Rant Warning: Need More Sci Fi!

[wolfx]

SIGH!! I am depressed. The movies are coming out with all these comic book/video game adaptations and none of it are sci-fi. I want some sci fi. ANYTHING!! It can be starwars-ish fantasy sci fi or it can be hard sci-fi ala Space 2001, or it can be sci-fi horror thriller ala Aliens.

What I truly need is Space operas! There isn't any decent space opera in the movies since Starwars and that was hell of a long time ago. Only way i can satisfy this craving is from anime.

Speaking of Sci fi there was talk long ago about an Ender's Game movie but whatever happened to that? Never heard anything about it since 2 years ago. Sigh.

I NEED MY SCI-FI.

<rant mode off>

[KingNor]

I hear ya man, though i want something original! what happend to all that creativity in the 80's through mid 90's?

[gerwalk25]

Speaking of Enders Game who would you cast as Ender Wiggin? I'd actually rather see it as an Anime OVA epic like Gunbuster, imho.

[wolfx]

Speaking of Enders Game who would you cast as Ender Wiggin? I'd actually rather see it as an Anime OVA epic like Gunbuster, imho.

409384[/snapback]

I kinda agree with you. It could very well be a 13 episode anime series even so more time is given to flesh out the characters more. The drama and moral dillemas explored in the book is no stranger to the average anime director so i think it can be pulled off pretty well. Make the char designer Range Murata and studio BONES at the helm and we have a TEH WIN anime.

Haley Joel Osbourne would've been a good Ender during the "Episode 1" days but not anymore. The potential Ender has to be a newcomer to the movie scene i presume.

I found out some info on the production of Ender's Game. Slated back to 2008 but its currently still in "Development Hell". They can't seem to agree on a script.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0400403/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ender's_Game_(movie)

and a blog....not sure maintained by whom. Probably just a fan.

http://endersgamemovie.blogspot.com/

[myk]

Sci-Fi is a genre that isn't taken seriously. Even if there was a good movie, chances are that if doesn't feature little green wrinkled sages and lazer swords it will be ignored. Take Solaris, for example; a great sci-fi story that was easily forgotten for its lack of the "Force."

[gerwalk25]

Haley Joel Osbourne would've been a good Ender during the "Episode 1" days but not anymore. The potential Ender has to be a newcomer to the movie scene i presume.

When I read the book around the same time Haley Joel (Osment) was my pick as Ender!

[Isamu Atreides 86]

Serenity was good.

[Radd]

I recently heard that Ender's Game is currently planned to be animated. I wasn't able to find out if it would be 2D or 3D, but either way, animation would be a good move for such a movie. So many child characters, it would be pretty much impossible to get a decent performance out of even half the important characters.

Of course, this could just be a rumour.

[wolfx]

It just occured to my bored mind that Ender's Game could've taken place during the events of Gunbuster.

We need more of these "humans against insurmountable odds" space opera shows. Like humans vs Zentraedi, humans vs space monsters, humans vs kilrathi, you get the idea.

[Guest Bromgrev]

I hear ya man, though i want something original!  what happend to all that creativity in the 80's through mid 90's?

409376[/snapback]

I agree, there's too much trying to fit stories into existing 'brand names'. When was there a decent film that didn't feature some well-known name like Aliens or Star Wars? Even the historical blockbusters all revolve around famous names (Troy, Alexander).

Sci-Fi is a genre that isn't taken seriously.  Even if there was a good movie, chances are that if doesn't feature little green wrinkled sages and lazer swords it will be ignored.  Take Solaris, for example; a great sci-fi story that was easily forgotten for its lack of the "Force."

409398[/snapback]

I liked Solaris the book, Solaris the first film and Solaris the second film. Now why don't more of Stanislaw Lem's books get made into films or mini-series? I would love to see a screen adaption of Tales of Pirx the Pilot.

Serenity was good.

409417[/snapback]

About the only original space opera of modern times. It's a pity Whedon seems to have given up on any more films. Looks like he's concentrating on a graphic novel instead, which is hardy the same league.

[Graham]

I also lament the lack of good sci-fi at the cinema. As others have said, Serenity was excellent, but that was last year and there doesn't seem to be anything new coming.

