With next month marking the 50th anniversary of the Apollo 11 moon landing, this seems like an appropriate time to critically examine the fascination generations of writers and filmmakers have had with the moon. What is it about space travel that was so interesting to Jules Verne when he wrote FROM THE EARTH TO THE MOON? George Melies was certainly inspired by Verne when he made his pioneering short film A TRIP TO THE MOON (1902). Melies actually allows his characters to land on the moon, not just circle around it as in the Verne original. It was Fritz Lang who first showed audiences the possibilities of rocket travel in his 1929 German silent film WOMAN IN THE MOON. What is the relationship between these works of science fiction and the scientific facts? And what insight have writers and filmmakers provided about humanity’s relationship with the rest of the universe?
There is a common belief that when time travel is used in a television show, it’s because the writers wrote themselves into a corner and can’t find a way out, so they introduce time travel, a tricky element to handle. Some use it as a panic button and expect their audience to just go along, while some do give it some thought. Analyze some examples in popular culture and discuss whether or not there is a good way to handle time travel. Possible examples include Rick and Morty, The Flash, and other science fiction and fantasy works.
This is a great topic which I would love to see written in depth! This is a thing that is always bugging me in movies, for example the use of time travel in the Avengers: Endgame, which had a lot of unanswered points and hardly believable moments and slippages. Another great example would be Looper where the story is, in my opinion, extremely powerful.
– Kaya1 year ago
This is certainly an interesting topic but it will need to be kept in mind the different kinds of time travel portrayed in media. So shows and movies have strict rules on the subject, like the Flash where time is described as fragile, as opposed to Bill and Ted in which a time machine is used with no apparent consequences. Still an article I want to see written. – Unquotable1 year ago
It would also be great to see where it's done well. Like Safety Not Guaranteed and Back to the future, where the narrative is constructed with time travel in mind, as opposed to the plot device to get out of a jiffy. – Lousands1 year ago
I think it is important to look at the physics involved; ideally, fictional time travel (and travel through space as well) will not violate rules of physics (and my understanding is that some time travel is thought to be possible, at least in theory). – AlanLibert1 year ago
I think its interesting how in Endgame, the film discredits multiple other films usage of time travel being incorrect or violating some law of physics.But I think another time travel film that can be added to the list is one that was mentioned fondly of in Endgame: Hot Tub Time Machine. While it plays off as being a college teen-style comedy film, the original point of the film is for everyone who goes back in time to repeat everything that they had done the exact way that it had happened, which of course fall apart half-way through the film but at the same time, when they arrive back they discover that the changes they made helped resolve their previous struggles at the beginning of the film. – Kevin Mohammed1 year ago
Compare and contrast the Other/Alien and the Human. What is a human? Is there such a thing as a "superior race"? Texts to consider: Ursula Le Guin’s "The Left Hand of Darkness", China Mieville’s "Embassytown" and A. E. van Vogt’s "Black Destroyer".
I have been taking a science fiction literature course at Uni and I feel that a great novel to discuss is the War of the Worlds by H.G. Wells and the discussion that the "other" are those who were under the thumbs of the British military during resource wars. The novel comments on cultural atrocities committed by the British Empire and the demonization of many countries, in order to rule them and replenish the Empire's need for resources. The novel uses Martians that invade Britain and relentlessly attack the human race in order to take over. That's all I can say without spoiling it but if you need any notes please let me know. – Esme943 years ago
The relationship between audiences and science fiction films have changed over the century. This has been affected by the political struggles of each era. How have the focus of these films changed over the decades. How similar or different are our fears between the 1950’s to today.
It is interesting to see how Sci-Fi has gone mainstream. Why is that? How did sci-fi become part of pop culture? Has it lost anything or does it mean that audiences are more open than in the past? This is a good topic. – Munjeera5 years ago
This may be relevant, since it deals with political issues. In a film class, we discussed James Cameron's Aliens and American films' (primarily action films, but Aliens is also sci fi) portrayals of masculine action stars (counting women, i.e. Ellen Ripley and Vasquez) and how they were influenced by Reagan's public persona. This may be taking allegory too far, but Ripley is essentially a hard body using violence to go up against an Other, which is in this case actually aliens. American sci fi tends to deal a lot with a fear of the Other/invasion (Red Scare, hostage crisis), but that's just one take to potentially explore. – Emily Deibler5 years ago
Specifying a certain countries' sci-fi films could help focus this article, since sci-fi is often used to explore and speculate on social issues, which change depending on where the movies are being made. – chrischan4 years ago
The Matrix was a very good "fear of technology" movie, made just as the internet was becoming omnipresent in daily life. – Tarben4 years ago
Interestingly enough, the sci-fi stories themselves have changed through the years with new and advancing technologies in the real world, but I feel as though the overall drive and goal of the genre has remained the same: To give humanity hope for the future. – Bluejay4 years ago
The "science" in movies nowadays is more ridiculous and at the same time believable as compared to those Sci-fi flicks made .30 years back – DevanshSharma4 years ago
Talk about various science fiction series and the types of technology or concepts which were once thought to be unbelievable, but have become reality, today.
