| Author |
Message |
|
| bocce |
 Posted: Sat Aug 28, 2004 1:47 pm |
 |
|
|
Joined: 24 May 2004
Posts: 2428
|
i'm not sure "science fiction" is quite so undefineable...
scientists basically deal with what a raw phenomenon is and how it operates. generally, they do this by discrimination (what makes it unique from other, perhaps even similar, phenomena) and via consistency (does it operate the same way at all times, in all conditions) and, then, label it.
technologists (engineers) look at the operative end of the discovery toward practical application and to enhance said application, if possible. an easily understandable paradigm would be synthetic fibre (in the 1930's).
let's assume a phenomenon is stumbled upon that can't be neatly catogorised or quantified. you have the underpinnings of sci-fi. let's assume a phenomenon is mis-catagorised or under quantified and things to go awry, you definitely have sci-fi.
let's further assume the technologists operate and enhance operational aspects of the phenomenon based on the above mis information. we got BIG sci-fi.
the important point is that fallible MEN deal with new discoveries and equally fallible MEN assess and apply their findings. this is what differentiates the monster (or horror) film from sci-fi. the monster, whether it be dracula, the mummy, ghidra or godzilla is a freak of nature, not a mis application of science (as in frankenstein).
nor is it an alien visitation, a sub genre very closely linked to the monster epic. the only valid sci-fi that i see in alien visitation is if there is CONSTRUCTIVE communication between the aliens and humans. that would be scientific. the rest is merely horror.
more later.... |
|
|
| Back to top |
 
|
| Marj |
| Posted: Sat Aug 28, 2004 3:08 pm |
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 10497
Location: Manhattan
|
Interesting take, Bocce. And I am assuming by MEN, you mean humans?
I am loving this forum so far, and while I doubt I'll be able to take an active part after this weekend, I will be reading and trying to see some of the movies on the list.
I especially want to see Metrolis. It's one of those movies I've had on my list forever, but always manages to get pushed aside for one reason or another. Now I find there are three versions, and while many of you have discussed this, I wonder, in the end, does it really matter which one I can find?
Is seeing any version, better than seeing none? |
|
|
| Back to top |
 
|
| bocce |
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 5:59 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 24 May 2004
Posts: 2428
|
continuing along...
if we delineate what characterises sci-fi from horror, we must also find a rationale to separate it from fantasy. this is a bit trickier and renders some of our more cherished sci-fi designates as leaps of imagination not sci-fi. again the criterion is the pursuit of science and/or evolving technologies.
anthropology is not hard science so most of the lost world films (eg. "journey to the center of the earth") are out. "jurrasic park" is in because the core issue is cloning.
similarly, random space travel (or random encounters in space) like "lost in space" or, even, "alien mine" are more fantastic than scientific. if you buy this premise, then, "forbidden planet" is hanging on the cusp.
extrordinary powers type films must also be filtered out. "scanners" is not but "altered states" definitely has the scientific chops to be included. even de palma's "the fury" may have some legitimacy.
apocalyptic visions would only fit if the story evolves from man's intentional meddling with the enviroment. i don't see the results of warfare as sci-fi unless some extrordinary new weapon is at the core. so "the world, flesh and the devil" or tv's "the day after" is out, "planet of the apes" is borderline, but "soylent green" or "silent running" would be in.
anyhow those are some of my criteria. i'm sure everyone have their own which either support or negate the above. have at it. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| bocce |
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 6:29 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 24 May 2004
Posts: 2428
|
i meant to add...
"starwars" and "dune" are most assuredly fantasy, not sci-fi as would have been "the thing" (original) had the doctor not meddled with the arm. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| censored-03 |
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 6:58 am |
|
|
Joined: 24 May 2004
Posts: 3058
Location: Gotham, Big Apple, The Naked City
|
After reading such consequent posts about Sci-Fi by bocce, I'd just like to add that I wish we also would have chosen something like this.....
http://www.zone-sf.com/firemaidens.html
..... that's Sci-Fi for me...oh yeah.  |
_________________
"Life is a comedy for those who think and a tragedy for those who feel."
