Let's talk about Sci-Fi movies

OrbitalDawn said:
Folklore* :p
Click to expand...

Nooo... how did that ... FFS
OrbitalDawn said:
I think the main criteria y'all are focusing on is some kind of plausibility. Seems it's more 'hard' science fiction that has this requirement to an extent. In reality it's more malleable and changes depending on what the creator wants to do.

And it doesn't have to be inventions only. Who says we won't find alien life that resembles dragons/magic?
Click to expand...

plausibility -> science

Godzillia is sci-Fi


The point is... whit magic\dragons they are not trying to give some complex explanation as to why they exist, they just exist.
With sci-fi they create a possible explanation for things happening... like Godzilla. He is a mutant caused by the atomic bomb.

If they say that the dragons are from space and the magic is just their advanced tech... then yes that is sci-fi.
 
Nerfherder said:
Nooo... how did that ... FFS


plausibility -> science

Godzillia is sci-Fi


The point is... whit magic\dragons they are not trying to give some complex explanation as to why they exist, they just exist.
With sci-fi they create a possible explanation for things happening... like Godzilla. He is a mutant caused by the atomic bomb.

If they say that the dragons are from space and the magic is just their advanced tech... then yes that is sci-fi.
Click to expand...

Very extremely well said. That's exactly how I think of it.

Fantasy bores me as it's all just made up crap. Sci-Fi could actually happen one day.
 
Chevron said:
Very extremely well said. That's exactly how I think of it.

Fantasy bores me as it's all just made up crap. Sci-Fi could actually happen one day.
Click to expand...

Funny, that's why I love fantasy (books, movies, games..). I deal with RL every day, for entertainment I like something else. Although SciFi is also one of my favorites since its not RL (although it could be one day).
 
Nerfherder said:
Because it exists in a completely imaginary realm. It does not link to our reality at all.

and also because of the Jedi's, they are magic. The technology in the Star wars universe is based on a completely imaginary physics, its all backdrop.
Using the what if scenario : What if on another planet there where these guys called Jedi's who had super powers and Ewoks and Wookies existed.

What are the ethical/moral implications for us ? Nothing.

Fantasy.... space western. Same as Firefly.


Do the test for Hunger Games....

What if one day there was a war and the people who won the war used advances weapons to enslave the losers, then they forced them to send their kids to play this game where they had to kill each other...

Ethical moral implications: Are powerful weapons and technology going to help or hinder the average person... especially if they are not available to everyone?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately George Lucas also felt the same as you do and changed his mind with the prequels and came up with... midichlorians! :sick:
 
SeRpEnT said:
Unfortunately George Lucas also felt the same as you do and changed his mind with the prequels and came up with... midichlorians! :sick:
Click to expand...

I think we can just put that in a box with Jar Jar binks :sick:

Ep 1-3 are a completely separate genre called Childhood Ruining.
 
I would classify between fantasy and sci-fi by "hardness" as well as content.

Very hard sci-fi would be for example a story involving near-future or very likely to be true science elements, for example a movie about the Mars Rover.
As you turn the hardness down the uncertainty goes up. For example Star Trek, we might build food replicators one day but not a warp drive. It's still sci-fi because of the majority of the content though.
Turn it down more and it becomes e.g. Star Wars where the theme is still space/ships, but you're so shielded from any science that it begins to border on fantasy.

Throw in dragons and it turns into fantasy. I mean in 10000 years we might genetically engineer dragons to ride on, surely that's sci-fi. But simply because they're dragons which we currently associate with fantasy then it becomes fantasy.
 
Cray said:
Why should they, there existence is theoretical isn't it? Why would it have to be the same?
Click to expand...

Theoretical yes. But does a parallel universe not mean its a like, if it's completely a different its just a completely different universe and nothing parallel about it... no?
 
animal531 said:
I would classify between fantasy and sci-fi by "hardness" as well as content.

Very hard sci-fi would be for example a story involving near-future or very likely to be true science elements, for example a movie about the Mars Rover.
As you turn the hardness down the uncertainty goes up. For example Star Trek, we might build food replicators one day but not a warp drive. It's still sci-fi because of the majority of the content though.
Turn it down more and it becomes e.g. Star Wars where the theme is still space/ships, but you're so shielded from any science that it begins to border on fantasy.

Throw in dragons and it turns into fantasy. I mean in 10000 years we might genetically engineer dragons to ride on, surely that's sci-fi. But simply because they're dragons which we currently associate with fantasy then it becomes fantasy.
Click to expand...

The original Star Trek was a lot more Sci-fi, every planet they visited there was some or other scenario where they would have moral dilemas and challenges. Like interfering in the balance of another world or helping one guy while another dies etc...

There is less of that now
 
Nerfherder said:
Nooo... how did that ... FFS


plausibility -> science

Godzillia is sci-Fi


The point is... whit magic\dragons they are not trying to give some complex explanation as to why they exist, they just exist.
With sci-fi they create a possible explanation for things happening... like Godzilla. He is a mutant caused by the atomic bomb.

If they say that the dragons are from space and the magic is just their advanced tech... then yes that is sci-fi.
Click to expand...

See now we're back to sophistication as being the criteria...

A mindless action movie featuring killer robots, future tech or space travel would thus not be sci fi according to your definition as it doesn't try to 'explain' the moral, philosophical or scientific implications or the reasons behind 'why' any of it happened?
 
fanie.dry said:
Theoretical yes. But does a parallel universe not mean its a like, if it's completely a different its just a completely different universe and nothing parallel about it... no?
Click to expand...

What? Parallel universe means there's nothing parallel about it? :confused:

Parallel universes could be anything, it could be the exact same as ours, could be the exact opposite, could only be slightly different etc. No way of knowing.
 
OrbitalDawn said:
What? Parallel universe means there's nothing parallel about it? :confused:

Parallel universes could be anything, it could be the exact same as ours, could be the exact opposite, could only be slightly different etc. No way of knowing.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X