The 2nd Science Fiction Hall of Fame

Tools    





Liquid Sky (1982) - Like Cosmic, I was googling for obscure and under-seen great sci fis...and Liquid Sky kept coming up. I know Joel said he likes this film and so I'm thrilled to see it nominated. The whole 80s vibe looks cool to me. I've not seen it before.
I had two candidates for this. The other one was Monsters (2010). After rewatching them I did similar Googling as you. I didn't find any other good noms but the fact that Liquid Sky appeared on so many lists and sites encouraged me to go with it. Seems like it has some serious UG reputation.

And Joel likes Liquid Sky even more than I do. At least based on his 5/5 review.
__________________



"Money won is twice as sweet as money earned."



28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds
Guess what though, the film I was going to nominate ended up nominated anyways. Coherence.
If there was another film you were considering, you could join late with that one. Or if you want to participate and send a list without adding a new film, that's fine as well.

Ok. I’ll nominate tonight. Just gotta eat dinner first.



Think you used enough dynamite there, Butch?
I definitely like Videodrome way more than either of those.


I had a similar experience. I saw it by myself in theatres, but was really on the fence about it. I thought that my expectations for the film maybe got in the way a little. After some consideration, I went again a week later with one of my friends, and liked it a bit more. My friend absolutely hated it though, and didn't want to watch it a second time. I'm not sure how I'd feel about it now if I had to watch it again.
For me there seemed a little rough spots in the flow of it and seeing Simon Pegg play such a d!ckhead was so much out of what I'm used to with him I had a very hard time dealing with it on the first watch.
__________________
They say: that after people make love there's a kind of melancholia, the petite mort, the little death. Well, I'm here to tell you, after a romantic night with yourself there's a very acute sensation of failed suicide. ~Dylan Moran



I had two candidates for this. The other one was Monsters (2010)...
I just read about that, it sounds interesting. Well maybe next time. I had considered Naked Lunch, but it was tagged as sci-fi It sure seems like sci fi enough to me.



Might as well start, as I've seen my own nom very recently.

Minority Report

For me, this was a movie filled with fascinating moral questions with great characters and actors. At 2+ hours it is a bit of a long watch, and Spielberg definitely could have cut some of it down, but I still thoroughly enjoyed most of the film. Tom Cruise is great in this movie, and I liked his character and motivations as well. Some of the cinematography and future world building is also excellent. Basically this film was a five star film until the ending, where it becomes a four star film. Spielberg ruins a possibly freakishly ambiguous ending by plastering in a classic Hollywood hero's victory. Other than that, a brilliant well made film.






Seconds (1966)
***SPOILERS***

When people think of Rock Hudson today they remember his lightweight rom-coms with Doris Day, but Rock did more serious work too. It's hard to get more serious that John Frankenheimer's 1966 Seconds. I had considered this as a nom, that's why I watched it last week.

I loved the first part of the film. It was oddly meditative with long scene takes and flowing edits that were accentuated by the cinematography of James Wong Howe, one of the greats. I was deeply interested in the character story of the brooding middle age man who pays for extensive cosmetic surgery that transforms him into a handsome younger man. Which is done at the expense of his former life, which he had to discard so as to find that important aspect of life that he had missed out on the first time around.

But as the film progressed I kept waiting for the deep truth of the film's mystery to come to fruition. I enjoyed the slow burn, the long scene take style of film making. But in the last half it never really came together for me. The film lost it's unique style when it shifted gears to the nude grape crushing scene. That scene and the way it was filmed felt more like a documentary, no doubt because there were so many people involved. The tonal shift diminished for me what was being built upon. After that the party with a drunken Rock Hudson seemed like a wasted opportunity to do more and the ending in the plastic surgery center, seemed rushed. I felt let down by the ending as I was expecting something deeper. Instead Will Geer tells the audience the meaning of the film. Breaking the cardinal rule of film making, show...don't tell. The final scene, while very dramatic, felt like it was lifted right from Rod Sterling's The Twilight Zone, which had aired on TV only a couple years before.

Even though I didn't like the movie as much as I expected, I think this is an awesome nom because it's a film that needs to be seen.

Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	seconds-1966-rock-hudson-wife-frances-reid-review.jpg
Views:	190
Size:	131.6 KB
ID:	53836  



I've only seen one other nomination other than my own, so this will be pretty new territory for me. As has been lately with HOFs, expect me to be slow yet steady.



Think you used enough dynamite there, Butch?
I just read about that, it sounds interesting. Well maybe next time. I had considered Naked Lunch, but it was tagged as sci-fi It sure seems like sci fi enough to me.
LOOOVE Naked Lunch. Been tempted to nominate it but I never seen much love for it.


And I'll be reading your Seconds review after I watch it.



I just read about that, it sounds interesting. Well maybe next time. I had considered Naked Lunch, but it was tagged as sci-fi It sure seems like sci fi enough to me.
LOOOVE Naked Lunch. Been tempted to nominate it but I never seen much love for it.


And I'll be reading your Seconds review after I watch it.
I saw it a while back and thought it was quite good.



ATTENTION ALL CREW MEMBERS!

We just passed by a damaged transport pod, and luckily we were able to rescue its occupant. After a brief check in the medical bay, he has been cleared to join our mission.

