PRO-CON: RUNNING MATE DEBATE (RATING SARAH PALIN, MCCAIN'S VP PICK)

An imagined debate between the GOP and the Democrats about the wisdom of John McCain's pick for Vice President, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin:

PRO: McCain has picked a new face, a fresh voice, to help him change Washington.
CON: McCain has handed Obama a huge gift by picking someone with even less experience than Barack has, therefore nullifying the experience issue. Sarah, you're manna from heaven!

PRO: Palin gives the McCain ticket a more youthful feel, since she is so young and attractive. This helps counteract the youthful vitality of Obama.
CON: Palin's youth and vitality makes McCain look that much older by comparison. And McCain's age makes Palin seem even more inexperienced. They look like one of those Hollywood May-September sugar-daddy couples. Wait, that was wrong. Make that January-December.

PRO: But Palin is so young and beautiful, voters will be distracted from McCain's age.
CON: Voters will worry even more about McCain's age, since it makes it more likely that this young, inexperienced ex-model will have to replace him one day.

PRO: Palin will help McCain win over disgruntled Hillary supporters. I mean, she's a woman!
CON: Palin is young and attractive, therefore the opposite of Hillary.

PRO: That was a low blow.
CON: Oh yeah? See Bill laughing and nodding his head over there in the corner?

PRO: Well, polls show Palin gave McCain a big bump.
CON: She gave him a big bump, all right. Viva Viagra, Vivacious Veep!

PRO: McCain has now appeased the GOP conservatives by picking a pro-life conservative.
CON: The GOP conservatives don't have time to go over Palin's views, they are too busy going over her, um, assets. Now they have to deal with sexual urges they thought were long dormant. Talk about Alaskan drilling!

PRO: Palin has been a vocal proponent of opening the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge for more drilling, meaning more oil for Americans and hence lower prices. Palin pick helps pocketbooks.
CON: You mean pickpockets. Palin is in bed with oil, literally. Her husband works for energy giant BP. How can McCain fight the oil companies now? Voters will realize that the drilling (of holes in our pockets) shall remain under McCain.

PRO: Palin holds a Bachelor of Science degree in journalism from the University of Idaho.
CON: I guess that means she'll be able to ask herself the tough questions. (Like: how can a former beauty queen keep looking hot under the heat of the White House Press Corps?)

PRO: McCain reinforced his "maverick" image by picking someone unexpected and risky as VP.
CON: McCain reinforced his "dangerous" image by picking someone unqualified to be President.

PRO: They say Sarah Palin has a good sense of humor.
CON: What, Michael Palin wasn't available?

PRO: If McCain loses, at least he gets into the history books by picking the first female GOP VP.
CON: Not if. When.

PREDICTION: OBAMA SHOULD WIN THE WHITE HOUSE IN 2008, BASED ON 16-YEAR CYCLE OF NEW NON-INCUMBENT DEMOCRATS WINNING PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS SINCE 1944

After 1944, a new, non-incumbent Democrat has won the White House every 16 years.

Twice during the past 64 years, a Democratic VP took over the White House when the President died, then went on to win as an incumbent. We view that as an extension of the late President's administration.

1944: Roosevelt-Truman wins. After them, no new Democrat in the White House till...

1960: Kennedy-Johnson wins. After them, no new Democrat in the White House till...

1976: Carter wins. After him, no new Democrat in the White House till...

1992: Clinton wins. After him, no new Democrat in the White House till...

2008: Obama wins (?)

So, the pattern is clear. Like clockwork, since 1944, it always takes 16 years for a new non-incumbent Democrat to win the Presidency. This makes 2008 a sure win for Democrat Obama.

