Favorite Sci-Fi action movie from the 70's, 80's, 90's, and 00's

It's an interesting film for Kubrick and Spielberg completionists, and it's definitely intriguing in its own right..but something about that movie is just lacking compared to the best science fiction from both their libraries. It's not as influential as movies like Close Encounters and 2001. For my money, it's also not as thematically satisfying as Minority Report, which Spielberg did in the same decade.

As good as it is, it wouldn't seem right for me to call it one of the best science fiction movies of the decade when it doesn't really stand up to what the best of Spielberg and Kubrick have done before. There's more to it as well, I just don't feel it's that great a movie. It's a film you can study, but it's not an amazing film, at least for me.

I could get into this in more detail, but at the end of the day I'm sure we'd both agree on the strengths and weaknesses..and I don't really feel like trying to prove that a movie's simply "good", and not great. Haha.


I fully agree with you. Oddly enough not only were AI and Minority report made in the same decade, AI's post production bled into the time of Minority Reports filming.

I wasn't trying to say it was one of the best sci-fi movies of all time, I just think its a shame how utterly fogotten it is. While overall the movie doesnt quite come together for me, it plays with a number of interesting ideas, and the special effects, while not mindblowing in scope are very welll done in my opinion.

On a strange side note, while watching it recently (the whole thing is on youtube, in one video, not even split up into 10 minute segments, odd.) I picked up on something that may simply be more me projecting my own ideas and interpretations onto the films meaning. Alot of the movie revolves around David fully believing that he is special, one of a kind. When he finds out that he is not he cannot handle it and freaks the hell out. Thematically and just characterization wise, it reminds me of what people often say about kids born about 1990 on. Theres been a lot of talk about how we (I was born in 1991) have been so over praised for such little accomplishments our entire lives that when it comes time to enter the world we simply cannot handle competing withothers, or meeting with apathy from our superiors. Being that Osment, the kid actor from the 6th sense who also plays the main character in AI, is also roughly from that age group makes this comparison really interesting for me.


In the end given the relatively short list of good science fiction films form the Naughts I thought AI should at least be part of the conversation.

Also Jude Law is awesome.
 
The thing about that particular 'saga' is, the fact that Wehdon very successfully managed to fit his whole 4 or 5 series plan into a two hour movie, tells me that this story did not really have enough there conceptually to sustain that kind of ambition. Because, when i was watching the tv show(b4 the movie was released), it seemed very flawed and flimsy conceptually, I would say that only two of the episodes(Out of gas and objects in space) measured up to his previous work on Buffy and Angel, while the others felt like they were treading water somewhat and were a bit boring as a result.
Yeah, the first series of Buffy was not that great, in comparison to the later seasons anyway, but it was still miles better than Firefly, and Whedon was jusy finding his television feet then.

I am going to have to strongly disagree with this. He didn't fit "4 or 5 seasons" into the movie. He fit roughly his plan for season 2 (they found out River's secret/what happened to the Reavers and she becomes a fully functioning member of the crew). If the film had done well, there would have been two more films that would have delved into more ideas he had like a second civil war.

Conceptually the marriage of the past with the future was brilliant. He didn't just pull from Star Wars. He pulled from Stagecoach (1939), the historical novel Killer Angels, The Searchers (1956), Gilda (1946) inspired noir etc. It was an ambitious character study in the future.

And those characters are why every episode was amazing. They were so well-developed and functioning without relying on the gimmicks of vampire camp and ass-kicking teenage girls (at least until the movie). Honestly, Firefly/Serenity is Whedon's most mature work and miles ahead of Buffy. Buffy may have been more successful, but in 14 episodes Joss did more than he did in years of Buffy, in my opinion.

I thought he put too many constraints on himself, while trying to be a smartass about things, y'know, being a little too smart for the show's own good.
Things like ruling out any contact with aliens whatsoever on the show and never using sound during space travel or battles.

That was an artistic choice to make this a human story? That's not being a smartass. That is being innovative and getting away from the Star Trek silliness. And no sound in space wasn't being a smartass....it was being scientifically accurate. Was Kubrick a smartass in 2001 because he had no sound in space? Because I hold that in higher esteem than what a 1960s TV show did.

and the Reavers took the role of the aliens essentially.

The Reavers were in the TV show and are based on frontier fears (real and imagined) and prejudices about Native Americans. Most particularly they were based on the Apache in the film Stagecoach, which the pilot episode of Firefly is a sci-fi TV remake of in a lot of ways.

