# Entertainment weekly picks the Best Sci Fi movies and TV from the past 25 years **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [January 7, 2008, 3:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566 "2008-01-07T03:12:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Darwins\_Finch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darwins_finch/32/20304_2.png) [@Darwins\_Finch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darwins_Finch)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2008, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/41 "2008-01-07T19:47:51Z")
Upon further reflection, I can accept that the presence of alien life in a movie is sufficient to classify it as “science fiction” (and, by extension, I would say that “monster” movies in general would similarly qualify, even if the monsters are native Earth creatures). Thus, _Aliens_, _Starship Troopers_, and _Total Recall_ get a pass. But that also opens up a whole bunch of other movies for possible inclusion (though maybe not; most monster movies really aren’t that good…). Of course, many such monsters are the product of science-gone-awry anyway, so fall neatly into the “science fiction” category. _Lost_, I suppose, could fall into the category of “technological advances”, what with plane-destroying magnets and tree-smashing, soul-revealing smoke-tentacles and all. I’m still at a loss for _Brazil_, though. If _Brazil_, then surely _1984_ (as well as the more recent _V for Vendetta_) would qualify (though, admittedly, I haven’t seen the movie so can’t verify its worth among the so-called “best”. But I can’t imagine it being worse than, say, _Heroes_). But neither really require much in the way of technological advances to become reality. > [@Bridget Burke](#): > > Many of us\* think that “speculative fiction” is, indeed, more descriptive of the field. This includes alternate histories & most stories set in the future–even when they don’t dwell on specific scientific developments. But how far into the future? If I set a movie in 2010, but have it otherwise be a “normal” drama (that is, one that doesn’t require it to be in any partilcular place or time), then can it really be considered “science fiction” by your definition? As for “alternate histories”, would that include “alternate universes”, as well? Because then _Road House_ would have to be included (as the events portrayed within could not possibly happen in our own universe)! ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2008, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/42 "2008-01-07T20:24:11Z")
I thought we did a thread on this before. Maybe I’m wrong. The list came out months ago. Probably over the summer. ---
**Author:** ![Mister\_Rik](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mister_rik/32/491_2.png) [@Mister\_Rik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mister_Rik)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2008, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/43 "2008-01-07T22:29:36Z")
[QUOTE=Boyo Jim] Am I missing a summary page? I don’t want to go through 25 links to see their crappy choices one page at a time? We have the technology to do this better. [/QUOTE] But this way, they get to make you look at 25 pages worth of ads. ---
**Author:** ![Just\_Some\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ad7895/32.png) [@Just\_Some\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Just_Some_Guy)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2008, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/44 "2008-01-07T22:47:07Z")
[QUOTE=Phase42] But this way, they get to make you look at 25 pages worth of ads. [/QUOTE] Nah, with my ad blocker I just made them pay for 25 pages worth of bandwidth. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2008, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/45 "2008-01-08T01:17:43Z")
Another omission: **The Fly** ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2008, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/46 "2008-01-08T01:57:44Z")
[QUOTE=Darwin’s Finch] I’m still at a loss for _Brazil_, though. If _Brazil_, then surely _1984_ (as well as the more recent _V for Vendetta_) would qualify. [/QUOTE] I’m surprised there’s any question about _V for Vendetta_ being science fiction. After all… the story is about a genetically engineered superhuman overthrowing a regime that established itself by staging “terrorist” attacks using manufactured pathogens. As for _Brazil_ and _1984_, well, sociology is a science, isn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2008, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/47 "2008-01-08T05:15:40Z")
Any list that has _Children of Men_ on it but doesn’t have “overated” in the title is disqualified. I’m with Zebra on this. ---
**Author:** ![cactus\_waltz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@cactus\_waltz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cactus_waltz)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2008, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/48 "2008-01-08T06:02:19Z")
I am not comfortable with labeling Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind as science-fiction. I see the connection, but the movie strikes me as one that simply uses technology as a tool to present a poetic story-telling. The technology has a central part, but I think it’s very downplayed in favor to the relationship between Carrey and Winslet. ---