ESSAY: SNL, The Chevy Chase Ban, Sunspots and Heroes

by Don Rose


From TLR's Ironic Comic corner comes today's strange fact: comedian/actor Chevy Chase, who gained his initial fame by starring on SNL (Saturday Night Live for the abbreviationally challenged), is banned from ever hosting the show again. Hard to believe, was my first reaction -- but would Wikipedia lie? Here are the stats Wikipedia lists:

Chevy Chase
9 (number of SNL episodes hosted)
February 18, 1978 (First Hosted)
February 15, 1997 (Last Hosted)
5 (Number of Special Cameos)
First former cast member to host more than five times.
Was banned from ever hosting again in 1997.

Why would this happen, you ask? According to funtrivia.com, here is the explanation:

After hosting nine times, former SNL regular Chevy Chase was banned from ever hosting the show again after the February 15, 1997 episode due to his verbal abuse of the cast and crew during the week. Even though Chevy Chase has been banned from hosting, he did make cameo appearances in two episodes: the February 20, 1999 episode in a sketch where Bill Murray (the episode host) plugs a book featuring famous quotes from the movie Caddyshack, and the October 6, 2001 episode where he reprises his role as The Land Shark and eats Tina Fey during Weekend Update. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banned_From_SNL

Now, we here at The LA Report are biased, since Chevy is one of our comedy heroes. But may we humbly suggest to the SNL folks that there should be a period of penalty, sure, but eventually, a chance at redemption. Hasn't an 11 year Chevy ban been enough? Perhaps SNL can give Chevy a second chance AND get comedic mileage out of such a grand return. Like, have Chevy co-host with a random unfunny person to fulfill the rule that he never host again (he would be CO-hosting, after all). Or, show Chevy going through a futuristic Clockwork Orange type conditioning to prevent him from ever verbally abusing anyone again, lest he suffer inner pangs of pain, guilt and stomach convulsions. Just some ideas here. We just think Chevy should get a shot at a hosting comeback.

If our Sun has an 11 year sunspot cycle, perhaps S Sun L can have a Host Ban Cycle. The fact that that last sentence made little sense shows how deeply we feel about this. If we are willing to throw out all journalistic quality for one sentence, surely we must be desperate to make a point here. There are so few heroes left anymore, we think the public should be allowed to savor all we still have. We want Chevy to host again. Can't we Chase that dream?

TWAIN AND OBAMA: SATIRE RULES THE MAGAZINE COVERS (FROM TLR's "IT'S ALL CONNECTED" DEPT.)

Commentary by Don Rose

Holy coincidence, Batman! What are the odds that the master of satire, Mark Twain, would be featured on a popular magazine's cover this past week (TIME) while an example of controversial satire graces the cover of another popular magazine (The New Yorker - which of course is even MORE popular now, at least with supporters of the Freedom of Speech).

But riddle me this: perhaps this is NOT a coincidence, but rather indicates that critical thinking via satirical content is coming back into vogue. (Hear that, Vogue? Get with it with your covers, baby! Doncha wanna increase sales, too?)

Yes, dear reader, I believe that maybe, just maybe, we as a people are smarter than the MainStream Media makes us out to be. After all, one thing we know for sure about next January is that our next President will be coming into office direct from that intellectual body known as the Senate, for the first time since John F. Kennedy. If Obama wins, his Kennedyesque qualities (young, smart, handsome, 2 young kids) means that comparisons to JFK's Camelot will come a lot out of MSM mouths. And hey, there's a popular musical currently on Broadway called Spamalot. Coincidence?

See... it's all connected.

Of course, satire on magazine covers is nothing new. And you never know when readers will, or won't, get offended by attempted humor. For example, this Bush cover. Now, why didn't this get people upset at People?

OBAMA VS. MCCAIN: WHO'S MORE LIKE REAGAN?

"No Pundit Intended" - A Commentary Column by Don Rose

Okay, Obama babes and dudes: I know the title sounds a tad weird. But Barack does share several traits with Ronald Reagan, as does John McCain, his opponent. Question is, who's like Reagan more? Let's explore.

ORATORY
Both Obama and Reagan are famous for being great communicators. McCain is all right, but not all that. Score one for the O man. His Obamatory is glorious.