Wasn't there talk a while back about a new Flash Gordan movie and even a John Carter of Mars movie? Those could both be excellent under the right director, such as Peter Jackson or Singer but could also all too easily be screwed by a hack director like Boll, Anderson or Ratner.

Oh well, at least we have the new BSG and new Dr Who on TV.

I must be one who the few people who did not enjoy the Ender books. I'll have to dig them out and re-read them to see if they are better the second time.

Graham

[EXO]

Sci-fi on TV is better than the films. The 80s had the best sci-fi film run.

[Mr March]

I wouldn't put too much faith in the outcome of the Ender's Game film. Yes the novel is a great story, but Wolfgang Petersen is directing. You'll know Petersen as the fella responsible for that trash heap called Troy.

Serenity is good science fiction film, but it was more of a continuation/retelling of Firefly. Sure you don't need to know the series to enjoy it, but the film is much more like a big-budget two-hour special than a stand-alone film. Still, beggers can't be choosers

If you're a fan of films like Stanley Kubrick's brilliant 2001: A Space Odessey, keep your sci-fi starved eyes locked onto The Fountain, set for release this year. The pre-release indicates it may be the first science fiction film to take the genre seriously since Blade Runner and director Darren Aronofsky is known for his unconventional filmmaking. It's as good a possibility for something truly new as we're likely to see this year.

Edited June 20, 2006 by Mr March

[Oihan]

You guys don't consider X-Men 3 sci-fi? Granted it's from a comic but it's still sci-fi non the less. It would be nice, however, for a new and great space opera!

[Fort Max]

What about "A Scanner Darkly", it's based on Phillip K Dicks book of the same name & Blade Runner/Total Recall were both great sci-fi flicks that had been based on his work.

[Graham]

What about "A Scanner Darkly", it's based on Phillip K Dicks book of the same name & Blade Runner/Total Recall were both great sci-fi flicks that had been based on his work.

409477[/snapback]

Very loosly based on his work, but yes, good flicks.

Graham

[Kelsain]

I must be one who the few people who did not enjoy the Ender books. I'll have to dig them out and re-read them to see if they are better the second time.

Graham

409454[/snapback]

I loved the first book, started to lose interest in the second, had little use for the third or the fourth - then Ender's Shadow came along, telling how Bean was the poop and totally stole Ender's thunder. I was never interested in reading the sequel to that.

I agree it would make a better anime than live action film. I don't think the mainstream audience would accept the amount of violence between the kids in this post-columbine, zero-tolerance world.

[eugimon]

Serenity was excellent.

If more sci fi is what you want, talk with your walllet and go and BUY sci fi. There are a few sci properties out right now, battlestar galactica, star gate, dr who... buy the DVDs, watch the shows.. show some interest and if studios think they can stay in business making it, they'll make it.

[JsARCLIGHT]

I think it has more to do with budget and Hollywood tightening it's belt than anything else. Sci Fi movies tend to be massive money pits with right around half of them (if that) in recent years turning a profit. They are just too costume, FX and set intensive... movie makers these days are thinking about making their investment back first and foremost and unless the sci-fi property is a big name like a superhero comic book or a sequel from a previous hot series then chances are it will not get a second look from the big studios.

You also have to take into account the boom in sci-fi in the '80s was all in the wake of the original star wars. Studios where willing to take chances back then in an attemp to get the next super huge property. Add to that that special effects where still in their infancy for all intents and purposes back then so you could have small studios and independent directors like Rodger Corman cranking out sci-fi movie after sci-fi movie with cheap sets, D list talent and sparklers on a plastic model effects. Thanks to the world's voracious appetite for movies and their increased fanboyism and nit-pickery of effects it has evolved so that even a run of the mill sci-fi movie is a massive dip in the wallet to create. And when you have an industry more concerned with the bottom line than telling good stories you get the market we are in today, which is not much more than a string of "hot topic" movies and "flavor of the month" casting and scripting options.

[sketchley]

I agree. Buying authorized licensed copies is a great incentive to people who produce those things. (Looks at the Bandai released DVDs of Macross on my bookshelf. Crosses fingers that Big West will produce more Macross in the near future.)

Most of the 'big name' stuff that is endlessly recycled, is done so precisely because it is known to make money. The chance of a risk being taken on an unknown entity, that does NOT do things by the book is very slight. Even though that may result in a much higher quality or better final product...

