On 7/24/2016 4:00 AM, clipka wrote:

>
> I guess we need to differentiate between "crappy movie" and "movie with
> crappy story".
>

I hadn't thought of that. How true.

But the truth is. I just don't like "the movies". I get bored and fight 
to stay awake. A bit like putting a cover over a budgerigar's cage. My 
eyelids go down with the lights.

> I think Stephen is right

I'll put this date in my diary. :)


> in that only few Science Fiction movies are
> plausible enough in their storytelling to qualify as having a non-crappy
> story. But that's an ailment of the entire Science Fiction genre, not
> just the movies.
>

A lot of them are cowboys in space. There is one I saw that could have 
been called. "The ray guns of the magnificent seven." Robert Vaughn was 
in it for continuity. :)

> "2001 - A Space Odyssey", for instance, is an outstanding movie
> /despite/ its story being rather simple, bordering on weak (except
> wherever it touches the mystical, at which point story abruptly gives
> way to the unexplained).
>

Yes, that was good, best in class. It was an art movie a wonderful 
adaptation of a short story.

On 7/24/2016 3:40 AM, clipka wrote:

 >>
 >> Then you've not seen many SF Moves. They are all crap. Except for
 >> Forbidden Planet.
 >
 > I'd disagree. For instance, I'd say "I, Robot" had a quite good story,
 > thanks to Asimov's legacy.

I've not seen it so I could not possibly comment. :)

I've just read a bit of its Wiki page and take your word for it being 
good. It does not refresh my memory of the stories very well.
But they took the idea and ran with it.




 > "The day the earth stood still" was also
 > good, and the story of "Metropolis" was pretty wild, but certainly a
 > work of genius for its time.
 >

Two cinema classics and Science Fiction-y too.

I liked the day of the Triffids. It is a bit dated now but still one to 
put on a list.

 > I think what you really want to say is that you simply don't dig Science
 > Fiction movies.
 >

Yes, they have mostly been a disappointment. My imagination is much 
better than whatever can be put on a screen.

 > Besides, note that I used the comparative (well, I /tried/ to use it
 > anyway). Even among crap there's good solid crap, painfully hard crap,
 > grossly soft crap -- and amorphous plain bullshit.
 >

I see that you are a scatologist of the highest order.


 >>
 >> Not Too Bright? (NTB)
 >
 > Nah, I guess it was more the fascination of first encounter -- the first
 > encounter with a level of crappiness never experienced before.
 >

You get some dreadfully bad moves that are a joy to watch.
If you're medicated. ;)


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message