HAIR
Reagan had great hair. Obama and McCain? Okay, let's skip this one...

CHANGE
Reagan was the "change candidate" in 1980, the outsider looking to come in and change Washington, during a climate of stagflation (low/no growth plus rising prices), oil shocks and turmoil in Iran. Sound familiar? Obama wins again.

FAMILY
Reagan had 2 daughters. Obama has 2, McCain has 3. Obama wins.

OTHER PARTY APPEAL
Reagan was famous for winning the votes of "Reagan Democrats." Obama gets love from a lot of Republicans, who have been dubbed "Obamacans." Yet McCain also has cross party appeal, drawing support from some Dems who see John as a moderate maverick (maybe). Tie.

FINAL SCORE
Obama is the victor. He is more Reaganesque than McCain. Just don't tell anyone I said this; I gotta preserve my street cred and keep my mojo working. Thanks.

RIP, GOP CONSERVATIVES; HELLO, CONVERSATILES!

essay by Don Rose

McCain Train Gains, Mitt quits. But the rise of John McCain and descent of Mitt Romney is just one aspect of a larger political shift. The soaring ascendancy of Barack Obama is another part of it. What is "it"? The end of the "conservative revolution" that began circa 1980 with Ronald Reagan, and now ends in 2008 with the man who loves to emulate and be thought of as another Reagan, George W. Bush. A 28-year run -- not bad -- one which saw but one Democratic name in the White House amidst a sea of GOP. Imagine, only Bill Clinton broke the string of Republican Presidents from 1980 to 2008. The reason for this GOP domination: the rise, acceleration and expansion of the Conservative Wave.

Now that wave is crashing down, and riding in on the new wave is John McCain, the man who prides himself on being able to reach across the aisle to (God forbid!) Democrats, who does not mind bucking "conservative wisdom", whatever that is. (A contradiction, perhaps.) Mitt Romney made a whole campaign out of begging GOP "believers" to see the light and seek him out since only he preached the true conservative gospel. But it was in vain versus McCain.

Why? Because, somewhere along the line, GOP voters freed themselves, woke up and wised up. They realized that their party originally became dominated by "Conservatives" when Reagan rode into power on a one Trickle Down pony, yet these same GOP folks ran record deficits, which was never a tenet of true conservatism. Then the party became dominated by Religious Right Conservatives (the Falwell Farewell to GOP moderates), which finally led to a Born Again Religious Right Conservative (Dubya). Yet behind the "conservative" verbage lies a liberal amount of spending (pun possibly intended). Yep, Dubya has full blown Big Spendingitis, now drawing up the first-ever 3 trillion dollar budget, and even higher record deficits.

As the Dubya Decade decayed, Big Spendingitis and Big Religion had fully infected the Conservative "mold", and after almost 3 decades, the term "Conservative" is now downRight moldy. Who ever said being "conservative" was about Big Government (record spending and deficits)? Who ever said being Republican was about Big Religion? The GOP got so lopsided to the Right, it couldn't right itself, and finally fell over. And the main man standing is McCain.

Yes, 6 years and 6 months after 9/11, 28 years after Reagan's rise, the American People are waking up and shaking things up. They realize that today's "conservative", the Neo-Conservative, and other brands of current conservatives are not really the real thing. The current shift in the political current is about allowing the GOP, the Grand Old Party, to have more just the "conservative" brand. To be truly appealing and truly Grand, a Party needs more than one brand. The Grand Old Party was like that before. And it can be again, perhaps with McCain.

In other words, Republicans are starting to realize their party was hijacked, on a flight path that kept banking Right. But now, just maybe, they realize that "GOP" can mean many things. It can be other-than-Conservative. It can be maverick. It can tell the truth. It can take the Constitution out of the garbage can. It can befriend Democrats. It can embrace eco green values. It can go for Finance Reform. It can be Arnold. It can be McCain.

