That depends if people have even seen any of these. Most have maybe seen one and even then don't know the title, remembering only some story bits.
ET was shown on the Universal movie channel several times, I think it's in regular rotation there. But I haven't seen The Thing on TV for a long long time. And I've never seen Blade Runner on TV. I didn't even know of its existence until I somehow stumbled upon it on the net. It's a shame that most people don't know about these as they mostly watch what's on TV and you'll never see Argento there unless you have some niche movie channels. It also depends where you live.
This isn't so relevant to this discussion but it's interesting.
Key factor, you were 9. Its a fine childs movie, Poltergiest and CEOTK are fine as young adult movies. The first Star Wars was as adult as any of the classic swashbuckler movies featuring , action, romance, a rousing score, villainous villians, nothing to deep, but highly entertaining, able to be enjoyed by all ages. SW also added a look, and ideas that appealed to any sci-fi fan. Strip away SW's bells and whistles, there was still a plot with some depth. All this was lacking in CEOTK , Poltergiest, and ET , which were essentially visual amusement park rides, once the thrill of the actual ride is over, so is any thought of what transpired, other than it was fun at the moment.
Your treatment of CEOTK is quite askew. Whether you like it or not is one thing, but it's not at all accurate to depict it as merely a "visual amusement park ride." It's a film of enormous depth and humanity - far more so than the simplistic star wars films. The director's cut released in 1980 is the definitive version of this historically great film.
Glad others are here to let us know what movies are worthy of our viewership.
Ewocs, Jar jar, screaming tie fighters flying around in space, I get the impression these are really kids movies, aimed at (todays) 12year olds...
Hans Solo in 2018 ? I hope the Aluminum Falcon gets a nice place in the flick too .
The Golden Age of Science Fiction is 12.
As I said, it depends where you live. I guess that Starz channel is available in USA, I think it's the same on which the Evil Dead series is shown (if I'm not mistaken). Sure, maybe it's also available in Europe, but then it depends what package you have and how much it costs. That's why I mentioned the niche channels. My guess is that Starz is one, mostly where movies are shown, but that's just my speculation as I admit I have no clue
There was an interesting debate a couple posts back about the comparative depth of Close Encounters and Star Wars. What's the supposed depth of SW? The advices of Yoda in the second one? The voices of Obi Wan at the end of the first when Luke flies the plane and hears something about the force?
This topic is interesting
Play Head Soccer 2 Now
That *is* an interesting question, now that you mention it. Both are sci-fi fantasies of course, featuring aliens and interstellar space travel and telekinetics and mind reading.
My main problem with CE3K is that it makes Earth and humans the center of the universe. Advanced alien species come here to talk to us, and take one of us with them. Why? Are they starting a zoo? Are they hungry?
Star Wars at least admitted the possibility that if the universe is populated with dozens of species, mankind is only one and not the most powerful one at that. Earth is a dim memory for most of the characters, and nobody thinks going there to play music with scientists and pick up a specimen is a good idea.
The plot of CE3K is that aliens are planning a landing on Devils Tower and have telepathically invited some humans. Said humans must then try to get to Devils Tower while hindered by the government. This is the heart of whats going on in the flick aided by some decent effects like shaking stop signs and playing with food. And flying lights. That's the bulk of it, no?
There was an interesting film called Mothman Prophecies with Richard Gere where his character asked Alan Bates character about the mothman people something along the lines of "Why don't they talk to us? Why don't they say what they want/represent?" To that Bates rhetorically replied: "Do you think any human has ever tried to talk to or explain something to an insect?" He implied that humans have intellect and percieve themselves as higher beings than insects therefore not trying to communicate with them.
So in the context of Close Encounters - why do aliens have to explain why they have come and what are their motives? Maybe they think humans will not understand them, maybe they have advanced further both technologically and in their thinking.
Sure, nobody has said that Spielberg's film has any of this kind of thinking behind it.
Sure, the aliens can build great big interstellar space craft with lots of flashing lights -- and they want to talk to the guy who plays with his mashed potatoes.
Yeah well, there were plenty of other people who got the 'psychic invite' in addition to him, but potato boy and the kid's mom were the only ones to make it thru the military blockades/gassings to crash the scheduled meet-n-greet. And Single Mom wasn't narcissistic to the extent that she would either abandon her kid to join Roy or take the kid back on the spaceship w/her.
Not that I'm invested in the storyline, or whatever.
-=Will you stand by me against the cold night, or are you afraid of the ice?=-
Bookmarks