Sci-Fi/Fantasy Films

» Sarah B. Hood - Sci-Fi is short for Science Fiction

Do people generally get confused about or ignore classifications of this kind ? I think perhaps they do. Case in point, I was reading postings on a forum dealing with a local band, and one of the moderators solicited from contributors their lists of top ten canadian FOLK SONGS; the contributors instantly responded with lists of twenty or more songs that covered every genre from rhythm and blues to death metal, half of them by american artists.

I concur; Jurassic Park seems to me to be the only film of the ones mentioned that can be strictly classed as Science Fiction. Just for the record, I would class the others as follows:
Lord of the Rings--Fantasy King Kong--Horror
1984--Political Fantasy Raiders of the Lost Ark--Adventure.

Films that feature action dealing with technology and/or the future may lure us into believing that they are sci-fi when in fact they are perhaps more appropriately classified as something else. For example, the classic shocker "Alien" very adroitly defined a new set of visual standards for cinematic depictions of "the future" when it appeared and features several important scientific or technological leitmotifs, but any one of the terms Thriller, Psychological Horror, Horror or Monster movie better characterize its genre.

A few random musings for what they may be worth...

_____________
John Hood