MrFood wrote:...I'm not gonna have time to watch it again for at least a couple weeks... so if you could give me a, well, primer on Primer so I can go tackle it forearmed - I shall be grateful.Not sure how helpful this will be but..The Primer Timeline

I remember Open Your Eyes as another great one, though the remake Vanilla Sky has sort of tainted it a bit for me.

It's been a long time, but the movie 'Hardware' might fit into what your looking for.A.I. is pretty greatPrimer as others have saidScanners is a good one too

Probably what you are looking for: http://www.criterion.com/films/27742-world-on-a-wire The novel it is based on is also worth reading.The film is currently streaming on Hulu Plus.

[Edit: I think I was drinking or close to sleep when I wrote this. To make clear: Tarkovsky verion is Super Duper; Remake is stupid.]I watched the Solaris movie based on the above recommendation, and I just have to disagree about it. I thought it was a bit of a mess of movie, maybe even just plain bad. And sure Tarkovsky's emphasis on the human aspects strays from the more strictly sci-fi cum philosophical aspects of the book, I think it only does so in the realm of dialogue. Most all of the intellectual issues are lurking around in every scene; they just aren't addressed directly by characters that often. But still you get that extended discussion of the tenability of solaristics as a science early in the film which is framed by the more human interests of the characters, but the harder sci-fi is all around. The mind boggling alieness of the solaris entity doesn't need to be spelled out, it is palpable throughout. That said, I can see how Kelvin's disinterest in all these matters can be a bit frustrating. I mean, even if he is caught up in the love story you'd think he'd want to talk a little theory. Still, you see him grapple with the intellectual alongside the emotional dilemmas in those dialogue free shots where he is continually mulling everything over. In a different way Kubrick movies also get slammed for not explicitly addressing content found in the source material, but something like 2001 visually sets up lots of issues to be explored, while avoiding addressing any of it ind direct dialog.

Chromodynamic wrote:Dave//Eksvplot wrote:Just finished Solaris again.I think it's a successfully executed film and I like it more and more each time I see it.Fuck Steven Soderbergh.Aww, I really like the Soderbergh version and found the Tarkovsky one a chore. Although, they both completely fail, in my opinion, to get even close to what Lem was writing about and it's no surprise that he pooh-poohed both versions; I don't really agree with the simple assessment that BClark has of both versions as films about, "love in space". ...So the book, Solaris, is great, "hard", Sci-fi while both film versions are not.it's not my assessment, it's lem's own that i was citing. as for me, i enjoyed the soderbergh version more than he.

Dave//Eksvplot wrote:Just finished Solaris again.I think it's a successfully executed film and I like it more and more each time I see it.Fuck Steven Soderbergh.Aww, I really like the Soderbergh version and found the Tarkovsky one a chore. Although, they both completely fail, in my opinion, to get even close to what Lem was writing about and it's no surprise that he pooh-poohed both versions; I don't really agree with the simple assessment that BClark has of both versions as films about, love in space. Films about humanity in space typically rely heavily on things like the anthropic principle (humanity's special/unique place in the cosmos) and Solaris, the novel, pretty much does everything it can to dismiss this as a hopelessly doomed exercise of humanity's ridiculous vanity/hubris about itself.So the book, Solaris, is great, hard, Sci-fi while both film versions are not.

Just finished Solaris again.I think it's a successfully executed film and I like it more and more each time I see it.Fuck Steven Soderbergh.

Not having read the book, at this point I can't gauge the Tarkovksy film on anything other than its own merits.And I think it's really good.I love the slow pace of it, the set design that makes the space station look like a broken down bus station, the subdued acting, the alternating colors, the look of young Natalya Bondarchuk, the general tone of the piece, the highway scene, the assured cinematography, Eduard Artemiev's music... Tarkovsky's Solaris has quite a lot going for it.I like that the narrative progression doesn't feel forced and overeager. It's a very mature film.

ImDADA wrote:Andromeda Strain.Watched this again last week, I think it still holds up and while my scientific knowledge is non-existent the film seems plausible. Just waiting for the remake with Keanu Reeves.