But what term can succinctly sum up this shift? "Anti-Conservative" sounds so negative, but that's getting warm. RepubliCAN sounds too, well, Up-With-People-ish, and frankly, who likes multi-case font. Still, we need a word here. It's about a resurgence of open-minded Republicans who go with what's Right (as in engaging in conversation with other points of view) over what's Right (as in insulated, "I'm always right" Right-of-center conservative). It is about the "free interchange of thoughts or views", with the emphasis on free -- and that, my friends, is the definition of "converse." Hence, I propose we say that McCain is the new leader of the "Conversatiles" - converts to conversation and converse versatile thinking - who are finally replacing the old King of the (Capitol) Hill, the Conservatives.

Heck, the new (or reborn again?) GOP is so free, it can even be a Democratic supporter. Yep, hard as it is to believe, some rightwing talk show hosts and authors are so in an uproar over McCain's Gain, they are even jumping to the other side. Ann Coulter said she would vote for Hillary Clinton over McCain, and Rush Limbaugh pretty much said ditto. And they were serious. Yep, signs are that the GOP party hijacking is ending, and the party's hostages are flaunting their freedom. Feeling free to converse and vote any way they wish. To think freely. To let religion stay out of the fray, and obey that little thing called "separation of Church and State". Some "conversatiles" have even become free enough to express support for a free thinking libertarian like Ron Paul. Some even go so far as to support Barack Obama. I saw it online, and they were serious. Who woulda thunk it.

Heck, it's almost as if common sense, good ideas and intellectual freedom are coming back in vogue, after years of religious and political dogma. God and dogma used to be Good, Right, and required for GOP candidates. Now, the formula has grown stale, and was in vain versus McCain.

One more note as the nation races toward making Presidential history. Only 15 Senators have ever been President, and only two Senators (Warren Harding and John F. Kennedy) were sitting Senators when they won the top job, going directly from Senate seat to Oval Office. Yet in 2008, all three remaining frontrunners for the Presidency are Senators. One will surely win. Showing that another Great Age is ending: the Age of Governors. Twas exactly 40 years ago that the last (ex-)Senator won the White House: then-Vice President Richard Nixon. And guess what: he was a Republican, and he was NOT a Conservative (which of course every student knows thanks to his nickname, Moderate Dick).

So then: who will win the Presidency this time around, in November 2008? Another Clinton? Obama? McCain? No matter what name gets the Prez prize, the American people are the clear winners.

LIFE STYLES OF THE RICH AND FAMOUS, ROBBIN' HOOD EDITION

Seems some folks are still quietly saying, as last year, that it may be best to end the lavish giftbags given to celeb presenters at award shows like the Globes, Grammys and Goldguys (I mean the Oscars, had to go for the G thing). The theory: people who are already rich are getting thou$and$ in free swag they could easily buy. But wait, are we not a culture that loves excess and doth give it high ratings? Maybe the solution is to balance things out in creative ways, and do it so everyone in our YouTubed society can watch. Like, say, a reality show where a bad-ass breaks into rich people's pads, takes their loot and brings it to poor folk. Imagine the reveals. Name? Bad Man and Robbin' Hood. (You can thank me later, Ben Silverman. Or Sarah.)

RETRO RANT: Paul Revere and the Conundrums (or, who Raided the Raiders' rating?)

An Essay on Yesterday

Lately, as I do sometimes, I have become fascinated with a particular segment of pop music history, this time the strange case of Paul Revere and the Raiders. I recall some of their songs, mainly Kicks, Good Thing and Indian Reservation, but when reading their history I learn that they apparently sold many millions of records, some sources estimating as high as 50 million over the last 40 years or so. One source said they were only topped by the Beatles and the Stones for sales by 60s bands.

Yet, when I go to Borders or other local music stores, I find no Paul Revere cds. Not even a nameplate for them. Why arent Paul Revere and the Raiders given respect at least somewhere near that given the Beatles and Stones? (I mean, even Little Steven, of all people, hardly plays the Raiders, if at all!)

