The importance of being Sci-Fi

[Chancellor Valium]

Originally Posted by Infinite Improbability

Sorry, but I don't have the time, money, or cable to track down all of the so-called classics from any genre. Until it plays on PBS or something and I notice it, it will fail to exist in my consciousness.

Video rental? What, $5 at most?


To describe '2001' as a 'so-called' classic and lump it in with pretty much anything else is blasphemy against sci-fi. It transcends classic. It's a Kubrick film, you *know* it's worth watching.

@Mav: If you stick it through, it's actually quite...well, you'll see...

Originally Posted by Infinite Improbability

I can see that my hard, soft, and bizarre categories have generated quite a bit of controversy.

No, they were just badly defined

Originally Posted by Infinite Improbability

Most entertaining, which I'd measure as laughs per minute, is h2g2. I'm surprised that this is in dispute.

'laughs-per-minute' is not a good measure of sci-fi quality. THAT is why it's in dispute. Also, that site is seriously unfunny. Literally.

Originally Posted by Infinite Improbability

Stargate is soft because the general user of this advanced tech doesn't have a stinkin' clue how it works. Even Teal'c and his zats and tacs and so forth only knows how to fire the things. Ask him how a liquid naquadah battery works and you'd get a blank look. Oh, and except for the guns, they left "real-world" human technology years ago.

Has already been covered, moving on...

Originally Posted by Infinite Improbability

Oh, and my major exposure to Also Sprach Zarathustra is the Buzz Lightyear game in Toy Story 2. I've heard it elsewhere, but that's what comes to mind.

*shakes head*