ten-best-sci-fi-films-of-the-aughts.jpg

Guides | December 31, 2009 | Comments (150)


In reviewing Moon, I think I said all I really need to say on sci-fi flicks for the purpose of this list:

As a former card-carrying scientist, and perpetual geek-nerd, I love science fiction. Which is why I hate most science fiction movies — like a fucking vampire, they suck all the goodness out of the genre and then take a big steamer on the leftover corpse. Science fiction done right isn’t just about high-gloss technology, aliens, dystopia, alternate histories, nanotechnology, clones, robots, time travel, space travel, spaceships and off-world exploration, etc. Sure, great science fiction often has one or more of these elements and, done right, that stuff is f’ing cool. But the best science fiction uses these themes and elements, or ones like them, as tools to explore. From Mary Shelley to Asimov, Pohl, Heinlein, and Gibson, from Kubrick to Ridley Scott to Joss Whedon, the science fiction genre, at its best, is put to brilliant use to study and explore not just science itself, but ethics, morality and the human condition.

And to save you from anticipating its appearance while you scroll down the list, no, you won’t find Serenity (2005) in the Top Ten. I love “Firefly” to no end, and think Serenity was as good a conclusion to the series as we could get. But taking it apart from the show, as a pure standalone movie, I don’t think it’s quite up there with the flicks I chose to include in this list. I have no doubt many of you will disagree with that (as well as with some of these movies even being in this list), and that you will vehemently (and possibly crudely) voice that disagreement in the comments. Have at it. In fact, that brings to bear one other point. While one’s enjoyment and personal estimation of films is often subjective, I think that’s particularly true of science fiction films. Some people dig on dark, futuristic science fiction, but hate time travel tales. Others love glitzy space adventures but loathe quiet, character pieces. Some hate anything the genre has to offer, others love it no matter how bad the end product’s quality is. To each their own. But this is my list, love it or lump it.

battlefield-earth-shot.jpg10. Battlefield Earth: A Saga of the Year 3000 (2000). Laugh all you want. While Battlefield Earth is often derided for being a horrific travesty of cinematic schlock, its 2% tomatomer rating on Rotten Tomatoes is hardly warranted. Travolta delivers a subtle performance in a rich film that explores what it means to be human … Nope, I couldn’t even come up with a third sentence of bullshit trying to talk about this flick. Battlefield Earth is everything wrong with bad science fiction movies. Here’s your real Top 10. — Seth Freilich

star-trek-logo.jpg10. Star Trek (2009). J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek accomplishes the impossible: It reboots an entire film franchise even while honoring the spirit of its beginnings, and it breathes new and heated life into a series grown stale. The director reteams with writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman; the same team also crafted the fantastically done Mission: Impossible III, and Orci and Kurtzman’s writing and producing credits include “Alias” and “Fringe.” They’ve created something wonderful in Star Trek: a fast-paced, breathless space opera, crammed with action, humor, and heart. — Daniel Carlson

pitch-black-shot.jpg9. Pitch Black (2000). Pitch Black has no business being a good sci-fi flick, let alone one of the better ones of this decade. But it is, despite the fact that it stars Vin Diesel. Writer/director David Twohy managed to couple a simple and rote horror “plot” (band of people stuck together in the middle of nowhere and being hunted down) with a simple and rote sci-fi “plot” (cargo ship crashes onto mysterious planet and passengers learn secrets about each other … in spaaaace), turning them into a tight and well-done sci-fi/horror flick. Much like Star Trek above it in this list, Pitch Black lacks the stronger thematic elements I talked about above. Nevertheless, it’s a well done and eminently watchable film that’s both scary and fun. — Seth Freilich

timecrimes-shot.jpg8. Timecrimes (2007). TimeCrimes is a bizarre mindfuck of a little time-traveling movie. But unlike many other time-travel movies (The Lake House, for instance), there are no holes in the logic of Timecrimes. It’s a tight, gripping, logically sound, weird, funny, very cool little thriller. And writer/director Nacho Vigalondo, despite having a name that sounds like something you’d really like to eat an hour from now, is one stupendous director. — Dustin Rowles

v-for-vendetta-shot.jpg7. V for Vendetta (2005). V for Vendetta is fucking brilliant. Beneath director James McTeigue’s floating knives and the ballet of violence, Larry and Andy Wachowski provide thoughtful (if somewhat shallow) characters, challenging-but-logical mythology, and the kind of daring political ambiguity rarely seen in a blockbuster of this magnitude. Indeed, while the film’s ideas and the motivations of its characters appear in vague shades of gray, V for Vendetta is clearly delineated by the graphic colors that stand in stark contrast to the dark palette upon which the film is painted, radiantly projecting onscreen the cinematic equal to David Lloyd’s chiaroscuro illustrations. While the book was set in a bleak post-Thatcherite, post-nuke 1997 dystopian society under the control of a repressive, authoritarian British “Head” and his thuggish “Fingermen” who worked out of “the Nose,” the Wachowskis have updated the timeline (to around 2020) and substituted a deadly plague for nuclear bombs. Still, the brothers have successfully transplanted Moore’s contumacious ideas, breathing new life into themes that resonate even louder in a post- 9/11 world, where centrally-owned media conglomerates control the flow of information under the supervision of a government that paralyzes its citizens into submission through its xenophobic culture of fear — and the Wachowskis overtly draw these parallels by using both the techniques (wiretapping and Abu-Ghraib-style black masks) and verbiage (“Coalition of the Willing”) of the Bush/Cheney regime administration, going a bit too far, perhaps, by suggesting that the government created the deadly plague (destroyed the WTC?) as a pretense for throwing down its iron fist. — Dustin Rowles

wall-e-shot.jpg6. WALL-E (2008). Written and directed by Andrew Stanton, WALL-E opens in the distant future on an Earth whose atmosphere is surrounded by a blanket of debris and whose land is covered in towers of human waste. The camera glides through space and then over the ruined planet as “Put on Your Sunday Clothes” from Hello, Dolly! plays, acting as the emotional soundtrack for the yearning hero about to be introduced and also offering a sad juxtaposition between the nature of exploration and the wreck of the world that was left behind. The song shifts source, going from non-diegetic to emanating from a speaker on a small robot idly wheeling through the trash. The robot, whose markings identify him as a Waste Allocation Load-Lifter, Earth class, spends his days compacting trash and stacking the cubes into ever higher skyscrapers of waste. WALL-E is the last remaining drone tasked with cleaning up the planet after the human race left for cleaner pastures. All of the robots that will appear in the film have personalities to a degree, but WALL-E’s is by far the most vibrant. WALL-E’s world changes with the arrival of EVE (Elissa Knight), a much slicker robot who’s been sent to Earth to search for signs of vegetative life. She’s a more typical robot, following orders and ignoring WALL-E once she realizes he’s not her objective, but WALL-E is instantly smitten. He follows her around as she searches for plant life, and in another wonderful sequence he attempts to win her heart, or at least impress her, by showing off the things he’s collected from his time cleaning up Earth. It sounds either corny or foolish to write about a love story between two robots brought to life in a computer, but that’s how believable, compelling, and just damn good this film is: It breathes life into these machines, gives them real beating hearts, and tells a story in nothing but pure emotion. — Daniel Carlson

donnie-darko-shot.jpg5. Donnie Darko (2001). It works because it defies classification, spinning shades of an indie outsider high school flick, quirk and humor and all, mixed with an almost nihilistic science fiction fantasy premise. It’s a film that you can watch a dozen times and still try to hone the edge of what you think you saw, of what was really happening. Eschewing twists, the movie itself is a mindfuck.

Jake Gyllenhaal is phenomenal as the eponymous Donnie Darko, playing a teenager who is plain and simply fucked up: slouched and unkempt, eyes flickering up above a sneer that would be malicious if not undermined by so much uncertainty. Adolescent rage at nothing in particular pours out in every argument, even as his voice cracks at every other syllable and trails off when he can’t find the right words for what he knows is true. He sees a grotesque rabbit from the future and launches his own Project Mayhem crusade of property damage and arson.