An example of this is how Star Trek and other shows would have holographic projectors or screen talking which enabled the ability of sight in long-distance communications. Nowadays we have various means of video chatting with people from around the world such as Facetime that seem to have been encouraged by shows like Star Trek.
The movies Johnny Mnemonic and Back to the Future 2 are good movies to look into.
– JennyCardinal4 years ago
Look at some of the cyberpunk genre like Neal Stephenson's Snowcrash and William Gibson's Neuromancer and compare their use of the internet with the reality it's become. – Tarben4 years ago
Could the writer of this piece also examine ways we've sidestepped expectation? For instance, in older films we often see "the year is 2015, we have a permanent colony on the moon" or Back to the Future's infamous hover boards (not hand-free exploding segways we call hover boards). There are more extreme examples of cultural ideals, like assuming that we might have achieved world peace, have evolved beyond the discriminations of gender and race.I think examining how we've achieved Sci-Fi and how we've failed it would be a nice contrast. – Piper CJ4 years ago
To Piper, yes! That gives the article a more diverse viewpoint for readers. I feel by showing what has been done, what we have yet to accomplish, or attempted acts to resemble concepts in science fiction would help give more insight.Also Jenny and Tarben, those are all definitely some great resources for the article! – Kevin Mohammed4 years ago
I think Samsung used a scene from 2001: A Space Odyssey in court when Apple sued them, claiming that they had ripped off the basic design of the iPhone touch screen. Their argument was that the idea had already existed in the sci-fi imaginary, and therefore was not an original idea from Apple. – TKing4 years ago
There's at least one then-futuristic film I've seen that had personalized street and, I think, train station advertising change as each person passed. Personal advertising has been on the internet for a while, and might soon be here on the street. It's always the love of amassing even more money by the already-mega rich that drives these advances, so when it'll really piss them off when I refuse installment of their microchip so they can market me. I'll be laughing at them from my prison cell. Take that.I've read that Gen X has been written off by marketers as too difficult to predict (read, "lead like sheep"). Good work, Gen X'ers. Make 'em work for it. – Tigey4 years ago
Discuss sci-fi’s use of technology to build "the perfect woman." Why are androids given a gender in the first place? Do androids have a sense of autonomy or are they content to be used as a semi-sentient sex toy? Is this a fetish or a case of misogyny? Why are male androids in film rarely given the same sexualized treatment?
Good question. It is like asking why GPS and computer voices are female. Probably because the creators were male. Male androids like Data are rarely sexualized. – Munjeera4 years ago
Like Munjeera said, a person's creations are often based upon their own ideal. Therefore it's more than likely that the original concept comes from a guy trying to be ambitious about his own personal desires. – Kevin Mohammed4 years ago
You can even go further back than The Stepford Wives. A great starting place would be Fritz Lang's 1927 film Metropolis, which also features a sexualized female robot.
Also, if you're going to discuss these films, you must address that most of them were made to critique misogynistic views. Ira Levin, William Goldman, and Bryan Forbes have all gone on the record to stress that The Stepford Wives was intended to parody views of "the ideal women" upon being accused of sexism by people who didn't understand its satire.
In Ex Machina, it's important to note how the film acknowledges the very tradition that you're addressing. Nathan specifically designs Ava to be sexually attractive to Caleb (even drawing inspiration from his porn searches), but the expectation is subverted when Ava uses her sexuality in tandem with her superior intelligence to outsmart both men and escape from the confides of their narrow patriarchal viewpoint (symbolically manifested as Nathan's mancave-esque research facility).
Just because a female robot is sexualized, it doesn't mean that it's necessarily just to satisfy the sexual fantasies of the presumably male spectator. The films that endure are often those which were ahead of their times in addressing the social disparity between men and women. – ProtoCanon4 years ago
If only there were more of them! – Munjeera2 years ago
With science fiction being popular enough in the American media to have it’s own channel on most cable/HD tv services, it’s become quite the commodity, but a lot of this science fiction is based around America or European powers, with a few exceptions, but there is actually a rich history of using science fiction to depict political unrest and situations under dictators and during war. I’d just like to throw out a list with some interesting stories with their summaries and maybe a bit of analysis.
Several films, shows, and other media have posited the idea of Clean Energy for all and an advancement for the future. This is quickly is shown to be false when all that potential for energy becomes a WMD. Destroying the weapon and returning to the status quo (traditional energy sources) is usually the happy ending. Solar and wind don’t seem to be picked out (although apparently I should see Sahara, it’s got something with concentrated solar); rather, it’s usually something new, sci fi-fantasy, and explosive.
I have a few theories to talk about: the dark turn of saving the world, the fear of the unknown, the possible connection to nuclear power’s "betrayal," do we just want more epxlosions, etc. But I’d like to sample more work. Here’s what I have so far, with spoilers in the list:
The Dark Knight Rises – fusion reactor made bomb
Spiderman 2 – "mini sun" made bomb
The Legend of Korra – spirit vines
The Flash (comics) – Speed force for public transport/energy, starts tearing up time
Sahara – Concentrated solar power used as a weapon
(Bonus: Snowpiercer’s attempt at derailing global warming causing an ice age)
More suggestions are super welcome!!
