MovieChat Forums > The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951) Discussion > What was Arthur Clarke thinking?

What was Arthur Clarke thinking?

posted 12 years ago by mickeyone
34 replies | jump to latest

Someone needs to explain to me why Arthur C Clarke, one of the world's greatest science-fiction authors of all time (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_C_Clarke), and one of the 2 authors of one of the greatest science fiction films ever made, "2001: A Space Odyssey", ranks "The Day the Earth Stood Still" higher on his list of best sci-fi films than even the film he coauthored. Strange is it not? I guess Clarke just didn't have the good sense of what a good science fiction film really is, like our detractors on this board do.

Arthur C Clarke's list of the best science-fiction films ever made:

1. Metropolis (1927)
2. Things to Come (1936)
3. Frankenstein (1931)
4. King Kong (original version) (1933)
5. Forbidden Planet (1956)
6. The Thing from Another World (original version) (1951)
7. The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951)
8. 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
9. Star Wars (1977)
10. Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1980)
11. Alien (1979)
12. Blade Runner (1982)

Oh wait, I KNOW! He likes it because of his fond memories of seeing it as a child. Umm, lets see, he was born in 1917 so that means he would have been at least 33 the first time he saw it. Yup, just recently out of the crib...

[–] Strangerhand 9 years ago

1. Metropolis (1927)
2. Things to Come (1936)
3. Frankenstein (1931)
4. King Kong (original version) (1933)
5. Forbidden Planet (1956)
6. The Thing from Another World (original version) (1951)
7. The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951)
8. 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
9. Star Wars (1977)
10. Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1980)
11. Alien (1979)
12. Blade Runner (1982)

Wow, that's a very good list, even though I wouldn't call King Kong [1933] Sci-Fi in the least, it's still an amazing film, and that's a very good list.

Looks to me like Clarke (R.I.P.) had great taste in film. So what's the problem? ???

--
StrangerHand: Now 75% more afro-free! 

[–] mojo2004 9 years ago

Someone needs to explain to me why Arthur C Clarke, one of the world's greatest science-fiction authors of all time (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_C_Clarke), and one of the 2 authors of one of the greatest science fiction films ever made, "2001: A Space Odyssey", ranks "The Day the Earth Stood Still" higher on his list of best sci-fi films than even the film he coauthored. Strange is it not? I guess Clarke just didn't have the good sense of what a good science fiction film really is, like our detractors on this board do.

Maybe he's humble and doesn't like blowing his own horn. Unlike celebrities now who can't shutup about themselves, their families and accomplishments!

MOJO2004

[–] liscarkat (16466) 6 years ago

I wouldn't have "2001" or "Star Wars" on any list.

[–] Satan2016 (23248) 6 years ago

Clark was born in 1917, so he may have seen all of them during their first run. He witnessed the development of film and was part of the evolution of Sci Fi.

The list is almost in chronological order. Your early experiences tend to be more vivid and emotional. He picked three classics from the 30s then three more from the 50s. The last four are around 1980. Seems to ignore the 60s except for 2001.

[–] liscarkat (16466) 4 years ago

I might have put "The Thing" and "The Day the Earth Stood Still" a bit higher, and I wouldn't necessarily classify "King Kong" and "Star Wars" as science fiction. I might not even have 9 through 12 on the list; there are certainly better SF movies.

[–] Starman (412) 4 years ago

The original The Thing From Another World is registered in the film registry of Congress, I feel like it deserves to be there as it was possibly the first 50's sci-fi film ever made that had an impact on culture in the same sense as Jurrasic Park, Easy Rider or Rambo, no one has made a sci-fi like that before, to me it's certainly more intelligent as a film than the remakes, not just a horror, it deserves a respect for its intellectual and emotional value, more than technical, its social commentary nontwithstanding. I think King Kong And Star Wars would be sci-fi for many people, it seems to fit the meaning of the term science fiction well.

[–] trevorh321 (5495) 3 years ago

Looks like those films were listed chronologically. On second look, I guess they weren't.

But I don't have a problem with that list, of the films I've seen. I would have left out Blade Runner and The Thing From Another World. I like both fine but neither would make my own top ten list.

[–] kwestmo (4114) a year ago

I am more surprised he included the fantasy Star Wars. A great and iconic film, but not SF.