If you need an example: "Deep Impact" vs. "Armaggedon." The later paints by numbers, and sucks. The former is a great movie, but, in a sense, should probably be marketed as a human-drama movie, and less a sci-fi, or science fiction movie. Which one did you watch? Which one do you remember better? Which one do you want more movies to be made like it? Which one made more money at the box office, and has seen more clones made of it?*

All rhetorical questions to get your thought-juices flowing. Please don't answer.

*"The Core" is the first to come to my beer-muddled mind.

[the white drew carey]

Battlestar Galactica is the shiznit. It's not cinema but, IMHO, it's the best sci-fi property out there at the moment.

[Penguin]

Here's my take...

I don't think sci-fi is suffering so much from Hollywood tightening the purse strings as much as it is from the whole corporate, money-making mind-set. We still see Hollywood piling wads of cash on the most unimaginable crap. The studios are only willing to invest money in projects that the money men think are sure-fire:

- Properties with built-in audience (comics, sequels, video games, remakes);

- Projects that appeal to the perceived limited attention span of the 14 to 17 year old North American male.

Problem is:

- Many such properties are not necessarily suitable to the motion picture medium;

- Hollywood still makes bad choices about which projects to fund (e.g. "Elektra", banking on perceived popularity of Jennifer Garner and ignoring the fact that the comics community, the primary audience, couldn't have cared less after "Daredevil");

- We get a 30 to 40 year-old's approximation of what appeals to adolescent boys.

So, any sci-fi beyond a testosterone-choked violence fest (not that those can't be fun too) gets labelled as too "cerebral" for mass appeal, and the studios won't finance them. And sci-fi tends to need larger budgets.

I wonder about the perception on teen-male-appeal too. It was at that age (many moons ago) that I first fell in love with the classics of sci-fi (now that I knew enough to understand them) - "2001", "Blade Runner", "The Day The Earth Stood Still"... are modern teen males as ADD-afflicted as studios automatically assume they are, or are we driving them that way by only feeding them this pablum?

I've totally come to hate the deification of the PG-13 rating, too. Studios are so freakin' afraid of R ratings and making something aimed at adults. I shudder to think what "Alien" or "Jaws" would have been like if studios had the same sensibilities in the late 70s that they have now.

[eugimon]

meh, I think sci fi fans need to give up their elitist attitude when it comes to these flicks..

[Penguin]

meh, I think sci fi fans need to give up their elitist attitude when it comes to these flicks..

409561[/snapback]

Elitist implies that sci-fi fans think that the genre is somehow superior to all others... I think we're just looking for some quality, which pretty much applies to Hollywood in general right now.

[eugimon]

meh, I think sci fi fans need to give up their elitist attitude when it comes to these flicks..

409561[/snapback]

Elitist implies that sci-fi fans think that the genre is somehow superior to all others... I think we're just looking for some quality, which pretty much applies to Hollywood in general right now.

409572[/snapback]

well, I'm speaking of fans who think movies should be made, specifically to satisfy their needs.

Serenity for example, fun movie. most fans were great, but many fans cried boohooo, joss sold them out. How DARE he kill off their favorite character, how come it was different from what they thought it would be?

their just seems to be a snobish attitude regarding sci fi/fantasy with work that is so dense, so self referential that discourages most people from going and trying it out.

[Gui]

You guys don't consider X-Men 3 sci-fi?  Granted it's from a comic but it's still sci-fi non the less.

409473[/snapback]

X-Men and super-heroes stories in general are more some sort of modern fantasy or fantastic than pure SF actually: these concepts usually don't show the 'science as a way to make society evolve' which is the main credo of SF stories since the Golden Age of the 40s (See Asimov, Clarke, Heinlein, etc,...) under the influence of John Campbell when he was the editor of Astounding

From this point of view, Blade Runner or Gattaca are definitely 'true' SF as well as some 'food for thoughts' that super-heroes or video games can difficultly reach because of the usual simplicity of their concept/idea (I mean 'testosterone boost')

I think the main problem of SF nowadays is well summarized by JsARCLIGHT and Penguin: (young) people want entertainment, nothing more...