How about clean energy in TV with Scylla in Prison Break in the final season 4? This is a good topic. Also, make note of a new battery powered by an energy source in Arrow that helps Felicity walk again. – Munjeera5 years ago
Adding cosmic cube to list (an obvious "too much power..." one). – IndiLeigh3 years ago
Discuss the difference between what "sci-fi" and "science fiction": that is, what differentiates a Star Trek, Star Wars, or Stargate from Isaac Asimov or Philip K. Dick? Is one inherently a better art from than the other? Does inaccurate or fantastical science somehow negate a potential "science fiction" work and downgrade it to "sci-fi"? are these designations warranted, or even altogether accurate? Can cover the literary, film, and televised examples of each genre, and examine if one is more commonly found in one dramatic form than the other (e.g., is "sci-fi" more common to film and TV, and "science fiction" to the written word?).
This seems to be a similar question as to what are the ill-defined differences between the popularized term of "Indie" verses the proper term "Independent?" Is an "Indie Film" or an "Indie Game" something that is produced by a young up-and-coming artist(s) who wish to make it big in the industry without the help of a big studio production? Or is that what the term "Independent" means, and "Indie" is in fact a term coined by the Industry to make smaller independently studio funded films and games sound more cool? Also, I would argue that the term "Science Fantasy" ought to be included in this discussion, because "Science Fiction" is a term meaning a fictionalized tale that uses current scientific facts and theories to spin an intentionally pseudo-realistic story that has a percentage chance of actually happening at some time in the future, or could have happened some time in the past under the right conditions. "Science Fantasy" chooses instead to only coat the surface and setting of a story in "technological" advances and gadgetry, or it perhaps takes place on another world or in another dimension, but it does not bother to base it's world in anything accurate or scientific. It's all just for looks, not for logic. So then what is "Sci-fi" supposed to mean? It seems it is intended to mean a science fiction tale that may or may not be based in scientific facts, but is nonetheless a more sensationalized story that does not go down the same thought provoking, philosophical, and psychological routes that a more "well-crafted" science fiction story might. Perhaps a discussion in definition of terms would be in order before a discussion of labeling and association of certain stories with such terms can begin.– Jonathan Leiter5 years ago
I agree with Jonathan in regards to his comments about "Science Fantasy" vs "Science Fiction" and I think it would not only be extremely interesting, but extremely helpful if you share what you find to be the difference and where there may be a misunderstanding or interpretation of these in regards to literature and media. The questions you are asking are perfect, but I think it would be quite a bit more tangible for the audience if you provide the "answers" (opinionated or expository) as the bulk of your writing instead of potentially perpetuating the questions and merely bringing them to the forefront (which can be a great part of it as well). I hope this helps. – EvanWebsterWiley5 years ago
I have found ideas recycled in the movies from science fiction classics. One example is a plot twist in James Cameron's Avatar, with the twins at the beginning having to exchange places was straight out of Heinlein's Time for the Stars. If you read enough science fiction it is possible to find where writer's of screenplays have "borrowed" from science fiction authors. I guess it's inevitable because the screenwriters probably were avid science fiction readers before they became sci-fi screenwriters.I think a well set up sci-fi or science fiction universe has a set of principles like – Munjeera5 years ago
Look into why movie goers can actively disregard "scientific problems" in films such as Star Trek and Star Wars, but grow exceedingly less forgiving during films like "Gravity", "Interstellar", and most recently "The Martian".
"Star Wars" is gritty and more honest with it's depiction of an "aged" and "well-used" future, or past, compared to other earlier depictions of space. However, at its heart, it is entirely a fantasy set in a technological environment.
"Star Trek," on the other hand, wants to be more believable with it's well-researched details based in scientific fact (or at least it used to be), nevertheless it has always been too far beyond our modern limitations to really bother taking issue with anything it gets wrong. It's too perfect, too streamlined, too clean. Barely anyone ever has to wear a space suit, and only if they need to do outside repairs, which isn't often.All of the other films try to handle space in a more gut-wrenching, tension-filled, anxious, terrifying, and life-changing way. Their space craft are based directly on current designs and understandings with regards to cost and efficiency. And artificial gravity in space still requires rotational inertia to work (eg. The Hermes from "The Martian, and The Endurance from "Interstellar"). The stakes are high. Death is a very real possibility. If you aren't smart and clever enough you could lose all your air, fly out the hull and into the void, burn your skin off, lose a limb. And there are no warp cores, phasers, or photon torpedoes to save you.So if the script for these films takes a short-cut, or doesn't portray something accurately, then it looks like a cheat. Whereas "Star Trek" or "Star Wars" can get away with such a cheat, because their narrative drama does not hinge on the scientific accuracy of the details and numbers, and whether or not somebody can patch up a breach in the hull with duct-tape, or find out how to swing around a planet just right to get back to Earth faster while conserving the most fuel. – Jonathan Leiter5 years ago
I love this idea. I think as we drift closer to becoming more technologically advanced, as we discover more about space, society is becoming more fearful of the future therefore films like Gravity and Interstellar are less favored by the audience. I am interested to see where someone takes this! – emilyinmannyc5 years ago