movie that you might want to watch, and add to the list

[Michae;]

been watching "enemy mine" on amc tonight, missed the beginning, but the rest of the movie was been, well, bad. anyways, you might want to check it out!

[Nathan]

Oh, it's not nearly that bad -- a fair little flick, really.

Nathan

[Lee]

This is a personal favorite with me and my freinds. It's whack but cool. How can you not love the dialogue? "ZZZZURKIEEEEEE!" hehe

[Jay O'Connor]

It's not a sci-fi movie.  It's a character study about ignorance and predjudice and overcoming them through exposure to the 'enemy'   It just happens to use a sci-fi setting.

[Culllen]

Of course it's a science fiction movie.  It deals with the future of humanity in a (fairly) not-fantasy way.  It's based on a science fiction novel.  How can it NOT be science fiction?

Being a character study and being science fiction are not two mutually exclusive things.  A film can be both.  In fact, some of the best science fiction can be called character studies, and vise versa.

Trust me on this one.

[Flangepart]

What he said. Sci-fi has to do with how human might react to certin circumstances created, and sustained, by techological change. Space flight = first contact = interaction with alien species/scociaty = War or not war. If war, this might happen. If not war, this might happen. And if the humans are still basicly like us, you can depend on some things being consistant. Not sci-fi? Come on.

[Jay O\'Connor]

A film can be both.

It can be, but this one isn't :)

There's a difference between "Science Fiction" and "Sci-fi".  Science Fiction is where the science actually matters.  A good example is an Arthur C Clarke short story I read about solar saling where the science of gravity and space and time were crucial to the story development.  A lot of Asimov's stories, especially hos robot short stories were the same.  "Sci-fi" is closer to like Star Wars where the space environment and technology are really just the backdrop for a story that is not tied to the environment

"Enemy Mine" could easily be reset as two downed fighter pilots in the South Pacfic  in World War II (one Japanes, one American) or even two cavelry officers in the civil war.  The story would be the same.  The story is even less concerned with the particulars of the setting than Battlestar Galactica ("Wagon Train" in space)

[Culllen]

Just because EM is a better character study than science fiction doesn't eliminate it from the category, any more than being generally bad keeps "Battlestar Gallatica" from tainting the rest of the pool.  It is what it is.

Still, the more I think about it, the more I believe this is a to-may-to/to-mah-to argument.  One that doesn't really matter, in the end.  Science Fiction, Sci-Fi, or Character Study, at the end of the day you either like the movie or not.  Those are the only categories that really matter.

I still think you're wrong, however.  : )

(Incidentally, the "Battlestar Galactica ('Wagon Train'" in space)" comment cracked me up.  As I recall, that was how Gene Roddenberry sold "Star Trek" all those years ago.  Talk about diffrent takes on the same premise...)

[Jay O'Connor]

Just because EM is a better character study than science fiction doesn't eliminate it from the category, any more than being generally bad keeps "Battlestar Gallatica" from tainting the rest of the pool. It is what it is.



I probably overstated my case.  



My point is that if you saw the box with aliens and spaceships and stuff and were expecting fairly typical sci-fi fair, you would be disappointed because the movie was much more internal and character oriented than what you would normally expect in the sci-fi section of the video store.   Not that's is not sci-fi in an absolute sense but that's it's not 'typical' sci-fi in an expected sense.  If you were expecting normal sci-fi, you might think it a bad movie, but if you take it on it's own terms, it's pretty good


(Incidentally, the "Battlestar Galactica ('Wagon Train'" in space)" comment cracked me up. As I recall, that was how Gene Roddenberry sold "Star Trek" all those years ago. Talk about diffrent takes on the same premise...)



I knew I heard that term somewhere...

[Culllen]

"My point is that if you saw the box with aliens and spaceships and stuff and were expecting fairly typical sci-fi fair, you would be disappointed because the movie was much more internal and character oriented than what you would normally expect in the sci-fi section of the video store."

Can't argue with that.

[AkiraTubo]

The problem with Enemy Mine is that it gives you its message in such simplistic terms.  It's storytelling is almost on the level of a children's movie but then they throw in something brutal like the slave ship captain dragging around the seemingly dead Drac kid.  I don't think the filmmakers knew who their target audience was supposed to be.

However, I'll give it points for being one of the few movies in which believing in a religion isn't seen as a character flaw.

[john]

I like Enemy Mine, but it has its problems. Like Quaid's character says he'd never seen a Drac before, but then when the slave ship lands, he says that they're tolerated because they capture Dracs. If they're so common that slavers use them, how come he's never seen one before? You think he'd have at least pictures of them.

 Also, is it just my imagination or in the scene where the old Drac comes over to him, does the Drac in the center in the back look like Louis Gossett?