Several months ago I wrote a post with the title “All sci-fi movies are bad sci-fi movies” — but I never hit the publish button because, I dunno… my conclusion just didn’t feel quite right. I guess what I really meant was “Most modern blockbuster special effects extravaganza movies with spaceships are bad sci-fi movies.” Then a couple of days ago we took the kids to see what turned out to be a REALLY GOOD science fiction movie, and it inspired me to take another crack at that dusty old draft.
A definition of “science fiction”
I read a lot of “hard” science fiction in my misbegotten youth. Isaac Asimov, Larry Niven, Ray Bradbury, Frank Herbert, Robert Heinlein, Stanislaw Lem, Arthur C. Clarke, and I’m probably forgetting a few. How I devoured that stuff! I don’t read it so much any more, but I still think about it a lot.
Science fiction is different from “regular” fiction because, at least in its classic form (e.g., early Asimov), the protagonist is not really a character. It’s a hypothesis: what if. The job of the story is to take that hypothesis to its logical conclusion, for better or for worse. And the fun of science fiction is, however improbable the hypothesis may be, it is, in fact, possible that a planet with the characteristics of Dune exists, or that one day we will build robots with positronic brains that follow the Three Laws, or that there is a monolith somewhere on the moon. [Aside: This is why I hate it when people lump sc-fi and fantasy together. Fantasy, at least in in its typical swords ’n sorcery / heroic quest form, strives to take you away from the real world. Sci-fi, as escapist as it might seem, is actually very much grounded in reality. The few fantasy stories I really like are the ones that include some reference to our world, or provide some quasi-rational explanation for the existence of magic. Roger Zelazny's Chronicles of Amber are a great example of this. So are the Narnia books.]
What’s wrong with science fiction movies?
The problem I have with so many modern blockbuster special effects extravaganza movies with spaceships is that either they don’t really start with a hypothesis for a protagonist, or if they do, it totally gets lost under all the special effects stuff. The worst example is probably the Star Wars series, which could just as easily have taken place in a fake middle ages fantasy setting — it’s completely character- and romance-driven, with not a speck of “science” in it anywhere. And movie adaptations of “real” sci fi books can be just as bad. The movie version of Dune, for example, is all about how huge are the sandworms, and how gross-looking is the Baron Harkonnen — the cautionary tale about ecology is barely discernible. And Starship Troopers? It’s nothing but special effects, ooooooh look at the cool scary monsters! I’m not saying these are necessarily bad movies, but they sure ain’t science fiction.
Pixar Studios does it again!
When we took the kids to see Wall-E I was expecting to like it just because I like everything from Pixar. The incredible attention to detail, the grown-up jokes, the amazing visuals: it’s all good. But I wasn’t expecting that it would be such a great science fiction movie. I mean, sure, it’s character-driven — just take a look at Wall-E’s soulful expression — but it is also very much about a hypothesis. Not, perhaps, a stunningly original hypothesis, but certainly good enough for me: What if the earth got so filled with trash that there was no more room for humans? Wall-E gave me the exact same “wow, what if, oooh we gotta be careful that doesn’t happen” feeling that I got from all those great classic sci fi stories. I betcha whoever wrote the screenplay was a big fan of Asimov too.
What do you think? Do you agree with my definition of science fiction? Do you like sci fi movies? Have you seen Wall-E?
9 Comments
I recently listened to a set of college-level lectures on Classical Mythology from The Teaching Company. Prof. Elizabeth Vandiver concluded the course with the notion that science fiction is modern man’s version of classical mythology.
“She also demonstrates that the ancient gods, monsters, and heroes are very much alive and active today in contemporary beliefs in UFOs and visits from extraterrestrials and in popular entertainment such as Star Trek and films such as the Road Warrior and the Terminator series.”
We have a need to explain monsters, basically, and science fiction lets us satisfy that instinctive urge. I think that would be compatible with your “What if …?” definition.
When I saw the image of those classic sci-fi books, I was hooked on this post — I was eager to read on. The more so having — earlier — heard kids #3 and #2 comment as they looked over your shoulder on something you were doing related to the ‘Wall-e’ robot. Being across the room then, I guessed you were posting about the movie, and, now, having seen the image of those books, I was doubly curious: how would you connect that movie with classic sci-fi?
To me they are apples and oranges. A Pixar film is state-of-the-art CGI/animation, and has a certain kid/family friendly ‘tone’ and humor, to it. My associations with sci-fi center around the physical objects of dusty, yellowed, crumbling-paper, treasure books. And further, the word-of-mouth sharing of authors and titles:
“Have you read Asimov? if you liked him, try…”
“You haven’t read _________! Oh man are you gonna love it!”
