The Science Fiction Top 10 is notable for having what is arguably the least disputable number one on all of these lists in 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968). Even after two decades, the film remains gorgeous and convincing-looking, and still capable of provoking debate about technology, the nature of intelligence, and humanity's identity and place in the universe. It has left an indelible mark on how the future, and how space and space travel, is visualized and imagined, especially, but not exclusively, on film. It's a masterful work, and it's difficult for me to think of a more deserving selection for the top of this list. At the same time, this Top 10 has its share of both puzzling selections and curious absences.
E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial (1982) at number three leaves much to be desired. Not only does the movie not hold up to repeated viewing, but it also barely qualifies as science fiction. True, the AFI's definition of this genre calls for “imaginative speculation”, but it also states that such speculation be 'married' with a “scientific or technological premise”. Of all the films on the list, E.T. offers the barest of such premises. Does it make any difference that E.T. was left behind by a space ship as opposed to, say, simply getting lost on the way back to his/her/its underground burrow in the woods? I don't think it does.
Most of the films on the list are largely “soft” science fiction; not a phrase I'm terribly fond of, but it does usefully distinguish between works based in well-established theory, practice, and knowledge in the natural and physical sciences from those that spring from the margins and wild fringes of those fields and those that are, perhaps, more about speculation in the social, rather than the natural and physical, sciences. The original Star Wars (1977) is a good example of the former, while A Clockwork Orange (1971) is a good example of the latter. But, unlike E.T., I think that the science, however “soft” it maybe, matters to those films. The kind of alien otherness that E.T. represents does not need to be extra terrestrial, and it seems frankly doubtful that her/his/its form has much relationship to whatever is “known” about the possibilities of non-Earth life. E.T. strikes me as pure fantasy, and, indeed, a film that seemingly satisfies the AFI's criteria for that genre better than some of the selections that actually are on that list (mind you, I'm not advocating that E.T. replace any of those movies).
The Matrix (1999) immediately stands out as an important omission from this Top 10. Think what you want about where the Wachowskis went after this movie, the original is and was culturally and aesthetically important and influential. As science fiction, it, and its larger storyworld, are more interesting and provocative than that of Star Wars, and no one seems to have held George Lucas' later sins against him in evaluating his movie. I still find myself wanting to puzzle out Reloaded (2003) and Revolutions (2003), while I just avoid the other Star Wars films after Jedi (1983), and even here I often tune out after Han Solo is rescued.
The remaining films on the list are all reasonable selections, although I would make an argument for Brazil (1985) instead of, say, Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991). But at that point I think I've entered the realm of personal taste beyond that of critical judgment and analysis (which is to suggest, while I think E.T. does not belong on this list, I can see the argument for T2, not only as a matter of that film actually being science fiction, but being good science fiction).
Comments