It’s a movie about time travel, but not about helplessness. With strange loops of closed-off time, the events of which go unknown to any but the time traveler therein, it ask what if everything we ever did worth doing was erased so that it never happened? That’s the fate Donnie chooses in the end. — Steven Lloyd Wilson

moon-shot.jpg4. Moon (2009). No aliens, dystopic futures, or killer robots. Just a dude living on the moon. That dude would be Sam Bell (Sam Rockwell), a contracted employee of a company called Lunar Industries, which has mostly solved Earth’s energy crisis by figuring out how to harvest helium from sun-soaked moon rocks. Most of the process is automatic, but the company needs someone chilling out on the moon, overseeing operations and getting canisters of the wonderful He3 back to Earth. A film like this, with essentially a cast of one, obviously relies heavily on the performance of that sole actor, and the premise sets Sam Rockwell up with the opportunity to deliver a great performance (or performances, if you will). And he knocks it out of the park — from the earlier part of the film, focused on Sam’s utter solitude and possible mental cracking, to the later exploration of individuality, Rockwell is simply a joy to watch. — Seth Freilich

primer_cuppedhands.jpg3. Primer (2004). Primer has none of the fancy special effects or distracting CGI images that we’ve come to associate with contemporary science fiction, relying instead on the classic sci-fi model of setting up a complex ethical dilemma and then watching the characters squirm around in it. Toward the end, the plot begins to double back in time in ways that aren’t clearly spelled out. It’s sometimes difficult to guess the sequence of events or even say for certain exactly what we’re watching, as we lose track of just how many Aarons and Abes there are moving around at any given time. I’ve seen the film twice now, and while it was easier to grasp the second time, I still walked away with unanswered questions. Some find this a fault, but it’s rare enough that a film gives us anything to really think about that I didn’t mind. Primer isn’t for everyone, but for those who enjoy a complex, tricky plot (the obvious, and already overused, comparison is Memento), it marks the debut of an exciting new talent — Jeremy C. Fox

district-9-shot.jpg2. District 9 (2009). At its heart, the film is about the lines we draw around “us” and “them,” and how truly shaky those lines are. We can accept any sort of horror, any torture, as long as it isn’t one of us. The film feeds on the horror implicit in how easy it is to carry a one and move someone back and forth across that line. A man in charge of an operation can in five minutes become nothing more than a pile of resources “worth billions of dollars,” that must be harvested quickly. Anesthesia? That’s for people not things, it might interfere with the procedure. Vivisection first, get the heart out as quickly as possible. Bits and pieces of humor run throughout, laugh-out-loud gallows humor. The authorities release photoshopped footage of Wikus screwing one of the aliens to explain his condition, to turn the sentiment of any friends and family against helping him. It’s mined here and there, a thug asking Wikus late in the film whether he’d used a condom. An alien asks Wikus why he killed a man after insisting that there should be no killing and Wikus erupts with the inarguable logic of “that was before he tried to kill me.” It is an intelligent and layered film, but as the old adage goes, ideas are boring, so if you must tell a story about ideas, be sure to wrap it with a bunch of explosions. One complaint of other reviewers has been that the central questions of the film are never resolved. They’re missing the point. We never find out why the aliens came, why most of them seem to have no understanding of their own technology, why they never rose up against those holding them. But that’s because the story is told tightly focused on Wikus. He is preoccupied with survival during the 72 hours over which the film unfolds. He is not in any position to learn those tidbits, and the answers, while tempting, are completely irrelevant to the story being told here. If given, such answers would just be tacked on, gratuitous to the personal journey of Wikus. — Steven Lloyd Wilson

children-of-men-shot.jpg1. Children of Men (2006). To reduce Children of Men to a chase movie robs the film of its skill and power. Cuarón keeps the tension high throughout the film by allowing the realistic story to drive the action, not the artificial music stings or blurred cuts that are the hallmark of the genre. There are no jetpacks here, simply a lived-in, beat-up, decaying world that’s decorated with touches of technology to lend it a vivid texture. Based on P.D. James’ novel, the film is a dazzling balancing act: humorous but not comical, chaotic but not mindless, bleak but not defeatist. Clive Owen cements his leading-man status by bringing a sense of gallows humor to his antihero, along with a British combination of anger and bemusement and drive. Perhaps the most compelling aspect of the film is Cuarón’s somewhat hopeful outlook. Children of Men presents a frighteningly possible future of our world, and Cuarón knows we don’t have to let it come to pass. — Daniel Carlson


The Ten Best Comic Book Movies of the Aughts | The Ten Best Kids' Movies of the Aughts







Comments

Great list. I adore Children of Men. It's one of the few movies that has made me reflect about the state of humanity.

And Clive Owen is hot in it, too.

Posted by: Sofía at December 14, 2009 3:06 PM

I am so down with this list! Wouldn't change a thing. I am also so glad that Wall-E is on it.

Posted by: Peanut_Butter_And_James at December 14, 2009 3:07 PM

Star Trek was number 10?!? And beat by something with Vin Diesel in it? ACK!! And what the HELL is that thing in the picture for Timecrimes?

In other news, I heart many of these movies, so I shall end my complaints.

Posted by: Patty O'Green at December 14, 2009 3:08 PM

There's District 9. Glad to see it somewhere.

Posted by: becks at December 14, 2009 3:09 PM

Fantastic list (even if our beloved Serenity didn't make it)

Posted by: dammitjanet at December 14, 2009 3:11 PM

Can't really argue. I'd love to see Serenity up there, but I can't think of what I'd take off.

On the other hand, cue B-Slim complaining about Star Trek in 3...

2...

1...

Posted by: Skewicide Blonde at December 14, 2009 3:17 PM

I thoroughly enjoyed this list. As I was scrolling, I wasn't sure what was going to be number one, but Children of Men was a fantastic choice. I'm holding back the spoilers, but in a scene right near the end where a whole crowd immediately falls silent, I catch myself holding my breath every time.

Posted by: branded at December 14, 2009 3:18 PM

Nice to see Time Crimes get some love. Overall I like this list but maybe it's a little premature with Avatar being out in a week...

Posted by: Garbageman at December 14, 2009 3:19 PM

Here's one you left off:

Sunshine (2007) directed by Danny Boyle.

Posted by: Yossarian at December 14, 2009 3:20 PM

Love this list.
Consider TimeCrimes and Primer added to my netflix.
An argument for Serenity:
My dad looooves sci-fi. Par exemple: He agreed to get my sister a PS3 for Xmas just so that he could get the new Star Trek on blu-ray. Anyway, he has never watched Firefly but he adores Serenity. So he is my proof that Serenity is possibly a good stand-alone movie. If that makes sense...


And yay! for the Donnie Darko, Wall-E, Children of Men love. You've made me want to skip my finals and pull out those DVDs.

Posted by: gee. ay. at December 14, 2009 3:28 PM

Yes! I completely agree with Children of Men and District 9. Those two movies were some of the best science fiction I have seen in a long time.

However, FUCK V for Steaming Pile. That movie was a fucking tragedy. Every update the Wachowskis made should have never happened. They were all WRONG. The graphic novel was written as a period piece for Thatcherite England with an anarchist as the central character, not as an all-encompassing story for the ages, centered around a freedom fighter, open for the Wachowskis to pummel to death with ham-handed attempts at updating it. Alan Moore's work should never be changed for any reason. I don't give one good goddamn WHO the director is, they need to keep their grubby fucking mitts off the plot and themes. FUCK the movie adaptation and FUCK the Wachowskis. They aren't even fit to empty Alan Moore's garbage bin.

I still haven't seen Moon, dammit. I should have requested a promo copy to review for our blog, but I didn't. In the future, I will remember to abuse my position.

Posted by: stardust at December 14, 2009 3:30 PM

I am one picky mofo, so I haaaaated Timecrimes, Primer bored the hell out of me, and V for Vendetta was pretty and had some good moments but eh.

I really loved District 9 though, and Moon was pretty good too. I haven't seen Pitch Black since it was out in theatres, but I remember enjoying it there. I haven't actually seen some of these movies due to a crippling lack of interest, so... 3 out of 10 for me, yay?

Posted by: Nat Kittyface at December 14, 2009 3:31 PM

OH MAN Yossarian I was just thinking about if they left one off and I couldn't come up with one. Now I feel ashamed, Sunshine is one of my favorite sci-fi flicks ever.
I would bump Pitch Black, put Star Trek at number 10, then squish Sunshine in at number 2 or 3 fo sho.

Posted by: gee. ay. at December 14, 2009 3:31 PM

I cannot express how much I loved V for Vendetta. The cast was perfect and the soundtrack was surprising and beautiful

I don't watch a lot of Sci-Fi, so I can only mention the few I enjoyed outside of the context of this Top 10 list.

Paprika - a perfect mind-fuck. The score is thrilling, the animation gorgeous and challenging, and the storyline mind-boggling. I love it. I've been working on a solo arrangement of the "Parade" ("Shizuku Ippai no Kioku") for two years. The challenge, of course, is that I do not speak Japanese but love the vocal line. Decisions, decisions.

