I often show clips of the following tapes: And encourage students to watch some of these films on their own and/or I've made one of the essays writing on one or two of these films: There's also a Gibson film/tape that I've been meaning to view from the early 1990s.  And I would love to see _StartUp.com_.  If it's on tape yet, I'll definitely show it.

More marginal is Coppola's _Nosferatu_ (1990), which may be useful at this time of year.  It has a great sequence with silent films and shows the role of communication technology within Victorian society throughout (typewriters, telegraph, cinematograph), but it's part of the texture of the film, not overt.  I use _1900 House_ for the same reason.  It's sort of a _Survivor_, with a contemporary family experiencing late Victorian, middle-class technology for three months -- they go bonkers eventually.  _1900_ is particularly useful for heightening awareness of domestic technology and the role that technology and related consumption, with the class issues that fall out, play in women's lives.

The "best"?  Or "classics"?  I think students don't have basic cyber literacy unless they've seen at least part of _Metro_ and HAL from _2001_.  There are so many pop culture interextual references about computers (many commercials draw on _2001_, such as a Mac ad in 1999) and cyborgs taking over the earth that draw on those two films as reference points that I find them essential, despite their age.  And there is high quality criticism as well.  Students often like the films too, if they can be coaxed along a bit.

You'll see that I've defined "cyber" pretty broadly.  Four primary reasons:
1)  To encourage students to think outside the <box>Internet</box>.  Just because characters in the film use the Net, doesn't necessarily mean that the film is about what the Net is about, the world that the Net represents, if that makes sense (e.g., computer monitors and email are ubiquitous -- so what?).

2)  Problems with the quality/age of many of the films; therefore students' appreciation may be diminished.  Movie stars and action/FX are good for capturing their imaginations.  _Johnny Mneumonic_ and _Hackers_ are *awful* films, but they do have some good sequences and it's fun, if argued the right way, to see Keanu Reeves (never more wooden) and Angelina Jolie in early performances.  Pierce Brosnan in _Lawnmower_ is a hoot too.

3)  Nevertheless viewing older films helps slip in some historical sensitivity to tech, state of the art of yesterday.  And, of course, newer may not be "better."  _The Matrix_ is watered down Gibson, but most students don't realize it.

4)  Facile vilification of the Net/technology in some films, dumbing down for broader audience appreciation (e.g., _The Net_).  A wider selection with more thoughtful films encourages less preachy or binary judgmental essays.  With my subject matter, it's an occupational hazard.

I too am interested in the final list that shakes out.  Thanks for the thread.

   Wendy Robinson                               wgrobin@duke.edu
   www.duke.edu/~wgrobin                        wgrobin@email.unc.edu
   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
   Instructor: Ethics and the Internet, REL 185.04
   a.k.a. E&I 2.0: Pervasive Computing in the Digital Age
   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
   Duke University                              Department of Religion
   118 Gray Bldg, Box 90964                     Durham, NC  27708
   office: 02CC Perkins Library                 voice mail: (919) 681-1702
   www.duke.edu/~wgrobin/ethics/                fax:  (919) 660-3530