And as I said, the big plot of the series, concerning River, it did not feel like the kind of thing they could have touched on over 4 or 5 series substantially.
I did enjoy the movie a great deal when i saw it at the cinema, he did very well with the limited budget and managing to wrap up his story, i thought it was better than the series, or at least, as good as those two good episodes i cited.
I think they did him a big favour in cancelling the show, so he could distill the story into movie form. Also, y'know, it gave him some practice for the Avengers.

Again, did you even watch the show? It was about far more than what happened to River. All the characters had substantive backstories and character arcs that got cut short. The main character is Mal Renyolds and when the movie ended his story and personal war with the government was far from over.
 
70's - Superman: The Movie. Hey it's as Scifi as Star Wars(in that both are science fantasy rather than science fiction).

80's - The Terminator

90's - Men In Black

2000's - Iron Man
 
Added The Thing Total Recall and Starship Troopers to my list, can't believe I forgot those three.
 
I am going to have to strongly disagree with this. He didn't fit "4 or 5 seasons" into the movie. He fit roughly his plan for season 2 (they found out River's secret/what happened to the Reavers and she becomes a fully functioning member of the crew). If the film had done well, there would have been two more films that would have delved into more ideas he had like a second civil war.

As I said in reply to the other poster, I was going by what a sci-fi mag said about that, maybe I mis-remembered or mis-interpreted what they said, or they were wrong.

Conceptually the marriage of the past with the future was brilliant. He didn't just pull from Star Wars. He pulled from Stagecoach (1939), the historical novel Killer Angels, The Searchers (1956), Gilda (1946) inspired noir etc. It was an ambitious character study in the future.

And those characters are why every episode was amazing. They were so well-developed and functioning without relying on the gimmicks of vampire camp and ass-kicking teenage girls (at least until the movie). Honestly, Firefly/Serenity is Whedon's most mature work and miles ahead of Buffy. Buffy may have been more successful, but in 14 episodes Joss did more than he did in years of Buffy, in my opinion.

What made Buffy so good was the friendships and relationships, the ass-kicking was there cause, y'know, some people do enjoy superheroics, it did not rely on that, as if there was nothing else to the show. And call it 'vampire camp' if you want, but they explored some real life issues very well through that mythology, in fact, he took the vampire and made his own mythology out of it.


That was an artistic choice to make this a human story? That's not being a smartass. That is being innovative and getting away from the Star Trek silliness. And no sound in space wasn't being a smartass....it was being scientifically accurate. Was Kubrick a smartass in 2001 because he had no sound in space? Because I hold that in higher esteem than what a 1960s TV show did.

Yeah, i know it is scientifically accurate, that's why I said it was 'too smart for it's own good.' It's not the same kind of sci-fi story as 2001, at some point he is going to want to do some ship to ship space battles, and when you draw that silly rule up for yourself, you are shooting yourself in the foot. I think he realised this, and that's why he moved the 'space' battle to the upper atmsophere, so we could have all the usual fun of sfx during battle.
I think there is a very good reason why no-one else had used that kind of scientific accuracy in a movie or tv show that would have, sooner or later, involved space action.


The Reavers were in the TV show and are based on frontier fears (real and imagined) and prejudices about Native Americans. Most particularly they were based on the Apache in the film Stagecoach, which the pilot episode of Firefly is a sci-fi TV remake of in a lot of ways.

Aye, exactly, native Americans were the 'aliens' back in those days, just as the Reavers were essentially used as 'invading aliens', c'mon, you know what I am talking about, the usual type of role reserved for human hating aliens in sci-fi shows, was taken up by the Reavers.


Again, did you even watch the show? It was about far more than what happened to River. All the characters had substantive backstories and character arcs that got cut short. The main character is Mal Renyolds and when the movie ended his story and personal war with the government was far from over.

Yeah, that is a fair point, and maybe they would have come up with some good stories in that regard, but it did get some kind of closure with the River plot, but yeah, I'm sure wheodn would have come up with some other decent stories in that regard, but over the course of many series, and no chance of any alien contact, a bit limiting there with the storylines.
I have not watched the show in years, but I think i recall them well enough, ok, maybe i was being a bit harsh on the show, it was just not my cup of tea for the most part, just as it seems Buffy was not yours. Maybe if the show had progressed I would have gotten into it more, because I did enjoy the movie a great deal when I saw it, y'know, once the main plot arc had kicked in properly.

edit: Because that is where Buffy found it's strength as a show, when there was a plot arc guiding the direction of the seasons, which did not happen until season 2 really, season 1 being more motw episodes, as I guess FF was, except, it was more character development of the week I suppose, maybe i just didn't find the characters that compelling. Or at least as compelling as those in Buffy.
edit: But the show needed both to excel, and FF only had one side of that coin before it was cancelled. maybe it could have got there if it hadn't, but i still think he put a couple of limitations on himself there for the old space saga.
 