Sunshine - an effects/design heavy Sci-Fi film as a showcase for acting? When Cillian Murphy is involved, anything is possible. It was little hard on the Sci-Fi for me (a bit to techy, you could say), but I enjoyed the ride until the bizarre ending.

The Jacket - it's not great, but it will do. It's the closest we got to a true Sci-Fi/Horror hybrid this decade (in America, I can't speak for the international scene in this hybrid genre) and its solid. Adrien Brody and Keira Knightley sell it as hard as they can.

Posted by: Robert at December 14, 2009 3:35 PM

I'll forgive having overrated District 9 at number two for the classy and accurate choice of putting Children of Men at number one. Nicely done list. Children of Men is one of my absolute favorite movies of the decade and probably of all time. An underrated masterpiece.

Posted by: whatBENwatches at December 14, 2009 3:37 PM

I'm not going to subject y'all to my usual rant about what constitutes "sci-fi," as those of these that give me pause come close enough to qualifying, I suppose. I will say, though, that after looking at this list - respectable though it is as just a list of movies worth watching - I realized the aughts were disappointingly weak for cinematic sci-fi. I need to start reading books again.

You don't have to apologize for Serenity. I love it too, but it's a little light on the "science."

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 3:37 PM

The first two acts of Sunshine were as great as if not better than anything on this list in terms of sci-fi. That last act, though...it doesn't kill the movie, but it sure does undermine it.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 3:39 PM

You lost be at Battlefield Earth: A Saga of the Year 3000, couldn't even get over the joke enough to read the list. :-/

Posted by: Angelmonster at December 14, 2009 3:47 PM

but it's a little light on the "science."

the hell?

Posted by: Jay at December 14, 2009 3:48 PM

i guess it works (depending on how you define sci fi), but i'd never thought of v for vendetta as a science fiction movie before now.

also, i totally suck at dividing movies by genre for these kinds of lists. korea's been killing it in sci fi for a while now, but does that mean those suggestions are more appropriate for the foreign film category? and are we considering foreign films to be films made in another country or films in a non-english language? and if it's the latter, isn't that kind of wrong since the US doesn't have an official national language? and why do men have nipples anyway?

Posted by: atinymachine at December 14, 2009 3:48 PM

that said, i'm so glad moon made this list. i got to see it early at a screening with duncan jones (aka zowie bowie). he was so awesome and nerdy and game for sitting through a marathon q&a session after the movie. he's a stand up guy.

Posted by: atinymachine at December 14, 2009 3:50 PM

"Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" is actually really really good SF.

Posted by: Ofer Ron at December 14, 2009 3:50 PM

What the hell. I'll leap on the Spielberg grenade. As sci-fi goes, I like both A.I. and Minority Report better than most of the movies on this list - certainly better than Star Trek and Pitch Black, at least.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 3:50 PM

I only managed to watch Primer once and I have no bloody clue what was going on, and not in a good way really, so it wouldn't be on my list. A lot of these are excellent though, and I really did adore Moon. It was, for me, as near to perfect as you can get in Sci-fi.

Posted by: Carrie at December 14, 2009 3:50 PM

Great list, but I'd put Sunshine over V For Vendetta. V was good, but not SUNSHINE good.

Posted by: geekchicoho at December 14, 2009 3:52 PM

Jay >> In what way was I being unclear? It's more western/adventure/fantasy than it is a serious reflection on humanity's interaction with technology and scientific advancement. I don't consider Star Wars sci-fi either.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 3:54 PM

Oh 1 for 10. I heard Freilich had sex with a PRAWN! Wall-E for fuck's sake.... BE was a "a rich film that explores what it means to be human" I gues were lucky the guy didn't throw in Scary Movie 4

Posted by: Colostomy Baggins at December 14, 2009 3:54 PM

Wall-E didn't get the #1 spot. There is NO WAY you prefer those other movies to Wall-E. I call shenanigans.

Posted by: superasente at December 14, 2009 3:58 PM

the exclusion of jason x: jason in space is UNACCEPTABLE!

Posted by: atinymachine at December 14, 2009 3:59 PM

I loathe Sci-Fi flicks (I was hesitant to even look at this post) but even I have to admit that "Children of Men" was an amazing film. I've never felt as tense as I did for the entirety of that movie.

And, damn, that Clive Owen is easy on the eyes.

Posted by: Danna at December 14, 2009 4:02 PM

I would also add "Sunshine" as has been suggested, and "Solaris". I loved both of them, even if the final act of "Sunshine" does leave a bit to be desired. Gone would be "Primer" and "Donnie Darko". I've seen Darko a few times and I'm still not convinced that Richard Kelly made the movie he thinks he did. Primer was ok, but when you need to read a 5 page entry on Wikipedia to understand wtf just happened it dulls the impact. It's not one I need to revisit. Good call on the others, looking forward to seeing "Moon".

Honorable mention would go to "Doomsday". It's an insane mashup of a dozen better movies but I had a blast watching it.

Hopefully "Battlefield Earth" will be the #1 best comedy because that shit was PRICELESS.

Posted by: TylerDFC at December 14, 2009 4:03 PM

Not "unclear", wrong.

Posted by: Jay at December 14, 2009 4:04 PM

District 9 as #2? Really?

Sure it's about "us" and "them," but so's a shit ton of other movies--that's why so many people went to see The Blind Side, for godtopus' sake. When I see an alien movie, I want to learn about some goddamn aliens, not watch an idiot scramble around with aliens in the background.

Maybe I could've gotten over that if the movie didn't have the most one-dimensional villains out there: crazy African warlord? check. Unfeeling corporate president? Double check!

Bahh!

Posted by: avocadolime at December 14, 2009 4:04 PM

Jay >> Ah. Well, it is my opinion. So, I guess I'll just say in response that, no, you are the one who is wrong.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 4:06 PM

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL-EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Nadine at December 14, 2009 4:07 PM

Brilliant list, thought I have to agree, Minority Report was a surprisingly awesome sci-fi movie and would have made a good addition here. And the Matrix sequels...Shit, did I say that out loud? Fuck it, I loved those movies to death.

Posted by: Christian H. at December 14, 2009 4:10 PM

Oh man, I HAAATED Sunshine, so I am incredibly surprised to see it recommended by so many. We went to go see it at my insistence, and my fiancee was all like "It's gonna suck." and I was like "NO WAY MAN, this is gonna be GOOD! I loved Solaris-the-original, I loved Event Horizon, so I'm gonna love this movie too!"

....and then it turned out to just be a half-assed shitty version of Event Horizon, but without the Sam Neill and the creepy demon chaos shit but with all of its pontification and MORE, and overused bloom effects and blurry editing for atmosphere, and the WOW, PEOPLE GO CRAZY IN SPACE? YOU'RE KIDDING obviousness, and my fiancee still hasn't let me live it down.

Posted by: Nat Kittyface at December 14, 2009 4:15 PM

And what the HELL is that thing in the picture for Timecrimes?

Posted by: Patty O'Green at December 14, 2009 3:08 PM

I believe it is a villain.

His face.

Coverd in raw bacon.

Posted by: PissBoy at December 14, 2009 4:17 PM

Nice list. I guess it was a weak decade for SciFi. The only one of those that I absolutely love is V for Vendetta but I at least enjoyed all the others that I have seen. Looking forward to Moon.

And I have to say that I full support leaving Sunshine off the list. It was a very well done movie that bored the living hell out of me.

Posted by: EricD at December 14, 2009 4:20 PM

And DarthCorleone.

Fuck yeah! Minority Report was a damn good flick. And I too enjoyed A.I. with exception of the, now cliched, Spielbergian (ien?) FORCED happy ending.

Posted by: PissBoy at December 14, 2009 4:24 PM

I'm also surprised by the Sunshine love. I popped it in the player expecting to be wowed, on the strength of Boyles' other movies (and the presence of Cillian Murphy among others in the cast); and it was like watching an untied balloon go flurbitting aimlessly around the room until it ran out of air and flopped onto the floor, limp and pathetic. It was a huge disappointment.

I would replace Wall-E with Serenity. Wall-E was adorable and I loved it, but it's still just a cutesy kids' movie in sci-fi drag. No comparison to the heroes, villain, monsters, damsel and sheer dead-cool awesomeness of every second of Serenity.

Posted by: Jerce at December 14, 2009 4:29 PM

You just had to include that piece of shit from Jar Jar Abrams didn't you.

This list has ZERO value.

Where's AI? Or Minority Report? or Sunshine? You know, REAL Science-Fiction movies. Here's a clue, assholes, having spaceships and lots of lensflary explosions does not Science Fiction make.
If your are going to try and cram that shit on the then list then why the hell didn't you include Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith?