**Author:** ![EsotericEnigma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e274bd/32.png) [@EsotericEnigma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EsotericEnigma)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2008, 7:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/49 "2008-01-08T07:28:45Z")
[QUOTE=cactus waltz] I am not comfortable with labeling Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind as science-fiction. I see the connection, but the movie strikes me as one that simply uses technology as a tool to present a poetic story-telling. The technology has a central part, but I think it’s very downplayed in favor to the relationship between Carrey and Winslet. [/QUOTE] Basically you’re saying that science fiction, as a genre, can not possibly be poetic or have a storyline centered around a relationship between two characters. I can not possibly disagree with this any more vehemently. It’s gone beyond “wrong” to a new word that hasn’t been coined yet. ---
**Author:** ![Mosier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ea924/32.png) [@Mosier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mosier)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2008, 7:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/50 "2008-01-08T07:31:43Z")
[QUOTE=gonzomax] Do you have to be born after 1980 to see good sci fi. ? The original War of the World belongs near the top. The original The Thing was a scary thill when I was a kid. They Came From Outerspace was great. Body Snatchers was best originally too. How about Outer Limits and The Twi Light Zone [/QUOTE] The original War of the Worlds was an awful movie, in my opinion. It’s almost downright unwatchable. ---
**Author:** ![Mosier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ea924/32.png) [@Mosier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mosier)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2008, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/51 "2008-01-08T07:35:23Z")
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers] Any list that has _Children of Men_ on it but doesn’t have “overated” in the title is disqualified. I’m with Zebra on this. [/QUOTE] I didn’t know that people considered Children of Men at all, let alone overrated. I hadn’t even heard of the movie until a friend of mine brought it to my house. I was totally unprepared for one of the most intensely powerful movie experiences of my life. ---
**Author:** ![OtakuLoki](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ac8455/32.png) [@OtakuLoki](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OtakuLoki)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2008, 8:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/52 "2008-01-08T08:00:29Z")
[QUOTE=EsotericEnigma] Basically you’re saying that science fiction, as a genre, can not possibly be poetic or have a storyline centered around a relationship between two characters. I can not possibly disagree with this any more vehemently. It’s gone beyond “wrong” to a new word that hasn’t been coined yet. [/QUOTE] It’s not like **cactus waltz** has invented that thinking. It’s a thought pattern I’ve encountered before. The best example I can think off the top of my head was a debate here on the Dope where a [poster](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5778810&postcount=100) maintained that _Flowers for Algernon_ wasn’t really SF. In spite of the fact that: [ul] [li]The story depended upon a fictional medical development that was beyond the abilities of the science of the day, and still is beyond the ability of today’s medicine. [/li][li]The story was written by an author who had worked as an editor of an SF magazine and written for many of the other SF rags.[/li][li]The story first appeared in an SF magazine. [/li][/ul] FTM it can be frustrating to read the amateur reviews of works written by non-genre writers who are tackling an idea in the general area of SF. Consider the recent novel The Time Traveller’s Wife. The last time I looked at the reviews on Amazon for that book a large number of them were seeking to reassure their audiences that this great book wasn’t _really_ SF. :rolleyes: ETA: I except professional reviews, since most of the time I find those to be completely effing useless, anyways. I’ve stopped fighting the battle, to be honest. It’s not worth the aggravation. (Of course seeing/hearing that argument from someone does usually leave me less than impressed with their reasoning abilities. And their ability to rise above stereotypes.) ---
**Author:** ![cactus\_waltz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@cactus\_waltz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cactus_waltz)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2008, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/53 "2008-01-09T00:18:12Z")
[QUOTE=EsotericEnigma] Basically you’re saying that science fiction, as a genre, can not possibly be poetic or have a storyline centered around a relationship between two characters. I can not possibly disagree with this any more vehemently. It’s gone beyond “wrong” to a new word that hasn’t been coined yet. [/QUOTE] That is not what I’m saying. For example, I experienced _2001: A space odyssey_ as both a poetic movie and a science-fiction piece. No doubt about it. What I’m saying though, is that Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind presents the story in such a way that the technical reasoning feels pretty uninteresting, it’s just there in order to tell the story. I felt the same way about John Malkovich and Adaptation too. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2008, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/54 "2008-01-09T01:34:32Z")
[QUOTE=cactus waltz] That is not what I’m saying. For example, I experienced _2001: A space odyssey_ as both a poetic movie and a science-fiction piece. No doubt about it. What I’m saying though, is that Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind presents the story in such a way that the technical reasoning feels pretty uninteresting, it’s just there in order to tell the story. I felt the same way about John Malkovich and Adaptation too. [/QUOTE] Your reasoning pretty much eliminates most of the greats of science fiction. No Bradbury, Asimov, Heinlein, Campbell… let me strike that, you eliminate most science fiction period. Your category would include Robert Forward and a few others. Maybe half a book shelf. ---