Last edited:
70's - Superman
80's - Predator
90's - The Matrix
00's - Artificial Intelligence
 
70's - alien
80's - aliens
90's - gattaca/the matrix/t2
00's - children of men
 
What made Buffy so good was the friendships and relationships, the ass-kicking was there cause, y'know, some people do enjoy superheroics, it did not rely on that, as if there was nothing else to the show. And call it 'vampire camp' if you want, but they explored some real life issues very well through that mythology, in fact, he took the vampire and made his own mythology out of it.

What made Firefly so good was the friendships and relationships, the sci-fi western was there cause, 'y'know, some people enjoy sci-fi westerns, it did not rely on that, as if there was nothing else to the show. :oldrazz: :awesome:

But I do think Buffy was very campy. Firefly had Joss's brilliant and irreverent sense of humor, but it was toned down so that the darker, more dramatic elements of the story weren't overwhelmed by it. It was just frankly a more mature show with adult characters (even if one of my favorites, River, was a teenager with the broken psyche of a child). He also created his own mythology to the 'Verse that despite only having 14.5 hours (16.5 if you count the movie) to it, that is fascinating and al encompassing. It is frankly one of the most imaginative, unique, memorable and HUMAN visions of the space opera ever attempted.


Yeah, i know it is scientifically accurate, that's why I said it was 'too smart for it's own good.' It's not the same kind of sci-fi story as 2001, at some point he is going to want to do some ship to ship space battles, and when you draw that silly rule up for yourself, you are shooting yourself in the foot. I think he realised this, and that's why he moved the 'space' battle to the upper atmsophere, so we could have all the usual fun of sfx during battle.
I think there is a very good reason why no-one else had used that kind of scientific accuracy in a movie or tv show that would have, sooner or later, involved space action.

So, he was scientifically accurate to space creating an eerie and unique aesthetic to his space elements and then found a scientific reason/excuse to have sound when his big space battle finally came? You just described someone who successfully figured out how to have his cake and eat it too. What's wrong with that? :awesome:

Aye, exactly, native Americans were the 'aliens' back in those days, just as the Reavers were essentially used as 'invading aliens', c'mon, you know what I am talking about, the usual type of role reserved for human hating aliens in sci-fi shows, was taken up by the Reavers.

But they're not based on aliens. They're not the old cliché of an alien race like Klingons or some such nonsense. They were based on the inaccurate prejudiced view of Native Americans held by pioneers who spun these stories (and led to films like Stagecoach and The Searchers).

They're not "invading aliens." They're a brilliant element of the western, not the sci-fi genre. And they play into Firefly's libertarian theme (the government made them by literally trying to social engineer a population). While I don't agree with the politics this underlines, it is pretty brilliant writing.

Yeah, that is a fair point, and maybe they would have come up with some good stories in that regard, but it did get some kind of closure with the River plot, but yeah, I'm sure wheodn would have come up with some other decent stories in that regard, but over the course of many series, and no chance of any alien contact, a bit limiting there with the storylines.
I have not watched the show in years, but I think i recall them well enough, ok, maybe i was being a bit harsh on the show, it was just not my cup of tea for the most part, just as it seems Buffy was not yours. Maybe if the show had progressed I would have gotten into it more, because I did enjoy the movie a great deal when I saw it, y'know, once the main plot arc had kicked in properly.

edit: Because that is where Buffy found it's strength as a show, when there was a plot arc guiding the direction of the seasons, which did not happen until season 2 really, season 1 being more motw episodes, as I guess FF was, except, it was more character development of the week I suppose, maybe i just didn't find the characters that compelling. Or at least as compelling as those in Buffy.
edit: But the show needed both to excel, and FF only had one side of that coin before it was cancelled. maybe it could have got there if it hadn't, but i still think he put a couple of limitations on himself there for the old space saga.