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 14, 2009 4:29 PM

While I enjoyed aspects of it, for me Sunshine was let down by the actual science. There is enough nuclear material on the Earth- scratch that, in the ENTIRE SOLAR SYSTEM to jump start the fucking sun??? Okey dokey.

COM- great choice and glad you omitted Serenity. I'm probably one of the few here who saw Serenity before Firefly and on it's own it was kinda "huh?" Mal aside, the ensemble that were so crucial to Firefly were not given much chance to establish themselves beyond their archetypes- tough guy, sweetheart, wise old man. Certain fates lost their impact which in retrospect, is a real shame.

Posted by: Squirrelgripper at December 14, 2009 4:32 PM

Aaaaaaaand yet, AGAIN you forgot Southland Tales.

How you can pull Donnie Darko out of your asses every time and leave out that one is astonishing to me.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 14, 2009 4:34 PM

I think you should have inserted your "just kidding" after Star Trek. I was not impressed. Seemed more like a parody of true Star Trek with high-school actors playing their favorite parts. Each actor was either hopelessly miscast (Chekov, Uhura, Sulu) or didn't understand or play their character properly (Spock). This movie seemed to be for non Star Trek fans who wanted something younger and cuter.

Speaking of Vin Diesel, Iron Giant would have certainly made this list if released a year later.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is definitely science fiction. You don't need robots or spaceships to fit into this category. The Incredibles could also loosely fall in here. Both are more brilliant and moving than anything I've seen on the above list.


Posted by: Bluesilver at December 14, 2009 4:36 PM

PissBoy >> I had to sit on A.I.'s ending for a while, but eventually I reached peace with it. I think calling it "happy" or dismissing it as a syrupy Spielberg cop-out is a tad dismissive.

I've read much discussion on the topic, and I think it's at least worthy of a little more thought. Here's one link that I think is a good beginning...

http://www.flakmag.com/film/spielberg/ai.html

Check out his Minority Report discussion about the ambiguity there as well...

http://www.flakmag.com/film/spielberg/minority.html

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 4:38 PM

I agree with everything on this list except Primer that movie was beyond boring. What is beyond boring you ask? It is a giant swirling vortex of suck that actually drains your will to remain conscious. No, seriously it is true; just ask your friendly neighborhood mad scientist.

Posted by: androstarr at December 14, 2009 4:41 PM

Sunshine needs to be on this list (no rants needed but it belongs)!!! thanks for the battlefield earth mindfuck i literally spit out my pepsi when i saw it at no 10

Posted by: SomethingToTakeTheEdgeOff at December 14, 2009 4:44 PM

Oh god AI, the film that would not end. I can't remember much about it except thinking far too many times 'Oh this is the end now right...this is sad...wait, no it's not. Is it?' Hated it.

Posted by: Carrie at December 14, 2009 4:45 PM

*sigh*

If Serentiy was removed form the list for lack of "sci-fi-ness", then Star Trek should be too. Both use the actual science as background for the story, instead of as a central proponent or catalyst.

Really, you should have established your definition of science fiction better. I mean, I don't care where you put your favorites or what not, but if you are going to invite the usual inane jerking-off that happens on these lists, the least you could do is be a bit more concrete in your criteria.

Posted by: The Hands Team (formerly Vermillion) at December 14, 2009 4:52 PM

Look, I know that it is hipster-col to rag on the Matrix sequels but at least you should have listed ReLoaded or the Animatrix compilation.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 14, 2009 4:53 PM

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 14, 2009 4:29 PM

That's my boy. Nothing if not predictable.

Posted by: Skewicide Blonde at December 14, 2009 4:53 PM

Really, you should have established your definition of science fiction better.

Posted by: The Hands Team (formerly Vermillion) at December 14, 2009 4:52 PM

------------------------------------------

What he said.

You can't have a consistent, serious, list where you lump Children of Men with Pitch Black (which I love but falls more into action Sci-Fi NOT Science Fiction)

You are confusing two different genres.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 14, 2009 4:56 PM

I'm not even going to gripe. I'm just happy to see SOME Science Fiction up in this bitch.

Posted by: admin at December 14, 2009 5:01 PM

Excellent choices for #1 & 2.

I've seen Primer twice now, and I still get lost with trying to figure out how many times who has gone back to when... I just can't pay close enough attention.

I really really want to see Moon. Is it out on DVD yet?

Posted by: MelBivDevoe at December 14, 2009 5:03 PM

I hadn't thought about that way of looking at Minority Report (think I've only seen it once), but will definitely watch it again with that in mind. Pretty bleak.

Posted by: Carrie at December 14, 2009 5:05 PM

"the fantastically done Mission: Impossible III, (insert sarcasm here) and Orci and Kurtzman’s writing and producing credits include “Alias” “Fringe.” and TRANSFORMERS 1 and 2."

THERE, I fixed it for you, leaving Transformers out of their credits EVERY time Pajiba talks about these people smacks of agenda.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 14, 2009 5:08 PM

Dude, excellent, excellent list. Thanks for loving sci-fi as much as the rest of us geeks!!

Posted by: Jelinas at December 14, 2009 5:11 PM

And, if we are talking about science fiction as "using fictional science to explore questions", then I submit:

Paycheck.

Yeah, Paycheck. Ben Affleck, Giamatti, all that. In fact, I thought the ending played out a lot better than the original short story. Hey, I love PKD as much as anyone, but some of his stories tended to just drift off as he sobered up, and this was one of them. At least with the movie, there was an actual question of using the machine, rather than petering out 2/3rds into the story.

Posted by: The Hands Team (formerly Vermillion) at December 14, 2009 5:17 PM

Really, you should have established your definition of science fiction better.

Really, you should have expected their definition of science fiction to not be spelled out. Verm, you've been around this block long enough to understand that if they did in fact include a set of concrete criteria, just as much of the "usual inane jerking-off that happens on these lists" would be about said criteria as the listed movies themselves.

I do enjoy that you and Slim are agreeing on things. One step closer to you two finally making out.

Posted by: branded at December 14, 2009 5:17 PM

In the same vein as Paycheck I respectfully submit:

The 6th Day

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 14, 2009 5:24 PM

Eh, Minority Report was dumber than a pack of 10 dogs, chock full of plot contrivances that exist only because the screenwriters were too lazy or incompetent to think of a way around the corners they'd written themselves into.

Posted by: Soylent Green is Sheeple at December 14, 2009 5:33 PM

What, no love for "the Butterfly effect"?!

(Cue Family Guy..."I got the idea for this panic room when I saw that movie. You know, 'the Butterfly Effect'...and thought 'if only there was some place to go, to get away from this awful movie.'")

But seriously, great list. BUT I'd knock "Pitch Black" off and replace with "Equilibrium".

Great low-budget dystopia movie, and "gunkata" *was* pretty unique (and frankly, I liked Equilibrium's more restrained version of it better than UltraViolet's over-the-top rendition).

Posted by: Jacktrade at December 14, 2009 5:34 PM

I love Equilibrium, Jacktrade. Plus, that movie stars Christian Bale, Sean Bean, Taye Diggs, and Dominic Purcell. So... I guess it could be the list of "Top Ten Beefcake Movies" if nothing else. (Probably not the support you were hoping for)

Posted by: MelBivDevoe at December 14, 2009 5:43 PM

MelBivDevoe, no. ;-)

I'd even forgotten about Sean Bean being in there though. Doesn't having him in a movie automatically give it web list cred?

Posted by: Jacktrade at December 14, 2009 5:48 PM

Although I did comment on the degree of sci-fi-ness for some of these titles, I thought Seth was pretty clear that wasn't the reason that he left Serenity off. He just didn't think it was as good a stand-alone film as these other ten. I thought he stated his mission well enough: these are the ten best films of the last ten years that he considers to be "sci-fi."

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 5:59 PM

Soylent Green Is Sheeple >> Still dumber than a pack of 10 dogs if you interpret the ending per the link above?

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 6:02 PM

I thought leaving off Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind was o.k. given its inclusion on the love stories list. I don't like to think of it as sci-fi, but I understand the argument. Of course, V For Vendetta has now cropped up on two lists, so I guess that rule is not unbreakable.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 6:05 PM

Eh, Minority Report was dumber than a pack of 10 dogs, chock full of plot contrivances that exist only because the screenwriters were too lazy or incompetent to think of a way around the corners they'd written themselves into.

Posted by: Soylent Green is Sheeple at December 14, 2009 5:33 PM

I agree. It started off solid and had some cool elements, but it completely fizzled. Tom Cruise chasing his eyeball around? The pre-cog lady using her pre-cog abilities (which were supposed to be limited) to guide Tom Cruise to hide behind balloons and give homeless people change?

