1. 2001: A Space OdysseyI've seen the ones in bold print.
1968, directed by Stanley Kubrick
1972, directed by Andrei Tarkovsky
3. Blade Runner
1982, directed by Ridley Scott
4. Forbidden Planet
1956, directed by Fred M. Wilcox
5. Planet of the Apes
1968, directed by Franklin J. Schaffner
6. Dark City
1998, directed by Alex Proyas
7. The Day the Earth Stood Still
1951, directed by Robert Wise
2013, directed by Spike Jonze
1927, directed by Fritz Lang
2004, directed by Shane Carruth
1. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
1982, directed by Nicholas Meyer
1973, directed by Woody Allen
3. The Empire Strikes Back
1980, directed by Irvin Kershner
2010, directed by Gareth Edwards
1983, directed by David Cronenberg
6. The Damned
1963, directed by James Losey
7. Invasion of the Body Snatchers
1978, directed by Philip Kaufman
1988, directed by Katsuhiro Otomo
9. Galaxy Quest
1999, directed by Dean Parisot
2011, directed by Lars von Trier
I do wonder why a person who had never heard of the film Altered States could be tasked with submitting a list to Time Out London on behalf of a science fiction website, but maybe I'm just making unwarranted assumptions about the general exposure necessary before official top-10 lists make sense.
The writer states his criteria:
They had to be science fiction, or obviously recognized as suchand he left off Repo Man and Kiss Me, Deadly because he didn't consider them SF. In regards to Repo Man, I always hear it referred to as science fiction (Wikipedia describes it that way, as do the Imdb and Criterion), so I'm not sure on what grounds he found it unsuitable for consideration. In regards to Kiss Me Deadly, I've only heard it described as science fiction by one reviewer, so that it would be considered and then eliminated seems bizarre to me.
Additionally, no director could appear on these lists more than once. I easily could have included at least two other movies by Stanley Kubrick, a half dozen by David Cronenberg, and at least one other by Tarkovsky, but felt that doing so would be cheating.whereas I consider it "cheating" to call it a Best Movies list when it's not. I mean if a director has made 3 of the best SF films ever, should 2 of them be bumped by lesser films because they share a talented director?
He also says:
Another factor I considered was seriousness of intent. By this, I simply mean that the movies I recommended either had to be made with some desire for enduring appeal (Woody Allen’s Sleeper may be of its time, but its satiric teeth lose none of their bite, even if contemporary audiences might not understand references to such figures as Howard Cosell)What? Really? I think if it's that dated, it doesn't matter how enduring the director wanted it to be.
He mentions other criteria, including that the films did actually endure and that he personally liked them.
Our family has issues with this list, as might be expected. Everybody's top-10 list will be different, and none of the folks in our family has any formal credentials in the field. We're just fans. In light of that, this is The Younger Son's list in uncertain order:
AlienI've seen all of those.
City of Lost Children
Battlestar Galactica (miniseries)
Book of Eli
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Husband's list (in no particular order):
MetropolisI've seen all of these.
The Day the Earth Stood Still (Robert Wise)
The War of the Worlds (1953)
The Time Machine
Book of Eli
The Fly (1958)
The Bride of Frankenstein