God bless Rhino's Nuggets, and iTunes, which feature the band -- but in general, it feels like Paul Revere may have been Raided from the history books (unlike the first Paul Revere). The bandleader Revere certainly isn't Revered by many popologists these days. At least that's how it seems.

So, question... what happened? Why is such a big selling band mostly ignored by the rock intelligentsia? Were they dismissed as pop fluff by those who always talk endlessly about (deservedly-praised) classics like Pet Sounds, Revolver and Pepper? Is their historical fate sorta like the Monkees -- bands acknowledged as having many hits, but not taken seriously enough due to their often-comic personas? (I believe both bands are absent from the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, yet both sold millions and influenced many future bands).

Any thoughts welcome! --Don "Patrick Henry" Rose

T-DAY T'S: TOP TWELVE TERRIFIC THINGS TO THANK

Here is a list (in no particular order) of the Top Twelve Things (or places or people) in or about or related to Los Angeles we wish to thank this year, just for being here and being great:

1. The Beatles

The LA Report never gets tired of their music or lore. Has there ever been a band before or since with more gems per album? Or humor? We love the liner notes by Martin "Marty" Scorcese in the delightful 2-disc DVD set of "HELP!" just released this month. Want to see what inspired The Monkees TV show and Monty Python? Get "Help!" Want to OD on Beatles every Sunday morning in LA? Try KRTH FM's two 1-hour shows back to back from 8-10am, Chris Carter's always amazing Breakfast With The Beatles on KLOS FM 9-noon, and Les Perry's Meet The Beatles show on KCSN FM 10am-2pm. Want to see the place that still puts out their albums? See the landmark Capitol Records building on Vine just north of Hollywood Boulevard (where Beatle fans gather on Beatle birthdays and other dates of note).

2. Jenny Lens

See our recent post about her show at La Luz gallery. Her punk rock archive rocks. And she's super sweet.

3. Bill Maher

He's the Lenny Bruce of our generation. Like Lenny, he has been crucified for just stating his beliefs (an act which, last I checked, was supposed to be protected by something called the Constitution). Case in point: losing his ABC show Politically Incorrect over his comment re 9/11 (about who are cowards and who aren't). Losing a show called Politically Incorrect for BEING Politically Incorrect is one of the great ironies of all time. Luckily, HBO likes irony, and Bill landed there with his show Real Time. We knew he'd wind up there, because HBO has always championed comedy of all stripes, even if too truthful for advertisers.

4. The WGA

Here's to the Writers Guild, which represents the interests of all those wordsmiths who create the scripts that power the TV shows and movies (and Internet downloads) that make our increasingly-depressing real world more bearable, and can sometimes even improve lives, start movements or both. But it all starts with that blank piece of paper (real or virtual), being stared at by a writer, until the magic spills forth.

5. Little Steven's Underground Garage

Want to hear a near perfect example of a radio show? Check out this gem on KLOS FM 95.5 every Sunday, 10pm (or just after 10) til around midnite (or just after 12). Steven Van Zandt's fun style, encyclopedic knowledge of pop music, eclectic presentation of old and new indie-garage sounds - and his Freak of the Week - makes this an unmissable weekly listening event.

6. The Paley Center for Media

Formerly the Museum of Television and Radio. Thousands of radio and TV shows at your fingertips in their amazing viewing library, and daily special showings in their theatre. Periodic lectures, panels and exhibits as well. We are so lucky to have this place in LA (the other one is way over in New York).

7. Google

I always wanted thank a noun, verb, and search engine in one go. But seriously, can any of us live without them? (Okay, Yahoo, put your hand down.) (Ironic how Yahoo put their name in an ad slogan as a verb, but "Do you Yahoo?" No, you Google.) And Google has now partnered with the X-Prize folks to offer $20 million to the first person to put a robot on the moon and post its video on YouTube. Is Google cool or what?