[eugimon]

I think the main problem of SF nowadays is well summarized by JsARCLIGHT and Penguin: (young) people want entertainment, nothing more...

409576[/snapback]

I don't think that is fair to say... there have been plenty of movies that did well recently with complex themes. If anything, most science fiction tends to boil complex issues down to very simple terms and convey such a singular view on what is moral and right... perhaps audiences are growing tired of being lectured to and would rather see complex moral issues portrayed with more care and finese?

[azrael]

I think the main problem of SF nowadays is well summarized by JsARCLIGHT and Penguin: (young) people want entertainment, nothing more...

409576[/snapback]

I agree. Sci-Fi is expensive. How many times did Ron Moore complain in the podcasts for BSG about his budget? And true Sci-Fi also doesn't have a wide audience. Ron Moore considers BSG a character drama first, Sci-Fi second. This saves him from large budgets and gathers an audience. If Ron Moore wanted to make BSG really hardcore sci-fi, he would (a)run over budget, AND, (b)no studio would put that on the screen since the scope of the audience is so terribly small. Even Serenity is guilty of throwing in the "testosterone boost". If it didn't, it wouldn't sell. People want entertainment, if that means throwing in large explosions and fighting...well...that's what it's going to be.

[Twoducks]

The most recent Sci-fi movie I can remeber that made me go "Wow, this IS good" is Dark City. Right now I can't think of any other good recent sci-stuf like DC.

There are sci-fi things that take place entirely on Eart like A.I. and Minority Report that where nice pop-corn films, just not especial. Now Gattaca was good.

I bet Gattaca and Dark City didn’t make much.

In a more space ships and aliens kind of sci-fi I must say I'm also really bored. Films either have really flat characters and brainless plots or are knock offs of older stuff. But I did have a really good time watching Pitch Black, heck my girlfriend even enjoyed it (and she hates sci-fi). A very decent and simple Alien substitute.

The only sci-fi I like right now is in written form or old anime shows. Thank goodness for anime stuff like the original Gunbuster and Project A-ko or writers like Asimov.

Serenity is good science fiction film, but it was more of a continuation/retelling of Firefly.  Sure you don't need to know the series to enjoy it, but the film is much more like a big-budget two-hour special than a stand-alone film.  Still, beggers can't be choosers

If you're a fan of films like Stanley Kubrick's brilliant 2001: A Space Odessey, keep your sci-fi starved eyes locked onto The Fountain, set for release this year.  The pre-release indicates it may be the first science fiction film to take the genre seriously since Blade Runner and director Darren Aronofsky is known for his unconventional filmmaking.  It's as good a possibility for something truly new as we're likely to see this year.

409467[/snapback]

Serenity I just couldn't get into. I felt like I was missing information; I didn't care for the characters one bit yet the movie looked like it was expecting me to cry or root whenever something happened to them (must be that you need the TV series to appreciate it). It dose feel like a big budged TV movie.

The 40 minutes that I saw could have easily taken place in a D&D fantasy setting full of magic instead of technology and far of kingdoms instead of planets and colonies. But a lot of people here like the movie so there must be something good there or at least in Firefly. How many episodes does the series have?

Guess I like my sci-fi to really drink from the reality it takes place on.

[Fort Max]

Firefly is only 13 episodes and the dvd set can be had really cheap so it's not at all difficult to check it out.

Is project A-Ko really that good as to be mentioned alongside Gunbuster?

[Penguin]

I think the main problem of SF nowadays is well summarized by JsARCLIGHT and Penguin: (young) people want entertainment, nothing more...

409576[/snapback]

Whoa, don't go putting words in my mouth... I said that's what studios think every 14 to 17 year old male wants, and they only want to bank on the sure thing. Truth is, I don't know a lot of teenagers, so I have no clue where their tastes are. If they are as vacuous as Hollywood markets them to be, I'd weep for the future...

[Fort Max]

Things like Blade Runner and Space 2001 weren't made for teenagers though sp perhaps the question should be, Where are the all good films for the more mature audience? Does Hollywood consider this audience to be an unprofitable dead zone?

