Rich Washabaugh asks: "Going by the disparity in the number of these movies produced compared to other genres (thats not a scientific accounting, just observation from several video stores) and the general response from friends when I tell them I rented "2001" or "Stargate", the sci-fi/fantasy/horror genres are not overly popular. (I'm going to abbreviate these three into just sci-fi to save typing and space) Aside from the idea that the realities constructed by sci-fi are not readily understood by audiences, "Dune" for example, my guess is that the special efx, though nice to look at, actually keep people from enjoying the story. The movies turn out to have long, boring flight sequences, shots that contain so much visual info that most people can't assimilate it all, etc..." This is an interesting question, but I think the real test might be to get your friends' reactions to films of proven popularity such as the first two ALIENS films, the TERMINATOR films, and of course ET, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS and the Star Wars trilogy. All of these films certainly revel in spectacle and have lots of interesting stuff to look at--but all of them fit rather comfortably into other established film genres: Action Film, Horror, etc. (though CLOSE ENCOUNTERS might be an exception). DUNE and 2001 are also very interesting visually, but are going to be extremely frustrating for people trying to watch them with standard narrative expecta- tions. While I like DUNE rather better than many people do (mainly *because* of its visuals), it suffers from a nearly-incoherent narrative that's a result of trying to cram an epic work into a couple of hours of film. 2001, on the other hand, is so spare and lean in its narrative, its human characters so devoid of affective affinity (i.e., likability), and so filled with narrative gaps (few explanations of why or how something happened) that you have to go for the spectacle (as many did when the film was released) or understand that Kubrick wants you to look somewhere else than standard narrative patterns for a model to rely on. So, in short, my answer would be that the FX in and of themselves aren't necessarily as distracting as you propose. What is more important is the narrative structure of the film itself--and what the film viewer thinks that he or she expects on going to see such a film. Don Larsson, Mankato State U (MN) ---- To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]