8. Wired Magazine

We have always loved their magazine - it is simply required reading for us every month - but they do great live events, too. They just finished a very cool series of tours of a "Wired Living Home" in the Brentwood hills (now listed for $4+ million in case you want to have your own private tour every day). Even the drive up there was futuristic, as we got to enjoy the new BMW Hydrogen powered car (which runs on either gasoline or hydrogen - the latter being the most abundant element in the universe with emissions that are basically just water). The LA Report attended on Nov. 18 and fell in love with the Ray Kappe designed home, which in some ways felt reminiscent of the Eames legacy in form while being very modern and green in function (we especially loved the 3-D desktop printer in the kids room). More info: www.wired.com/wiredlivinghome.

9. The Playboy Mansion

Do we really have to justify this one? (Not to guys, anyway.) Seriously, we are so glad this place is still alive and kicking (ass). Not just because it is a testament to the rewards that can come to you for creating a radically new kind of publication (newsworthy articles plus nudesworthy arty girls!), but because they still do amazing events there, and because they have a wonderful animal sanctuary which you must see. (Tip: buy a ticket to a daytime charity event held at the Mansion -- there are several each year -- and odds are good you can see the cool creatures, as we did). Note: our Thanks list Number 3 is often seen at the Mansion (Bill being a kind of honorary heir to Hef).

10. Shout Factory

The LA-based company produces some of the greatest DVDs and DVD boxsets we have ever seen or played. Also stellar CDs. There are too many to list! Just go to www.shoutfactory.com and see what we mean.

11. Rhino

This LA-based company ALSO produces some of the greatest DVDs and DVD boxsets we have ever seen or played. And stellar CDs. Too many to list! Just go to www.rhino.com and see what we mean. (One example we will always cherish is their 70's music boxset; the original packages they sold are covered in real shag, baby! For a more recent stellar set, run don't walk to get Rhino's new cool collection, THE McCARTNEY YEARS, 3 DVDs of Macca/Wings heaven!)

12. LACMA

Last but not least is the Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Their exhibits are world-class (the current Dali exhibit is one example, while King Tut and Van Gogh exhibits amazed throngs of grateful museum goers in recent years). They show great films in their Bing Theatre. They are centrally located, and have easy parking nearby. And to top it off, they do amazing events, our fave being the annual Costume Ball every year during Halloween week (or should I say Halloweek?). I think their slogan should be, "I like my LACMA." (Now let's see if they use it!)

THE SEIN NINE: 9 FINEST SEINFELDS

Hard to believe nine years have elapsed since the passing of "Seinfeld" (although it is now immortal on DVD). Perhaps the greatest sitcom ever. But what if you want to get to the heart of the series without watching days of DVDs? Let The LA Report cut to the chase for you. Here now are nine episodes that The LA Report finds the most inspired/memorable/catchphrasey.

Merv
Kramer finds a discarded set for The Merv Griffin Show and reconstructs it -- in his apartment.

Soup Nazi
Man runs store selling best soup in town, but do not violate the set routine he has for buying it... or else.

JFK-esque
Oliver Stone satire with loogies instead of bullets? Priceless.

Spongeworthy
There's a shortage of those little female protectors, so Elaine gets superprotective of those she can get.

Backwards Trip
Scenes seen in reverse order, depicting a trip. Perhaps the most ambitious and mind-bending episode.

The Bet
Using nothing nasty in word or imagery, the quartet sees who can stay Master of Their Domain the longest. (That is, who can prolong a probation on masterbation, proving who's the pro.)

Do the Opposite
"If everything I do is wrong, then doing the opposite must be right." George gets philosophical, and it works.

Yadda Yadda Yadda
Singlehandedly sent this phrase into the popularity stratosphere.

Show within a Show
Seinfeld and George pitch TV show about Seinfeld and George's lives. Best selfreferentialism ever.

Naturally, there are many other great moments/shows we could have listed (The Bro/Mansiere, Elaine dancing, the Sidler, Kramerica, Vandelay Industries, Kramer creating a Coffee Table book about Coffee Tables that actually IS a Coffee Table, etc.). But the above nine are fine for now.

