsequent viewings, did something change? Back in the pre-internet days, did you talk to your friends about the ending and try to throw theories back and forth?
I still don’t ‘understand’ the ending if, by ‘understand,’ you mean I believe I discovered one correct interpretation. I gather that with the starchild image Kubrick was attempting to visualize human transcendence and a next evolutionary step. It seems to me that Dave finds the aliens who left the monolith, that they house him until he dies, and that he is reborn in some new form. That’s all I got. I would imagine the Clarke book has a more literal description of what’s going on – which, now that I think of it, may be why I’ve avoided reading it.
I chatted about the movie from time to time with my brothers but I don’t remember much discussion of the last act.
Roger Ebert has this great explanation of the way Lynch’s movies hold together - they have a dreamlike logic, such that you can’t really explain what actually occurred, but you understand what happened. That’s how I feel about 2001, it can’t fit into a literal story beat, so Kubrick kind of swing fornthe fences by sticking a baby floating in space. Which is weird to look at, but your brain immediately interprets that this is intended as metaphor, which frees you up to make your own interpretation. I’ve always admired 2001’s ending even while it feels weird as hell to me.
I read the book first so I kind had a leg up on the ending. But fwiw I agree with you. 2001 is the greatest SF movie of all time for me. By a massive distance as well.
My short list would be something like
2001
The fifth element
Starship troopers
The firefly movie
Moon
Star Wars 1 (fuck the out of order naming crap)
Solaris
Bladerunner
The Arrival
Aliens 2
Man, lists are tough. I’d probably agree with folks that 2001 has to be at the top, it’s the best “serious” sci-fi still, and considering it was made before we landed on the moon, I find that a bit depressing.
I guess another problem I have is that I define science fiction more strictly than I gather most of you do. I don’t think Star Wars, Aliens or Fifth Element are very sci-fi but I’m not going to get hung up on semantics. If I had to pick five, I’d probably say, in no particular order:
2001
12 Monkeys
Forbidden Planet
Contact
and then either The Martian or Europa Report. Screw it, make it a top six
There’s a bunch I haven’t seen that sound pretty good - need to see Primer and Upstream Color off the top of my head. But I like the list. At least today I do.