-- Horace Walpole |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marilyn |
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 8:26 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 8210
Location: Skokie (not a bad movie, btw)
|
| If anyone wants a Trash Scifi "chapter" to this forum, I'm all for it. It is one of the more amusing genres out there, fantasy-filled and fun. |
_________________
http://ferdyonfilms.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Syd |
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 10:42 am |
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 12890
Location: Norman, Oklahoma
|
Quote: bocce
anthropology is not hard science so most of the lost world films (eg. "journey to the center of the earth") are out. "jurrasic park" is in because the core issue is cloning.
Stories about speculative anthropology (and paleontology, which seems like what you have in mind) can possibly be science fiction; for example Michael Bishop's novels No Enemy but Time and Ancient of Days or the novel that came out a few years ago where Homo erectus had colonized America and Homo sapiens had not. |
_________________
I had a love and my love was true but I lost my love to the yabba dabba doo, --The Flintstone Lament |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Nancy |
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 1:07 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 4607
Location: Norman, OK
|
censored-03 wrote: After reading such consequent posts about Sci-Fi by bocce, I'd just like to add that I wish we also would have chosen something like this.....
http://www.zone-sf.com/firemaidens.html
..... that's Sci-Fi for me...oh yeah.
There does indeed need to be a genre forum for that. A friend of mine just got a DVD set that includes Wild Women of Wongo, which I've been wanting to see for years. Maybe I can talk him into showing it as a double feature with Mesa of Lost Women. And, of course, I've always had a sneaking fondness for Queen of Outer Space. When I was a kid, the local TV station showed a creature feature every Friday night. Unfortunately, they only had two films: Attack of the 50-Foot Woman and Them, so they alternated them. (I've seen Them so many times I practically know it by heart.) After a while, they invested in a third film, and it was Queen of Outer Space. |
_________________
"All in all, it's just another feather in the fan."
Isaacism, 2009 |
|
| Back to top |
|
| bocce |
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 1:50 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 24 May 2004
Posts: 2428
|
syd...
i sympathise with your position. however, if the hypothesis component of the scientific method were the only criterion for science, almost any film would qualify.
frankly, i like anthropologic tie ins like "stargate" but i just can't get comfortable fitting them into my definitions for sci-fi. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Syd |
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 2:34 pm |
|
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 12890
Location: Norman, Oklahoma
|
There's more to it than just the hypothesis, there's the way it's carried out. No Enemy But Time (which won the Nebula award for best Science Fiction Novel sometime around 1980) is about an anthropologist who travels to a parallel Earth which didn't develop as fast as ours, in order to study Homo habilis, extrapolating from what we know about them. The methods of travelling across parallel earths and the biological speculations also mark it as science fiction.
There is also Olaf Stapledon's Sirius, about a superintelligent dog, which is definitely science fiction. |
_________________
I had a love and my love was true but I lost my love to the yabba dabba doo, --The Flintstone Lament |
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 5:33 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
| Some fundamentalists would argue that most science is fiction. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marj |
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 6:52 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 10497
Location: Manhattan
|
Gary is BACK and in great form, I see.  |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| mitty |
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:17 pm |
|
|
Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 1359
Location: Way Down Yonder.......
|
Just returned from Lower Boonies, and no "Metropolis"! They (Hollywood Video) have "Tron" and "Blade Runner", the directors cut. He suggested I try their website. I dunno, I'll try Blockbuster first I suppose. Tomorrow.
Joe, I had forgotten about "The Day of the Triffids"! Thats my second favorite (in book form). The movie with Howard Keel was so-so as I remember it. Howsomeever.....the BBC version on the PBS some years back was terrific! But I have been unable to locate a copy of it to purchase.
In fact all these years I have only had a paper back of "Triffids", and only lately managed to find a hardback of it. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Ghulam |
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:46 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 4742
Location: Upstate NY
|
| I had ordered Metropolis from Netflix, but then I found it at Hollywood Video yesterday, so I cancelled my Netflix order. The one I got is the 1926 version. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marc |
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:48 pm |
|
|
Joined: 19 May 2004
Posts: 8424
|
| THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL was recently released on DVD. It shouldn't be hard to find. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