It got terribly silly.

I really liked V For Vendetta. I love the comic and while it wasn't 100% faithful, I thought it worked very well as an adaptation.

Posted by: Forbiddendonut at December 14, 2009 6:05 PM

you've been around this block long enough to understand that if they did in fact include a set of concrete criteria, just as much of the "usual inane jerking-off that happens on these lists" would be about said criteria as the listed movies themselves.

Those arguments was more about the idea of "best" or "favorite", terms that are inherently subjective and invite complaint. That I have no problem with.

But Seth made a point to delineate between science fiction and movies with "sci-fi" elements. And I quote:

Science fiction done right isn’t just about high-gloss technology, aliens, dystopia, alternate histories, nanotechnology, clones, robots, time travel, space travel, spaceships and off-world exploration, etc. Sure, great science fiction often has one or more of these elements and, done right, that stuff is f’ing cool. But the best science fiction uses these themes and elements, or ones like them, as tools to explore.

He even made a point to use this as the reason for avoiding Serenity on the list. So either he didn't stick to it, or there were some aspects he did not make clear, because quite a few choices on this list are just as suspect.

Of course, he could just decided he didn't want to hear a bunch of knuckleheads bragging about how they didn't like Serenity (like it is something to be proud of), so he came up with a flimsy reason to leave it off.

Like I said, I don't really care about what is on the lists. All they do fro me is remind me of films I liked, and films I might want to check out. But if he wants to engender controversy and get the villagers to whip out the pitchforks again, the least he could do was be consistent.

Posted by: The Hands Team (formerly Vermillion) at December 14, 2009 6:07 PM

Although I did comment on the degree of sci-fi-ness for some of these titles, I thought Seth was pretty clear that wasn't the reason that he left Serenity off. He just didn't think it was as good a stand-alone film as these other ten. I thought he stated his mission well enough: these are the ten best films of the last ten years that he considers to be "sci-fi."

You are indeed correct. I do apologize for that misconception.

But I still think he was far too forgiving with the criteria. I am not saying all the movies weren't good; I am saying they weren't all sci-fi, according to his deifnition.

Posted by: The Hands Team (formerly Vermillion) at December 14, 2009 6:11 PM

I thought he stated his mission well enough: these are the ten best films of the last ten years that he considers to be "sci-fi."

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 5:59 PM

------------------------------------------

Then he does a disservice to films such as District 9, Moon, Children of Men by categorizing them as "Sci-Fi."

Sci-Fi is Science Fiction's retarded cousin.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 14, 2009 6:11 PM

Sorry Pissboy & Darth, the Helmets have to violently disagree with you on the merits of AI. I'll concede off the top it had an interesting idea behind it, but it was slow. Damn slow. Slow enough to disengage me from an interesting idea and make me resentful I'd bothered to talk lady/nurse mrs helmet into coming to see it. And I know from slow, I love me some Solaris when the mood is right. AI was crawling with Pinnochio-isms, and was almost more cloying than Pollyanna. I understand and respect that Kubrick's a great director (but hey, speaking of slow, I hated 2001 as well!), and his part of the film was more tolerable than Spielberg's (anyone else notice the homage to Star Wars in it?), but on the whole, the execution was just weak. The pacing killed whatever interest there could have been in a possibly-compelling storyline, and the change in directors was so jarring as to almost make it a new movie toward the end. Fail.

Posted by: lordhelmet at December 14, 2009 6:17 PM

"Spielberg's (anyone else notice the homage to Star Wars in it?)..."

Please elaborate.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 14, 2009 6:20 PM

BarbadoSlim >> O.k. I'm just not the sort of warrior-geek who cares about parsing "sci-fi" vs. "science fiction" into a semantics war. I use it as shorthand as opposed to distinguishing a lesser genre. I'd just assume anything called "sci-fi" be up to the standards for which I deem "science fiction."

lordhelmet >> What do you mean by the "change in directors"? There was only one director. It was Kubrick's story, but he was dead by the time filming started. Now maybe I'm the one parsing semantics, but the way you described the film as being two separate "parts" has me confused. Regardless, you think it's slow. I don't. There's not really any place for to go on that aspect of the discussion.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 6:32 PM

I absolutely loved Moon and am thrilled to see that it made the list. My brother and I saw this at the cheap seats during a double feature and were blown away at how well done it was. I kinda saw the ending coming before it got there, but the way that they handled it, and where they ultimately take it, was amazing. Also, as previously stated, Sam Rockwell gets a pass from me in anything else he appears in based on that movie alone. He can do no wrong by me.

Sunshine, in no uncertain terms, should have made this list somewhere, somehow. Say what you will about the third act, the film is amazing and Cillian Murphy... just... my god. I had only seen him in Red Eye at that point and was surprised he had the chops to pull it off.

The only film on this list I haven't seen is Timecrimes, and judging from Baconface up there, I should rearrange my Netflicks que immediately.

For the record, fuck AI and Minority Report. They were mildly entertaining at best, but solid sci-fi they were not. AI especially long outlasted its welcome. It should have ended with the little bastard frozen at the bottom of the ocean. Then maybe I could agree with its inclusion.

Posted by: Roaddog at December 14, 2009 6:39 PM

Shouldn't you try avoiding repetition in these lists? V for Vendetta was already in another list. Surely you could find something else if you tried hard enough. So here I suggest two different movies (I'm not very literate in science fiction, in fact I have only seen three of the movies in the list)

The Prestige. ok. I don't know whteher this classifies as science fiction but the guy is reproducing himself! That's some freaky science right there. And surely we can stretch the definition of "true magic" to be a science of some sort. Great film and very enjoyable.

I'm a Cyborg but that's OK. This could classify as a romantic comedy but for chrissakes the girl truly believes she's a cyborg, and she ends up in a mental hospital with other psychos. Medicine = Science. Cyborgs = mad science. Directed by Chan wook Park

Even if my choices don't satisfy your definition of science fiction, I'm sure we can find something to replace V for Vendetta with. Let's avoid repetition. We've got a whole decade to play around with. Don't tell me movies in the last decade have been bad. That's a lazy answer. Good and bad movies are produced every decade.

Posted by: barf at December 14, 2009 6:39 PM

oh, and Dr.Who deserves a special mention here. Not in this list obviously because it's a movie list but it's possibly the best science fiction produced in every decade since the sixties so no science fiction commentary can be complete without it. Now get on the Tardis children and let's take off.

Posted by: barf at December 14, 2009 6:45 PM

Yup to Sunshine.

As for the bleak bleakness of space, I submit Solaris. No, seriously. Maybe it slid down a bit at the end, but overall a creepy consuming space story. Actually, not entirely unlike a darker version of Sunshine.

A.I. was just horrible dreck (but then I was actually thinking to myself 'Where's Star Wars Episode II?' [covers head with hands, runs from room])

Posted by: Johnnyboy at December 14, 2009 6:46 PM

Primer and Timecrimes had little appeal to me as movies (on the level of characters or plot or visuals), there wasn't much to them besides headgames about time travel paradoxes, the kind anyone who's read time travel stories will have seen many times before (save yourself the trouble of watching Timecrimes and just read wikipedia's article on the predestination paradox and the Novikov self-consistency principle). Personally I'd replace them with Serenity and Idiocracy, but other possibilities would be Linklater's A Scanner Darkly or Spielberg's A.I. or even the recent The Road. And Avatar might end up deserving a place on the list too, we'll soon find out...

Posted by: Jesse M. at December 14, 2009 6:51 PM

I approve of this list!! Very well done!! The only one I haven't seen is Time Crimes. Moon may very well be one of my top favorite movies ever. Same with District 9 and Children of Men. And damn if I haven't seen Pitch Black 25 times and loved it every time, despite Vin Diesel whom I normally hate.
But I love EVERY movie on this list.

Sunshine was a pretty darn cool movie too.

Posted by: Eva at December 14, 2009 6:52 PM

Good call for A Scanner Darkly jesse. I had forgotten about that.

Posted by: barf at December 14, 2009 6:57 PM

Can't believe I forgot A Scanner Darkly.

Also, lordhelmet, I just reread your post. Should I be worried about the fact that you feel compelled to "violently disagree"? Is bloodshed pending? Is my life in danger? :- )

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 7:07 PM

And I like Solaris quite a bit as well. I'm just embarrassed to mention it because then I have to admit I've never gotten around to watching the original.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 7:09 PM

Soylent Green Is Sheeple >> Still dumber than a pack of 10 dogs if you interpret the ending per the link above?

Yes, because most of the dumb happens long before he gets caught and halo'd.