ESSAY: 20/20 VIEW OF WHY 1977-1987 WAS THE GREATEST DECADE IN SCI-FI FILM HISTORY

by Don Rose

The answer seems clear when you look at the sci-fi films released during that magical ten year timespan between 1977 (when the original Star Wars hit theatres) and 1987 (which brought the first Robocop, and the Mel Brooks spoof-fi film that satirizes Star Wars space epics, Spaceballs). I hereby proclaim that the period 1977-1987 must be deemed the greatest decade ever for science fiction films.

As initial evidence for this claim, consider the following 20 movies released between 77 and 87 (listed with title and year of release):

Star Wars 1,2,3 (A New Hope, The Empire Strikes Back, Return of the Jedi): 77, 80, 83
Close Encounters of the Third Kind: 77
Star Trek 1,2,4 (The Motion Picture, The Wrath of Khan, The Voyage Home): 79, 82, 87
Superman: 78
Invasion of the Body Snatchers: 78
Blade Runner: 82
E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial: 82
The Thing: 82
Alien, Aliens: 79, 86
The Terminator: 84
Gremlins: 84
Back to the Future: 85
The Quiet Earth: 85
Brazil: 85
Robocop: 87



What an astonishing collection of solid sci-fi entertainment. All were hits, financially and/or critically. But wait, there's more -- as in many more examples of stellar science fiction movies released between 1977 and 1987, such as these 2o additional films:

The Black Hole: 79
Superman II, III, IV: 80, 83, 87
Flash Gordon: 80
2010: 84
The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai: 84
Star Trek 3 (The Search for Spock): 84
The Last Starfighter: 84
Dreamscape: 84
Dune: 84
The Philadelphia Experiment: 84
Night of the Comet: 84
Ghostbusters: 84
Enemy Mine: 85
Cocoon: 85
Lifeforce: 85
Predator: 87
Innerspace: 87
Spaceballs: 87

I believe the evidence is clear. The combination of box office popularity and revenue generated (and franchises launched) during these ten years has simply never been matched in any other decade. These films also introduced the most famous sci-fi lines of all time ("May the Force be with you"; "I'll be back"; "Who ya gonna call?"; "E T phone home"; and even a famous line made of music not words -- the five notes heard in Close Encounters).

So why did this period from 1977 to 1987 spawn so many science fiction classics? Perhaps it was the combination of many forces coming together -- the main force being film technology, getting cheaper and better and hitting a technical sweet spot, leading to widespread use of a new generation of special effects, accelerated by the spectacular success of that space spectacular, Star Wars. Perhaps it is also related to the fact that this ten-year timespan brought the rise of the personal computer, from the first simple Apple machines to the IBM PC and the Mac; our nation was falling in love with home technology. Third, it was the age of Voyager - the first spacecraft launched in 77 with its twin launched soon after, exposing our solar system for the first time - and Cosmos - the PBS series that made Carl Sagan a worldwide science star and "billions and billions" a household phrase. Voyager and Cosmos inspired the nation to fall in love with space all over again, a post-SpaceRace post-Apollo renaissance.

Then again, some would simply say Star Wars as the sole reason for the ten-year sci-fi film boom that began 30 years ago. Looking back on it now, Star Wars seemed to arrive out of nowhere, or from some alien cinematic world; it felt so new at the time, so fresh and exciting. Star Wars was the Elvis of sci-fi flicks, popularizing a new filmic form (epic sci-fi adventure laden with hi-tech effects) just as Elvis had popularized a new musical form (rock and roll). Star Wars was born in theatres just weeks before Elvis died; perhaps a torch passed from one legendary innovator to another.

Of course, when it comes to the greatness of the great sci-fi films of 1977-87, you don't really have to worry why. Why not just enjoy some 20/20 hindsight and rent these forty fantastic films, for fun. (Netflix, here I come!)