[Mr March]

Serenity is good science fiction film, but it was more of a continuation/retelling of Firefly.  Sure you don't need to know the series to enjoy it, but the film is much more like a big-budget two-hour special than a stand-alone film.  Still, beggers can't be choosers

If you're a fan of films like Stanley Kubrick's brilliant 2001: A Space Odessey, keep your sci-fi starved eyes locked onto The Fountain, set for release this year.  The pre-release indicates it may be the first science fiction film to take the genre seriously since Blade Runner and director Darren Aronofsky is known for his unconventional filmmaking.  It's as good a possibility for something truly new as we're likely to see this year.

409467[/snapback]

Serenity I just couldn't get into. I felt like I was missing information; I didn't care for the characters one bit yet the movie looked like it was expecting me to cry or root whenever something happened to them (must be that you need the TV series to appreciate it). It dose feel like a big budged TV movie.

The 40 minutes that I saw could have easily taken place in a D&D fantasy setting full of magic instead of technology and far of kingdoms instead of planets and colonies. But a lot of people here like the movie so there must be something good there or at least in Firefly. How many episodes does the series have?

Guess I like my sci-fi to really drink from the reality it takes place on.

409585[/snapback]

15 episodes is all that Firefly could manage before cancellation. The series is fun, but is definitely the adventure drama story that makes up the atmosphere of the film. It's great for what it is, easily one of the best shows of it's type.

Like I said, keep an eye on The Fountain, it looks like serious sci-fi cinema.

[chrono]

SIGH!! I am depressed. The movies are coming out with all these comic book/video game adaptations  and none of it are sci-fi. I want some sci fi. ANYTHING!! It can be starwars-ish fantasy sci fi or it can be hard sci-fi ala Space 2001, or it can be sci-fi horror thriller ala Aliens.

What I truly need is Space operas! There isn't any decent space opera in the movies since Starwars and that was hell of a long time ago. Only way i can satisfy this craving is from anime.

Speaking of Sci fi there was talk long ago about an Ender's Game movie but whatever happened to that? Never heard anything about it since 2 years ago. Sigh.

I NEED MY SCI-FI.

<rant mode off>

409365[/snapback]

SW gets a B+(a C- on the Prequels though). It was a decent effort at Space Opera, spent to much on the fantasy aspect of it though(force bs).

What I would LOVE would be a true space opera TV series that didn't depend on lame-arsed single episode show like most sf tv does. I'd love to see one that keep it's human perspective and didn't rely on techobabble, pretty people, or suck arsed scripts to solve problems. Killed person that did and didn't matter, but losing them made you feel like something was missing.

I'd kill to see Ben Bova's "Grand Tour" book series be made into a series. It has all the workings to make a awsome modern day SF series, without a freaking alien in sight! It's totally Man against Man!!

meh, I think sci fi fans need to give up their elitist attitude when it comes to these flicks..

Actually it's not elitism.

It's the lack of balanced SF that makes the SF fans look elitest because most of the current crop of SF shows are either overly dramatic or action based with with science involved other then as a cheap gimick for the main character to be cheesly threatened by and that 'normal' viewers have been trained to accept as SF.

2001: A Space Odessey & Alien is the 'ideals' SF movies because it balanced EVERYTHING so well! Sadly only The Matrix & Pitch Black has been remotely close to either.

[Twoducks]

Firefly is only 13 episodes and the dvd set can be had really cheap so it's not at all difficult to check it out.

Is project A-Ko really that good as to be mentioned alongside Gunbuster?

409587[/snapback]

Gunbuster is better but A-ko gives you so many great laughs that it deserves attention. It’s a very well crafted fun story that contains spoofs of a lot of the sci-fi and anime clichés of the time. The animation is good old classic greatness (just seeing A-ko's sprinting at top speed in the school to save C-ko is worth it). If you haven't seen it at least give the first OVA a look

Forgot to say that to satisfy my crave for serious, incredible epic scale intergalactic conflicts with lots and lots of well developed characters with a touch of military tactics, the League of the Galactic Heroes is the anime I turn to.

409585[/snapback]

15 episodes is all that Firefly could manage before cancellation.  The series is fun, but is definitely the adventure drama story that makes up the atmosphere of the film.  It's great for what it is, easily one of the best shows of it's type.

Like I said, keep an eye on The Fountain, it looks like serious sci-fi cinema.

409611[/snapback]

I'll give Firefly a try in the near future and set the radar for this The Fountain then.