There's the encounter with Dr. Eddie, who Anderton sent away for a lovely sojurn of prison rape, who essentially declares revenge in nearly as many words ("and now to return the favor ..."), in an extended sequence that builds menace and forboding, only to be resolved with Dr. Eddie taking his "revenge" by leaving moldy, spoiled food in the refrigerator. That's sure fair revenge for several years of ass-rape in the prison shower.

That's pretty dumb (and unbelievable).

Then there's the little matter of the fact that in the future, security admins can't be bother to revoke the clearance of a man on the run for murder, into not only a high security building, but also into the inner sanctuum containing the most important crime fighting forces in the entire city, when all that could be accomplished by a couple of key strokes and is S.O.P. *ANYWHERE* with that level of security.

That's massively dumb (and unbelievable).

And then there's the fact that Anderton escapes with Agatha, the lynchpin to the most important crime fighting force and one of the most important people in the entire country, through a human sized drain in the containment tank that apparently leads straight to a FUCKING alley.

That's just indescribably dumb (and utterly unbelievable).

I mean, why don't we hear about the following conversation happening at Seaworld?

Bob: Hey, Frank, where's Shamu?
Frank: Oh, didn't you hear? Somebody pulled a lever and he swam out the Orca-sized drain that leads directly out of the park to the ocean.
Bob: Wow, that sucks! Who could have ever foreseen that accident happening?

You don't, because that would be preposterously stupid.

So, no, still dumber than 10 dogs.

Posted by: Soylent Green is Sheeple at December 14, 2009 7:18 PM

I like 10 dogs. :- (

I'll grant you all your points but the first one. For me it's just so well-made that suspension of disbelief applies.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 7:22 PM

And by "well-made" I mean that the rest of the film is grounded and gritty enough that I can give those parts a little latitude.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 7:24 PM

I'll grant you all your points but the first one. For me it's just so well-made that suspension of disbelief applies.

Yeah. Kinda like Transformers.

[backs out. shuts door]

Posted by: Johnnyboy at December 14, 2009 7:25 PM

Johnnyboy >> *rolls eyes* Troll much?

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 7:30 PM

Yeah, okay I'm new, but I gotta side with Sheeple on this one. I was thinking about Minority Report, but it's just always struck me as standard fare. No disrespect. It looks great, interesting concept, good sci-fi provenance, but it just lacks something that leaves you going "wow."

Posted by: Johnnyboy at December 14, 2009 7:35 PM

although people say the clooney solaris was somewhat a misfire, i think it holds up, to the original, even partially the great novel; the original was tarkovsky(sp) and some deep shit but what i translate as the "misfireryness" brings that extra element of sci fi creepy awkward what the fuck but hellyeahness;i rented right along with punch drunk love way back and that was beautiful double feature

Scanner darkly, tight, not too mention downey jr wiggin' at his freaky best, and proof the winona wasnt dead (to shite rom-com, to sandler curse

Posted by: furtherbeyond at December 14, 2009 7:37 PM

As I recalled it Kubrick directed the first act then died and Spielberg took over - that's how it seemed to me at the time, too, stylistically as well. If that wasn't the case then no big deal, nobody dies tonight.

The homage to Star Wars was the camera angle following the alien ship over the frozen ocean with the huge excavated trench in it - think of following the X-wing's approach over the death star in Episode IV.

Posted by: lordhelmet at December 14, 2009 7:37 PM

Really nothing to disagree with here. I know some might say Revenge of the Sith should be here, but it isn't even the best Star Wars prequel. I have no idea how it got a higher score on the Tomatometer than Return of the Jedi.

Posted by: George at December 14, 2009 7:39 PM

And how about the fact that the film never even *ATTEMPTS* to address the issue that the country is about to vote to expand the pre-cog program to the ENTIRE United States when the current pre-cogs only have range of 200 miles AND the 3 pre-cogs were only created through a program of mutant experimentation that *KILLED* most of the children that were experimented on (and that's leaving aside that the actual success rate is even lower, since 2 of the 3 pre-cogs can't function without Agatha.

I guess for me, suspension of disbelief doesn't mean suspension of common sense and logic. If a sci-fi film wants to be taken seriously (as opposed to say, Transformers), it ought to be solid enough to withstand the slightest attempt to poke pre-cog sized holes in it.

I mean, Anderton escaping with Agatha is a key component of the entire story and the fact is that the screenwriter couldn't actually come up with even a remotely believable or possible series of events to explain how that could be possible.

Like I said, lazy, sloppy writing.

Posted by: Soylent Green is Sheeple at December 14, 2009 7:39 PM

Just shut the fuck up, Hands Vermillion.

Quick question to the rest of you. I am an avid science fiction reader, but find myself constantly disappointed. I find most science fiction authors (and I might include a nod to fantasy here, also) to be shoddy authors (i.e. terrible syntax, poor grammar, etc.) with great ideas, or vice versa.

Whilst I have found a few gems (I tender Peter Hamilton as my absolute favourite), my book shelves are littered with poor science fiction. Recommendations are difficult - particularly from the internet - because it seems tolerance for shit writing is at an all time high in the modern era.

In light of my comments, may I ask for suggestions from (most) of you?

Posted by: Peter G at December 14, 2009 7:42 PM

Glad to see Pitch Black made it.

Posted by: sailboat at December 14, 2009 7:45 PM

Nice list but hard to read in parts. Proofread guys. You write (really) well, don't make sloppy mistakes.

Posted by: Jim at December 14, 2009 7:46 PM

Soylent Green is Sheeple & Johnnyboy >> Fair enough. I don't think Minority Report is the second coming of science fiction. I just enjoyed many aspects of it and thought it deserved mention with respect to this list, particularly with the inclusion of what I consider far lesser fare. As I said: it seems it was a weak decade for science fiction in film.

lordhelmet >> Yeah, it certainly seemed so, didn't it? That's one of the things I really dug about it: that Spielberg made so much of it - particularly that first act - feel so Kubrickian. I thought it an impressive and skillful display of respect.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 7:47 PM

Okay, since George went there -- one more post and then back to my homework ... and I'm not saying this to troll, but I honestly thought Attack of the Clones was second best in the series after that very first movie from 1978.

I mean, come on, young Obi Wan beating down Jango Fett? An army of jedis? I won't defend the blight that is Hayden Christensen, but Ewan McGregor was awesome. Even Temuera Morrison was great. It's Star Wars, guys, what the hell?

Posted by: Johnnyboy at December 14, 2009 7:49 PM

Soylent Green is Sheeple >> *shrug* I thought it was pretty evident that the government was covering up the ugly underpinnings of how the Precog program actually works. We have the perspective we have because we're inside the program with Anderton. The one scene in which we see what it's like from the outside we're shown that the schoolchildren are being fed PR lies.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 7:53 PM

I'm kicking myself for forgetting about A Scanner Darkly. That movie deserves much more critical acclaim than I've seen it garner in the past.

And RDJ on his way back up from his umpteenth stint in rehab/jail is hard to not like.

Posted by: Roaddog at December 14, 2009 7:57 PM

AI and Minority Report are enjoyable, but far from the best sci-fi of the decade. AI suffers because of its ending; not because it's happy, I have no problem with that, but because it's a complete deus ex machina.

I'd swap Star Trek for Serenity, as the latter as fewer gaping plot holes, but that's purely a personal preference (and, as a Firefly fan who saw every episode before the film, I find it hard to judge what it must be like to experience as a stand-alone story).

Also, this:

Sci-Fi is Science Fiction's retarded cousin.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 14, 2009 6:11 PM

It's an abbreviation. That's like saying that a romantic comedy is the intelligent, sophisticated version of a rom-com. They're the same thing.

Posted by: Daniel Hall at December 14, 2009 7:59 PM

Posted by: Johnnyboy at December 14, 2009 7:49 PM

Agreed on your point that Attack of the Clones was Obi Wan's movie. My ranking for Star Wars films goes:

Empire Strikes Back
Star Wars
Attack of the Clones
Revenge of the Sith
Phantom Menace
Return of the Jedi

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 14, 2009 8:02 PM

i forgot to say, Great list

Peter G, great sci fi tends to get taken over by lit fict, vonnegut, huxley, for me its all about that essential change of perspective, when i m taking shit too seriously, like if i m pissed at me, and i read blood meridian, i can refocus pissed at world; i have a soft spot for sci fi writing so when i m in the mood, just go in public library and pick one at random and read until it kicks in

southland tales hellyeah

is Grindhouse sci fi?

Posted by: furtherbeyond at December 14, 2009 8:03 PM

It's an abbreviation. That's like saying that a romantic comedy is the intelligent, sophisticated version of a rom-com. They're the same thing.