(and then the experience of settling in for the mind-trip of whatever author/book I’d been pointed toward).
For me, that’s what ‘sci-fi’ is. (but maybe seeing the image(s) of those classics in that old, worn state at the start of your post focused me of the book/book-sharing aspect of sci-fi).
… but even so, yeah. I see what you mean. Looking at sci-fi (in book form) and this movie in terms of their underlying ‘what if’ nature, works — as you point out.
And going even a level or two deeper/more general: the political subtext ‘don’t pollute/don’t be a mindless consumer’ (or is it so central as to not be a ‘sub-text’?) of Wall-e leaves me pondering — again — something Aunt Sara said some time ago, about politics involving story telling; that good politicians are good story tellers. Does this movie somehow bring that idea full circle–does good story telling have to have a political (in a very general sense of the word) component? Does it have to focus on something that people care about and can relate to their lives/well-being/sense of justice/etc.?
What a great post! I’ve always been a ginourmous sci-fi fan. I think that people who read science fiction (now or in the past) are representative of the greatest creative minds out there. This is why I totally agree with you about the state of sci-fi movies today. They aren’t imaginative or speculative; they’re all about silly effects and violence a whole lot of white noise.
I saw “Wall-E” last weekend and loved it! At least it had a story, and the story seemed entirely plausible. We ARE losing our identities due to the instant gratification we get from electronic devices–jeez, I sound like a total old-fart neophyte, but it’s true! We ARE getting fatter and lazier by the minute because everything is handed to us on a platter. We ARE destroying the earth due to our selfishness and lack of foresight. Life is just too easy now. I think I’ll probably be dead before humankind is really hurting, but we will be. I think we’ve passed the tipping point already.
Wow, what a rant! Maybe I’ll rant some more about this on my blog. Thanks, Julie!
Hmmm, Sara, that’s an interesting idea. I’m not sure I agree that sci fi is the modern version of classic mythology. If anything I’d say its more comparable to parables or fables. But I have to think about it some more…
Hubby, I know. I had so much fun finding those book cover images. I think we have a couple of Larry Nivens down in the basement still. Let’s see who can find them first. ;-) That is a good point about politicians and storytelling. I don’t know if it goes both ways, though. I can think of lots of good stories that aren’t political. Maybe it depends on how you define “political.”
Chartroose, ha ha, yeah. “The greatest creative minds out there” — sounds good to me. ;-) I look forward to reading your rant!
Wall-E totally looks like the robot from “Short Circuit”… minus the cheesy 80′s style
On the storytelling/politics connection: In my conversation with Hubby long ago, I was (probably badly) paraphrasing Howard Gardner, pioneer of the “multiple intelligences” theory or learning and psychology. He wrote Leading Minds to explain that the most gifted leaders in many fields (politics, religious ministry, teaching, etc.) have a gift for story telling. According to Gardner, the most successful storytellers listen to the stories coming from the community and reflect back those stories in their speeches, lectures, sermons, BLOGS (!!), etc.
Aunt Sara, your explanation of the politics/storytelling connection reminded me of a description of the earl, geniuses engineers of 1700s/1800s-era Britain. Many were illiterate (at least initially) sons of un/low-skilled craftsmen but somehow they connected with the early processes and projects of industrialization–I think one apprenticed in a blacksmith’s shop and that led to work at a coal mine, etc.–formal education in engineering didn’t yet exist so coming from ‘outside’ the usual (middle class/educational) path to such a career didn’t yet count against someone, but a common feature those early geniuses was an ability to sketch out–or render in detailed, precise drawings, their ideas.
Which makes sense I guess–(really, I am guessing here) in the early days of industrialization there wouldn’t have been an established ‘vocabulary’ with which to convey/discuss ideas for building a bridge or some new machine.
You had to draw it.
I’m not sure this directly relates to storytelling and politics, but I see no reason to let that stop me from introducing it into the discussion.
I saw Wall-E last weekend with my mom and loved it – mostly because of its cute factor. But, I have to say, when I see all these fictional folks of the future motoring around on their chairs without ever having to think about where they’re going and never noticing anything around them but for their computer monitor cell phone-esque communicator things (and desperately needing to be jolted back into reality and being totally surprised by it), I can’t help but think that maybe we’re not so terribly far from that. Odd that it’s Pixar that you can rely on for surprisingly thoughtful social commentary and *real* sci-fi movies, no?
That’s so funny! I just wrote in a post earlier this summer (in my review of The Pillars of the Earth) that I sometimes really enjoy sci fi books, but hate them as movies. I wasn’t able to put my finger on why this was, but I think you just hit the nail on the head.