Mal is the most interesting protagonist that Whedon ever created, IMO, and how he would react to a second civil war is unknowable. The show could go from space-western to a sci-fi epic war. How the crew would grow from losing Wash has a thousand potential directions (look how confused the fangirls and their fanfics are about where to take the show ;) ), there is so much potential we'll never see realized. Who needs aliens when you have these characters and this setting?

But I respect your point about our differences on Buffy and will leave it there.
 
What made Firefly so good was the friendships and relationships, the sci-fi western was there cause, 'y'know, some people enjoy sci-fi westerns, it did not rely on that, as if there was nothing else to the show. :oldrazz: :awesome:

But how much of that sci-fi western was there really, in the show? Not much, I don't recall any spacebattles, memorable gunfights or set-pieces. edit: Unlike with Buffy, which from the beginning, had a healthy doseage of the superheroic action throughout.
and talking about western staples used in the show, that episode about Mal having the duel with that guy? Man, i thought that was boring.
I have the boxset, haven't watched it in years, so i could be forgetting some parts that were supposed to satisfy that aspect, but when i saw the movie, i was like, 'Ok, now they are starting to fulfill the action quotient of the show i thought would be there.'
Because you need the characters, the action and the story arcs, and all FF really had going for it was the characters, that is, if you found the characters compelling.

But I do think Buffy was very campy. Firefly had Joss's brilliant and irreverent sense of humor, but it was toned down so that the darker, more dramatic elements of the story weren't overwhelmed by it. It was just frankly a more mature show with adult characters (even if one of my favorites, River, was a teenager with the broken psyche of a child). He also created his own mythology to the 'Verse that despite only having 14.5 hours (16.5 if you count the movie) to it, that is fascinating and al encompassing. It is frankly one of the most imaginative, unique, memorable and HUMAN visions of the space opera ever attempted.

Buffy had episodes and drama that were as mature as any in that show. i don't know how much of the show you watched, but if you are thouroughly versed in it, I can only say that I strongly disagree with you that FF was the more mature work.
But, of course, buffy stretched to 7 seasons and had many different tones going through episodes, season 5 was probably the most successful in the regard of being mature, the last one he did the showrunning on(most important job being taking a last writing pass over every script) b4 he left to work on FF.

So, he was scientifically accurate to space creating an eerie and unique aesthetic to his space elements and then found a scientific reason/excuse to have sound when his big space battle finally came? You just described someone who successfully figured out how to have his cake and eat it too. What's wrong with that? :awesome:

My main point originally was that he had painted his wagon into a corner with that rule, and if the show had not been cancelled he would have had some right wonky space battling going on, I mean, what is he going to do, have every battle take place in the upper atmosphere of planets cause he realised he had made a daft descion to overrule sound in space(God often thinks twice about that rule he came up with too btw).


But they're not based on aliens. They're not the old cliché of an alien race like Klingons or some such nonsense. They were based on the inaccurate prejudiced view of Native Americans held by pioneers who spun these stories (and led to films like Stagecoach and The Searchers).

They're not "invading aliens." They're a brilliant element of the western, not the sci-fi genre. And they play into Firefly's libertarian theme (the government made them by literally trying to social engineer a population). While I don't agree with the politics this underlines, it is pretty brilliant writing.

ok, they were not like Kilingons, but they were did take the role of invading aliens of a different sort. disagree if you must, but that is how I feel about them. Let's say he did make them aliens, and they did the exact same things in the movie, you would be sitting here typing up the same kudos for their inspiration, there is nothing wrong with them conceptually, all i am saying is...they could just as well have been a made up alien race.

and as to your point below, ok, you may be right, perhaps there would have been enough going on in the mythos that he didn't need any more non-human types coming into play and ripping it up once the Reaver plot was taken care of, but it's always good to leave it open for yourself to have an alien presence(and the Reaver's 'alien/non-human' presence did an an element of excitement that was lacking in the tv series imo).
But, knowing Whedon, if he had come up with a good story later on about some aliens coming into play, he would have just said fug it to his rule, and wrote them in, so i guess that was not really a problem, unless he wanted it to be.


Mal is the most interesting protagonist that Whedon ever created, IMO, and how he would react to a second civil war is unknowable. The show could go from space-western to a sci-fi epic war. How the crew would grow from losing Wash has a thousand potential directions (look how confused the fangirls and their fanfics are about where to take the show ;) ), there is so much potential we'll never see realized. Who needs aliens when you have these characters and this setting?

But I respect your point about our differences on Buffy and will leave it there.

ok, yeah, and i answered that point above as it flowed in from what i was saying about the reavers.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"