Posted by: Daniel Hall at December 14, 2009 7:59 PM

----------------------------------------

No, no they are not the same.

If YOU and other low-end users want to use Sci-Fi as an abbreviation for serious Science Fiction that's your prerogative but that's not how I was taught.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 14, 2009 8:06 PM

Johnnyboy >> You will find it difficult to find a greater Star Wars nerd than I am. But, yeah, I think Clones is the weakest of the six. By far, too. My blind love for Star Wars enables me to forgive many of its flaws, but that droid factory scene is like nails on a chalkboard. And as mentioned above, I really don't consider Star Wars sci-fi (or "science fiction").

Oh, and 1977. 5/25/1977, to be exact. '78 was the re-release.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 8:08 PM

Posted by: Soylent Green is Sheeple at December 14, 2009 7:18 PM

I enjoyed Minority Report, and I don't believe your concerns are merited. Bearing in mind a certain degree of suspension of disbelief, I would posit the following in response:

(1) That scene didn't establish the Doc's motivation for revenge, but merely led the viewer to incorrectly infer as such. A 'false dawn' used to ratchet up tension without requiring a plot device to propel the story forward. Coupled with the following spider scene, escape scene and chase scene, I thought it did a great job leaving the viewer wanting for a cinematic payoff that doesn't come (and, arguably, never does).

(2) Firstly, IT/admin support being on top of the little details when an employee leaves? Hahahahahahaha. Good one. I live in Australia, google 'The Age' and check out how well Victoria's forensics department is doing (the DNA mix-ups would be laughable if they aren't fucking up so many lives/reputations). Further point, the pre-cogs exist as a crime fighting department, yes, but still an experimental one - there is nothing to indicate that its design has changed from the time it was originally established. The levels of security you state exist again imply an inference from the viewer, that may or may not be justifiable, but are in no way "utterly unbelievable".

(3) Refer my paragraph (2). Also, it's a stretch to describe Agatha as one of the most important people in the entire country. Presumably (if it is to be implemented US-wide), there are many more pre-cogs and Agatha has - by and large - completed the task set before her; demonstrate the reliability of the system. Up to the public now. Drain (requirement for rapid flush - large hole), alleyway (note that it is non-external) - that caused you to find the film "utterly unbelievable". I call it needless nitpicking. Each to their own, I suppose.

I thought it was a cracking science fiction film, tightly wound together with a little bit of Spielberg fuck you.

Posted by: Peter G at December 14, 2009 8:09 PM

Posted by: Peter G at December 14, 2009 7:42 PM


Maybe try some:

Poul Anderson
Kim Stanley Robinson (start with his Mars Trilogy)
Ben Bova


I'm assuming you have read the classics (Asimov, Phillip K. Dick, Harlan Ellison, Verne etc) if not, the what the hell are you waiting for?

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at December 14, 2009 8:14 PM

Daniel Hall >> I don't agree that A.I. has a deus ex machina. The term implies victory snatched from defeat by arbitrary circumstance (again, the happy ending). That ending isn't that happy, and it's not that arbitrary either that millennia down the line sentient robots would eventually get around to excavating him. David receives his last request, but what does it really mean from a greater perspective? What does it say about humanity and the value of what we perceive as emotions? I think it's pretty damn bleak.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 8:15 PM

Okay, Darth this one is my last post and then back to the homework (probably not a good idea to be doing homework on the laptop.)

that droid factory scene is like nails on a chalkboard

Yeah ... that scene was horribly very Mario Brothers.

But if the series is great for being a good story well told, then I'd offer that no small chunk of that story is finally delivered in Episode II.

Posted by: Johnnyboy at December 14, 2009 8:29 PM

We're all but "low-end users" in BarbadoSlim's world.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 8:31 PM

Johnnyboy >> It's the only one that I can honestly say left me extremely unhappy the first time I saw it at the theater. All the other ones left a smile on my face for the first viewing. I got over it on subsequent looks, but it's still the weakest for me. Yeah, much of the important plot happens therein, but the execution seems the most lacking of the six films. Get back to your homework. I'll return to what currently passes for diligence at my job and refresh again in a few minutes.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 14, 2009 8:36 PM

no Grindhouse?

Posted by: furtherbeyond at December 14, 2009 8:52 PM

I'm not going to argue what should and shouldn't be on the list. Suffice to say I'm happy to see Moon, District 9 and I need to see Timecrimes. I'm disappointed A.I. isn't here, but its absence doesn't change my fondness.

Posted by: Cindy at December 14, 2009 9:01 PM

No Eternal Sunshine? That IS science fiction, you know.

Posted by: Mr. Tusks at December 14, 2009 9:23 PM

Just shut the fuck up, Hands Vermillion.

Uh, who the fuck are you, again?

Posted by: The Hands Team (formerly Vermillion) at December 14, 2009 10:09 PM

Posted by: Jerce at December 14, 2009 10:32 PM

BarbadoSlim:

There might be a difference to the hardcore fans; I'm the first to admit that I don't know enough about that particular world to enter into that argument. But according to 99% of the world (and according to dictionary.com), 'sci-fi' is an abbreviation of 'science fiction'. The two are interchangeable.

Which is not unusual. Most subsets of fandom have their own quirks of terminology within their niche.

PS: Using a term as relatively esoteric as "low-end user" just reinforces the notion that only a select few people acknowledge or care about the distinction between sci-fi and science fiction.

Posted by: Daniel Hall at December 14, 2009 10:56 PM

Hell yes I'm feeling this list (especially the # 1 pick...that would be mine too!). The aughts rended slim pickings as far as science fiction flicks go (the comic flick boom made sure of that) but it was a case of quality over quantity. I'll feel reeaally really stupid saying it but I skipped on watching Timecrimes on Cinemax the other day since it seemed so boring. Me being the Lost-lover I am, that synopses does make it seem up my alley, in a Primer-ish sort of way (though I've been trying to get a physical copy of that one for a looong time...to no avail).

As for movies that were left off the list, I think Sunshine has no business being in here. Oh sure, it had nice, would-be iconic (damn you Linkin Cack for messin' that up) visuals and the first half of the movie was good, but then the whole "monsters...in SPACE" thing happened and...well. I guess the Danny Boyle sci-fi thing-to-go-to still remains 28 Days Later (oh no he didn't go there!). The Matrix sequels (especially Revolutions)...way to instantly destroy my naive teenaged expectations, Wankowskis.

The one movie that I'd say merits inclusion is Battle Royale...the addition of automatic weaponry and wanton dismemberment made watching high school interpersonal dynamics playing out surprisingly palatable (to my shriveled, blackened shell of a heart that is). Any other ones? Oh yeah, Superbad...only the speculative nature of science fiction lets us explore the ramifications of Christopher Mintz-Plasse's cock doing anything other than shriveling in perennial forced-chastity hell (ok, obvious joke is obvious).

Posted by: Pancho at December 14, 2009 10:59 PM

district 9 was so overrated. pure garbage. the acting was awful, the plot was predictable and boring, the stereotypes were offensive, and the theme of apartheid was just about as subtle as Crash's theme of "there is racism". this movie was so pretentious it made me want to punch a baby. SOMEONE, please defend district 9.

Posted by: thrillho at December 14, 2009 11:29 PM

...it was fun.

There. Defended.

Posted by: Daniel Hall at December 14, 2009 11:32 PM

Hello? The Fountain? Anybody? Wtf. :(

Posted by: Maddie at December 14, 2009 11:36 PM

SOMEONE, please defend district 9.

If you are gonna troll, don't be obnoxiously blatant about it.

Posted by: The Hands Team (formerly Vermillion) at December 14, 2009 11:58 PM

Maddie, I loved The Fountain. Even with an ending I disliked, I thought it was a gorgeous thing--for the visuals, for the acting and for the story (except for the ending).

But really, I don't think it counts as science fiction. I'd call it fantasy. (I'd also call it well worth seeing, any of you who missed it.)

Posted by: Jerce at December 15, 2009 12:04 AM

You shouldn't punch babies. Please get this impulse of yours under control.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 15, 2009 2:08 AM

Not a bad list, although I hate 3D animation and have therefore never seen Wall-E. My time travel-lovin' self would have both Primer (one of my favourite movies ever ever ever) and Timecrimes higher. Also, no Futurama? The first and fourth movies were pretty great.

Thought V was kinda meh, Star Trek was fun and Children of Men hugely overrated (but still very good). I'd definitely have slotted A Scanner Darkly, Minority Report and Sunshine in there.

Posted by: bendiagram at December 15, 2009 4:16 AM

My workplace firewall finally id'd Pajiba as an entertainment site, so now I'm stuck with after commenting 24 hours after the fact. Fuckers.