**Author:** ![Mister\_Rik](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mister_rik/32/491_2.png) [@Mister\_Rik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mister_Rik)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2008, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/55 "2008-01-09T02:29:54Z")
Interestingly, this thread is the first indication I’ve had that _Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind_ was a science fiction film. It has a title that screams “chick flick” or “feel-good movie”, and so it didn’t capture my interest. And since I don’t watch TV, I didn’t see any commercials to set me straight. So … was it any good? ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2008, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/56 "2008-01-09T02:33:24Z")
[QUOTE=cactus waltz] That is not what I’m saying. For example, I experienced _2001: A space odyssey_ as both a poetic movie and a science-fiction piece. No doubt about it. What I’m saying though, is that Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind presents the story in such a way that the technical reasoning feels pretty uninteresting, it’s just there in order to tell the story. I felt the same way about John Malkovich and Adaptation too. [/QUOTE] What you’re saying is that the science or technology of the story has to be a kind of central central character in and of itself. This was, I think, a pretty standard definition of sc-fi through through the 1950s and maybe even the the 60s. After that, you can flip a coin. Did sci-fi expand itself to include more examination of society and psychology as influenced by sciene and technology? Or did other literary forms expand themselves due to a greater realization of the impact of science and technology on the human condition? I don’t think it’s necessary to claim a particular piece of work as definitively sci-fi or something else. Those divisions are a result of niche marketing strategies by publishers. We can argue forever whether some particular book is sci-fi or not, but to what end? Is Tom Clancy is a scif-fi writer because he makes up some weapons systems that don’t exist yet, or just a big-name-no-talent techno-thriller hack? Ok, bad example, we all know he’s a hack. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![cactus\_waltz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@cactus\_waltz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cactus_waltz)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2008, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/57 "2008-01-09T03:15:48Z")
[QUOTE=Boyo Jim] What you’re saying is that the science or technology of the story has to be a kind of central central character in and of itself. This was, I think, a pretty standard definition of sc-fi through through the 1950s and maybe even the the 60s. After that, you can flip a coin. Did sci-fi expand itself to include more examination of society and psychology as influenced by sciene and technology? Or did other literary forms expand themselves due to a greater realization of the impact of science and technology on the human condition? [/QUOTE] Yes. This is why I’m not a big person of genres myself. And I’m aware of the fact that sci-fi novels can have poetic touches as well as regular fiction can have sci-fi touches (‘Slaughterhouse 5’ comes to mind). However, I still personally feel that a true sci-fi title should have a dominant technologic characteristic, and I didn’t feel Eternal… had that. Michel Gondry is first and foremost an playful imaginator. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2008, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/58 "2008-01-09T03:25:58Z")
[QUOTE=cactus waltz] Yes. This is why I’m not a big person of genres myself. And I’m aware of the fact that sci-fi novels can have poetic touches as well as regular fiction can have sci-fi touches (‘Slaughterhouse 5’ comes to mind). However, I still personally feel that a true sci-fi title should have a dominant technologic characteristic, and I didn’t feel Eternal… had that. Michel Gondry is first and foremost an playful imaginator. [/QUOTE] I have to say that sounds contradictory to me. You’re not a “big person of genres” but there is a “true” sci-fi. It seems to me you are insisting on genres, though not necessarily more than **Loach**. Your definitions simply differ. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2008, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/59 "2008-01-09T03:53:03Z")
> [@](#): > > However, I still personally feel that a true sci-fi title should have a dominant technologic characteristic, and I didn’t feel Eternal… had that. It’s _Science_ Fiction, not _Technology_ Fiction. There are plenty of stories in which technology plays no role, and an extire class – “soft” Science Fiction – in which the focus is on non-tech sciences. Ben Bova had what he called “The Hat Test” when he was editing Analog. If you can change the Hat without changing the essential story – make it from a Space Opera to a Western simply by flipping a few adjectives (“Outland”, anyone?), then it’s not really science fiction. But if you can’t pull that trick, if the science is essential to the story, then you definitely had Science Fiction. I haven’t seen Eternal Sunshine, but it sounds like it fits under this definition. So does Creator. I’m pretty liberal – I’d even acceot utland, although saying that it’s clumsily bad science fiction. ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2008, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566/60 "2008-01-09T04:05:47Z")
Any list that doesn’t include 2001 Space Oddessy on it’s list is insane. And no Star Wars movies from the original trio, but includes Clone Wars? Insane. Blade Runner, beeatches! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/entertainment-weekly-picks-the-best-sci-fi-movies-and-tv-from-the-past-25-years/432566.md?page=4)