I didn't really care for Close Encounters either, although I couldn't point to any one thing I hated. It was just sort of BTDT, which means I guess it may have just aged badly.

The Matrix to me is a monument of movie wizardry, but not a good SF movie. For one thing, I predicted the ending at about the 20-minute mark, complete with rising from the dead and seeing the code behind objects.

I'm sort of surprised Forbidden Planet didn't make it on there, since it's often bandied about on lists like these. I suppose the fact it is basically The Tempest in space may disqualify it.

From the top 10 sci-fi list:

The first two films of the original Star Wars trilogy make it onto the list probably for reasons of nostalgia rather than science.

Essentially westerns set in space....

Aren't many sci-fi movies, not just Star Wars, basically westerns in space? Or am I pulling that theory out of my ass?

I remember having a yammering argument about the "westerns in space" concept, and I think I came out with "You can't call it a western if it's based on Yojimbo" as well as "If westerns were the first true genre of movies, then all movies owe their existence to westerns, don't they?"

So, debatable. In the case of Star Wars, I'm gonna stand by the Yojimbo assessment. Just because Kurosawa movies get made into westerns does not mean they are all westerns to begin with.

While I probably liked The Matrix more than you did, Nutty (pretty!), I think part of the reason it gets onto the list is because of the people for whom that plot is new. Which is probably few of us.

I thought it a great action movie with excellent effects, wonderful sets and costuming, kick-ass soundtrack, people that were fun to look at, Keanu not making me want to commit suicide, and a nifty (but not special) plot.

All in all, enjoyed it much more than Close Encounters. Which I think I was too young for when it came out (8), but first seeing it as a teenager shouldn't have been so boring. Unlike Alien, which I still saw a few years after release and adored as much as I was shit scared.

I think I was 2 when CE came out, so yeah. As for The Matrix,

the people for whom that plot is new

Well, it wasn't that the plot wasn't new; it was that I connected the dots too quickly. (a) Neo writes -- and especially, cracks -- code, (b) the world he lives in is code; therefore, Neo should be able to rewrite the world on the fly. If he can think that way. Which, it being a movie, I never doubted he would, but it took him a long time to get there.

Actually I think part of the reason that the art direction did not bowl me over was that I kept thinking of the movie as live-action anime. So, I was a lot more BTDT with the style than if I'd approached it from a other-live-action-films perspective.

I realize that in the above "code" on which we base our computers and "code" that the machine bad guys use to dominate the world are presumed to be the same thing, but at least I (and the movie makers) are not positing aliens as Mac users.

I realize that in the above "code" on which we base our computers and "code" that the machine bad guys use to dominate the world are presumed to be the same thing

Not really. It's a premise I think Snowcrash took too far (we all think in binary now!), but I think it's a principle thing. Any good cracker learns abstractly and really fast. So the metaphor needs to be simple (and why wouldn't it? The matrix is only one generation removed from the humans that created it, and Oedipally dependent.

All in all, enjoyed it much more than Close Encounters.

I though Close Encounters was cold and soulless. Which is odd, considering Speilberg's fondness for emotional manipulation. But I haven't seen the movie in many years.

I also thought it was boring. Alien encounters don't do it for me.

(OMG! Did you know war is bad ??)

And, of course, OMG, did you know that love saves the world!?

Still, I liked Milla's Adventures in Bladerunnertown. Flying Cars! Blue Alien Opera!

Yojimbo's based on Red Harvest and Fistfull of Dollars is based on Yojimbo.

One plot, three distinct genres.

Aren't many sci-fi movies, not just Star Wars, basically westerns in space?

Well, Outland certainly is...

Star Wars is like a western because, er, there's a scene in a bar, I guess. Apart from that? Not really. It's more of a fairy tale, and a little bit of a WW2 movie. I think some people say "western" to mean "the good guys are very good and the bad guys are very bad," but that's not a defining characteristic of any genre. By that logic, I could say that Spider-Man is a western in NYC with superpowered people who wear strange outfits, but does that actually tell you anything? It's just extending the definition to the point of meaninglessness.

Westerns are about frontiers. And order versus chaos, and personal loyalties and ethics, and what you do when there's no authority telling you what to do. Star Trek at least had a western premise -- exploring the unknown. Star Wars is about rescuing princesses and toppling evil empires and joining well-established revolutionary forces. Not so much a western.

Not so much a western.

Good to know. I retract my question, as I don't wish to start a kerfluffle.

(For the record, I hate Westerns but tend to love Sci-Fi. And now I know why that can be so.)