The deadline has been moved to August 3rd, 2019.

@ahwell @Citizen Rules @edarsenal @John-Connor @Nathaniel @Okay @pahaK @rauldc14 @ScarletLion @Siddon @TheUsualSuspect @Yam12


Attack the Block (2011)
Directed By: Joe Cornish
Nominated By: TheUsualSuspect
Runtime: 88 min

Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	poster-attack.jpg
Views:	867
Size:	237.2 KB
ID:	53837  



Alright, the first posts are caught up with the new nomination, deadline, and the posted reviews. As for my initial thoughts on Suspect's film:

Attack the Block - I saw this when it first came out on video, but I just couldn't get into it. Some friends of mine really liked it though, so I've been meaning to give it a second chance. Looks like that time has finally arrived haha.

I had considered Naked Lunch, but it wasn't tagged as sci-fi It sure seems like sci fi enough to me.
I would've allowed it, and not just as an excuse to watch the film again haha. This part was a little late being added to the rules, so I guess you might have missed it:

Any film that is listed on the Google information sidebar, IMDB, or Wikipedia as sci-fi is eligible for this HoF. If your film is not described as sci-fi in any of those locations, we can discuss in PM whether or not it is an appropriate nomination.





Turbo Kid (2015)
Directed By: François Simard, Anouk Whissell, Yoann-Karl Whissell
Starring: Munro Chambers, Laurence Leboeuf, Michael Ironside

If you take a campy sci-fi action flick from the 80s, throw it into a Mad Max style post apocalypse, trade the cars for BMX bikes, and sprinkle in some ridiculously over the top violence, Turbo Kid is what you end up with. The leather-clad gang members are fighting for clean water instead of gasoline this time, and the inherent goofiness of seeing everyone awkwardly dismounting small, deck-out bicycles like there's nothing uncool about it would be amusing enough in its own right without the film's added satirical elements.

With the exception of Michael Ironside, the cast mainly consists of relatively unknown and amateur actors who all commit to their parts and give great performances. The dialogue lends itself well to the occasional bout of hamminess, since the script celebrates sci-fi tropes while also pointing out their absurdity. While there are direct call-outs to films like Soylent Green, for the most part its references involve plot details and character behaviour, so your enjoyment will not be affected if you're unfamiliar with the associated media.

Turbo Kid never pretends to be anything other than a fun homage to the works that inspired it, and there's something refreshingly genuine about that. It has a child-like enthusiasm to it that I find endlessly charming. It was also made on a miniscule budget and its promotional costs were crowd funded on indiegogo, which really makes me wonder where multi-million dollar genre films are spending their money. Or maybe more filmmakers just need to go dumpster diving in Québec for their props and costumes.

Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	turbo.jpg
Views:	169
Size:	261.6 KB
ID:	53838  



Robinson Crusoe on Mars

This one was just pretty boring watch for me. There was some brilliant and beautiful visuals and scenery, but overall, I thought the characters were bossy, arrogant, or annoying, and I wish we could have seen more of the alien life in Mars, it just shows the ships (over and over again at that) bombarding the planet. There are a number of plot things that just don't check out either, and a lot of realistic things - like not being able to actually breathe on Mars - that they definitely take some artistic liberty with. Anyways, it wasn't horrible, but I don't think I'll be rewatching it again soon.




Here's the review of my own nomination which I rewatched couple of days ago.

Liquid Sky (1982) R

What could aliens possibly want if not heroin? Or maybe there's something even better available in the drug and sex driven fashion circles of New York.


This is my third viewing of Liquid Sky and despite of some rather large issues it's still very enjoyable film. It's filled with odd characters, totally insane costumes and it makes the world of fashion look as cold and heartless as it's colorful. It's a bit like sci-fi version of The Neon Demon but better.

For the most part writing is good and stylish. The hunger for fame and addiction to drugs drives its characters to cruelty and being jerks. Some, like Margaret, hide their weakness and vulnerability deep inside. Others, like Adrian, have done that so long that the hard exterior rarely breaks even when alone with her lover. There's very little warmth in this movie and even the revenge (of sorts) leaves a bitter taste.

The most notable things in Liquid Sky are its visual style and ridiculously good soundtrack. Costumes and make-ups are totally insane yet still they somehow work. I remember reading somewhere that the budget for the costumes was only few hundered dollars which makes them even more awesome. And the music fits the film almost perfectly; it's simple, amateurish but so much better than it should be.


Acting is both good and bad. First of all Anne Carlisle does really good job in her double role (so good in fact that I didn't know she was also Jimmy until I Googled about the film after my previous viewing). Other than (and partially including) that the acting is as odd as the rest of the film. I still don't know if some of the actors are just bad or are they doing a Lanthimos thing few decades early.

The biggest issue I have with Liquid Sky is the whole sub-plot about the German scientist. I honestly believe the film would be better if they'd edited that off completely. It doesn't match the mood of the rest of the film and it feels like unneeded explanation to ensure that every viewer gets what's going on. He's also the worst actor in the movie and all his scenes are poorly written.

I'm rounding up my rating (in other words I feel that 3.5 is too little but 4 is maybe a bit too much). Without the scientist stuff above I'd most likely give it .5 more.