This list reinforces the slim pickings for science fiction this decade. There's a strong few, but that fact that Wall-E could even be considered much less included has to suggest that there is very little talent working within the genre.

Sci-fi vs science fiction. The former may have started as a simple contraction of the latter, but both terms have evolved to develop specific meanings, at least in the mind of fans.

Basically:
"Science Fiction"- happy enough with the definition in the article. Science fiction acknowledges the science element of the equation and explores the potential ramifications of contemporary situations. Children of Men referenced a host of them: environment, the police state, social breakdown, etc.

Sci-Fi uses the trapping of the genre, but doesn't concern itself with the details. Technology is either a MacGuffin, deus ex machina or an excuse for the FX department to blow it's budget (in the case of the Matrix sequels, all 3). Aliens are either a convenient excuse for a monster/demon or noble savage/beast. As for consistency with actual science, the link is tenuous at best.

And Peter G: Haven't really considered your question, I'm too stuck on figuring out what the hell your problem is. Why precede a reasonable question with an unexplained demand for a commenter- who from what I saw was on topic- to shut the fuck up?

Posted by: Squirrelgripper at December 15, 2009 4:25 AM

as much hype as ive heard over primer... seriously that shit is weak. good example of a high concept boned by poor acting and writing.

Posted by: farik at December 15, 2009 11:58 AM

Fuck Alan Moore. Fuck him right up his nostril. Either quit bitching about adaptations of your work, or QUIT WHORING OUT THE MOVIE RIGHTS. You can't have it both ways, Alan, you pretentious tit.

Posted by: Craig at December 15, 2009 1:40 PM

I would have added "I am Legend" over "Primer". I expecially like the way Francis Lawrence subtly develops the humanity of the zombie creatures. Smith just treats them like guinea pigs but they prove to be emotional and intelligent. Now that I think about it I would place "28 Days Later" on the list as well. It is a monster movie that does a good job of asking who is the real monster. Maybe the reviewers consider zombie flicks to be more horror than SciFi but I don't.

Posted by: ironmike at December 15, 2009 4:14 PM

I have nothing terribly productive to add, but I just want to say Donnie Darko totally fucked up my Easter after I saw it. Went to church on Easter and they had a person in a bunny suit. I couldn't see it without the Donnie Darko bunny creature super-imposed over it in my mind. I have enough issues with clowns and people in animal suits without another freakout layer added. OK, trying not to think about it--must clear mind before nighty-night time....

Posted by: lainiefig at December 15, 2009 10:47 PM

Great list. Children of Men was incredible. District 9 rocked. Wall-E, Moon, Star Trek. Yea...this list is awesome. And the Battlefield Earth Joke had me dying.

Posted by: Littlejon2001 at December 16, 2009 12:52 AM

Craig: Have you considered that maybe he doesn't own the rights to some of his work? I have no idea if that's the case, but it's worth examining.

Posted by: Brenton at December 16, 2009 2:19 PM

"Science Fiction"- happy enough with the definition in the article. Science fiction acknowledges the science element of the equation and explores the potential ramifications of contemporary situations. Children of Men referenced a host of them: environment, the police state, social breakdown, etc.
Posted by: Squirrelgripper at December 15, 2009 4:25 AM

Sorry, the police state and social breakdown have something to do with science? Where are the science elements in the equation? (And a dystopic future does not count as science.)

Posted by: Brenton at December 16, 2009 2:24 PM

Brenton >> That reminds me of my M.D. father's quip to my PhD (in clinical psych) sister that she's not a "real doctor." Perhaps it's not as traditional for the genre, but one could make the argument that social "sciences" count.

Regardless, I suppose you could make the claim that the premise of the sterility of the human race qualifies as medical "science," even if it is left as unexplained.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at December 16, 2009 5:01 PM

As a bona fide holder of a typical social sciences degree (history/poli-sci), I am entirely comfortable acknowledging that the soft social sciences have at best a tenuous claim on the word science. And that's being generous.

Nevertheless, fair point.

Posted by: Brenton at December 17, 2009 5:53 PM

"Battlefield Earth: A Saga of the Year 3000 (2000)" There really is no justification for this.

Posted by: D at December 21, 2009 6:13 PM

I am one of those die-hard AI defenders, and feel that it belongs on this list as well. Maybe in the place of Primer, which seemed to think that being "clever" is the same thing as being simultaneously boring and confusing. I think the ending of AI, the epilogue that people feel is some kind of Spielbergian "tacked on" happy ending are missing the point. If you read the film as a posthuman fairy tale being told by a mecha (Ben Kingsley's voiceover) FOR mechas, it's the only ending that makes sense, and the only one that could possibly comfort all those poor, abandoned machines.

And even if you don't read the story as a fairy tale, the notion that the only resolution that poor David can get is generated by fellow mechas, who have to lie to him to convince him they've cloned his "mother" (so they can, in essence put him down, though they call it sending him to the land "where dreams come from") is pretty chilling, and totally Kubrickian. And it was, apparently, all there in Stanley's draft of the script, so it's not something Spielberg pulled out of his ass to create a feel-good movie. In fact, the ending is pretty bleak: no human does anything nearly so generous for David.

Posted by: maxcastle at December 21, 2009 9:28 PM

That list is Horrendous - defending Battlefield Earth as not being the worst movie of all-time is one thing, but putting it on this list is just embarrassing. District 9 was all hype, and so was V for Vendetta. Children of Men was decent. This list looks like you don't even watch movies, just listen to dumb, uneducated masses. Except for Wall-E - Holler.

Posted by: Andy at December 22, 2009 12:31 AM

LOL @ Dumbass above me.... read the entire thing.

Posted by: ohilove at December 26, 2009 10:53 AM

Surely The Prestige deserves a mention here? Great performances, great plot and twist, great ambience, and it bears up very well on repeat viewings.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind should probably also be on here, but it got best film of the decade so I guess that's excusable.

Posted by: Sir Thursday at December 30, 2009 4:53 PM

Seriously dudes, Battlefield Earth? I don't even have to make a joke because you're obviously making it for me. Danny Boyle's Sunshine or Darren Aranofsky's The Fountain are much more deserving to be on the list than that worthless piece of dribble. Just insanely poorly executed. Although mad props for including Moon and Primer. Great great flicks.

Posted by: TheAntiochFirm at January 4, 2010 12:42 PM

@ The dude above me.... AGREED!! Every word. You can't make a best of the 2000s' sci-fi without including The Fountain...

...or A Scanner Darkly.

Good call on including Primer and Children of Men (although I wouldn't place it at number 1)

And seriously... People need to lose their Avatar boners. Okay, so the visuals were ridiculously awesome, but come ON... The story was ludicrous. Lol.

Posted by: Phabuloso at January 14, 2010 5:25 PM

Spielberg is a God among men. Pure genious.

Posted by: Lucila Kehm at February 7, 2010 12:46 PM

Okay, it was a motivation for me. I am considering my own weblog

Posted by: Wen Tototzintle at March 13, 2010 7:06 PM

battle field earth the third worst film of all time

Posted by: EVIL at April 7, 2010 7:53 PM

I'll take your excerpt from your Moon review and run with it. It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for an insanely well funded sci-fi movie to be any damn good. If you don't have the money for CGI, you'd better have a damned good script. Conversely, the more money you have for CGI, the less you're going to worry about how good your script is. That is why it is the only genre where I am consistently more interested in the independents than I am in the big budget. And, if I do get excited about a big budget sci-fi, it's because I know the director/writer from an independent that blew me away.

Posted by: Gwen at June 15, 2010 4:39 PM

Battlefield Earth was horrendous. Why is it on this list?

Posted by: Jason at July 5, 2010 11:13 AM

pretty good list but i cannot understand the love for 'children of men'. i cringed the whole way through. clumsy dialogue, wooden acting and plot cliche after plot cliche. waste of michael caine. what film were you guys watching?

moon was great as were district 9 and primer. star trek was embarrasing. taking all the tension out of spock's struggle with emotion over reason in one film that the original maintained for it's entire run.

Posted by: doubledown at July 20, 2010 11:39 AM

Yossarian speaks truth, delete Battlefield Earth (wtf?) and replace it with the excellent Sunshine.

Posted by: norm at August 7, 2010 7:25 PM





Post a comment

 (required)

 (required)


Preview of your comment:



Video ads popping up after each page view? Try clearing your browser's cookies.



Related Posts with Thumbnails









twitter_badge-thumb-300x110-5250.jpg facebook-thumb-300x112-5252.jpg




recentreview.jpg