Low Budget Sci-Fi Films That You Enjoyed!

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

Mad Max and Donnie Darko are excellent additions to the discussion. The budgets for the sequels went up substantially, but Mad Max was made on a low budget (about 350,000-400,000 Australian dollars). Donnie Darko was made on an estimated budget of $4.5 million.

 

[Truth_Seeker]

Cypher is definitely his least effective film, but it's worth watching as a rental. I rather liked Nothing, which is absolutely absurd and definitely elicited a few chuckles.

Cypher had a good story with an interesting plot twist at the end. I remember being dissapointed by the CGI (the cartoonish helicopter in particular ).

 

[stonester1]

Pi

 

[Klaus]

The Quiet Earth - 1,000,000

Love that movie, though I know opinion here is sharply divided lol...

 

[Argus Skyhawk]

I enjoyed Anna to the Infinite Power. I'm not sure what its budget was, but I doubt it was very high. We just don't see enough dark SciFi suspense thrillers aimed at kids, I say.

 

[Truth_Seeker]

"The Mist" ($18m.) was also a good low budget Sci-Fi/horror film. I liked the idea of the monsters coming from a parallel dimension.

 

[TheMasterOfOrion]

Shrunken Heads
Ikarie XB-1 1963 Polák
Screamers
First Spaceship on Venus 1960
Battle Beyond the Stars
Solyaris Andrei Tarkovsky 72
Lifeforce
Weird Science
Silent Running
Fantastic Planet 1973
Black Moon from 75 (not really space scifi )
Wing Commander, Gattaca, Fly, Children of Men, Killer Clowns from Outer Space
Day of the Triffids 1963
Caltiki, The Immortal Monster (not really space scifi )
The blob
Ice Pirates, Space Hunter
Latitude Zero, Carpenter's Dark Star
Outer Limits Sandkings movie
Toxic Avenger, Godzilla movies etc
Planet of the ApesUchu daisenso
BarbarellaSpace Trucker

 

[Colonel Green]

The Quiet Earth - 1,000,000

Love that movie, though I know opinion here is sharply divided lol...

I didn't realize that. Was there a thread on it at some point?

 

[miraclefan]

Moontrap.
Dark side of the moon.
Leviathan.

Have no idea what the budgets were, but they look cheaply made.
However I still think they are fun (scary) movies.

 

[Klaus]

The Quiet Earth - 1,000,000

Love that movie, though I know opinion here is sharply divided lol...

I didn't realize that. Was there a thread on it at some point?

I think it was just in a general movie thread, but IIRC some think it's boring and some of us love it. I just got it on DVD to replace my old fuzzy dubbed VHS a couple of years ago.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

Robinson Crusoe on Mars

 

[Chris_Johnston]

Equilibrium--20mil

Kurt Wimmer made a great Sci-Fi movie for just $20m.

It doesn't look cheap at all, in fact it looks like it costs at least $50-60m.

Yes, I was very impressed by the production values, especially the cinematography.
(Great commentary on the DVD, too! I think there's even a drinking game for it: Take a drink whenever Wimmer says "At the end of the day...")

 

[Kegg]

Robinson Crusoe on Mars

It is? The SFX for the spaceships are pretty good for the period and the sets are similarly nice. It's not the opulence of Forbidden Planet or 2001, but I wouldn't have imagined it to be a cash strapped production either (though I only dimly understand Hollywood economics, if at all).

Love that movie, though I know opinion here is sharply divided lol...

I didn't realize that. Was there a thread on it at some point?

I think it was just in a general movie thread, but IIRC some think it's boring and some of us love it.

I thought this was pretty good. The interraction of the characters is chiefly what I found interesting, the way their relationships develop over the course of the film.

 

[Harvey]

Yeah, I don't think Robinson Crusoe on Mars could have been that low-budget. But, I also don't think it's very good. Criterion hasn't had a great track record when it comes to science fiction releases, though. Equinox is an interesting piece of film history, but it's hard to watch. The less said about Armageddon, the better. And so on...

 

[Kegg]

^
It's not great and it's probably not something I'd see more than once, so it's good that I caught it on TV rather than buy the DVD set.

But it is still something I'd see once.

 

[stonester1]

Until the End of the World

 

[Harvey]

^
It's not great and it's probably not something I'd see more than once, so it's good that I caught it on TV rather than buy the DVD set.

But it is still something I'd see once.

True, but did it warrant a Criterion release?

It would have been better if they had thrown the special features budget for that title towards, say, Alphaville, which only contains a two-page booklet with a short essay.

And by better, I mean I wish that's what they had done.

 

[stonester1]

It's not LOW low, but Dark City's production budget was 27 mil in '98 dollars.

 

[Kegg]

True, but did it warrant a Criterion release?

A release, anyway. Didn't they justify it based on the special effects? That's what I vaguely remember from reading the DVD's back cover.

It would have been better if they had thrown the special features budget for that title towards, say, Alphaville, which only contains a two-page booklet with a short essay.

And by better, I mean I wish that's what they had done.

Alphaville was one of their earlier releases, IIRC. That said it's probably due for another edition... and it's not like Godard gets forgotten.

 

[Harvey]

I think it was release #43 or something. So, yeah, pretty early. Still, I wish it would have included supplements of some kind. Criterion isn't well-known for issuing bare-bone discs.