6. "Sci-Fi isn't dead, it just moved out of its mom's basement" In response to In response to 0 Thu Aug-30-07 12:43 PM by buckshot defunct
There may be an argument here if it were possible to draw a distinct line between now and a time where all sci-fi movies were on par with 2001. But seeing as how that was never really the case, I can't really clap to this.
First of all - and let me just get this out of the way - Blade Runner sucks. So that's strike one.
Second - I find it hard to declare Sci-Fi dead when it seems to be so damn popular. I realize that this is an attack on art and not commerce, but come on. Popular culture has gotten a LOT nerdier over the past 20 years and there are sci-fi elements almost everywhere you look. Our action movies are all sci-fi thrillers now. Our most popular TV shows have superpowers, mad scientists and smoke monsters. Some might see this as a negative thing, a retread and dilution of concepts that were played out decades ago. Maybe so, but I see it as more of a positive thing, an integration of sorts. And attacking originality is such a slippery slope. There's the whole 'there are no new ideas' thing for one. And plus, I think it puts too much responsibilities on the storytellers to focus on the wrong things. I think the audience has some responsibility here as well to not be so damn jaded. It's not always about seeing new things, but rather seeing things with new eyes.
I do agree that great Sci-Fi depends on ideas and not effects. Sometimes you get both, and I will actually defend The Matrix as an example of this. Then there's stuff like Pi and Primer, films that are able to blow minds on a shoestring budget. And they will always be the minority, it doesn't mean Sci-Fi is dead. It just means that the good shit is hard to come by. That's why it's called the good shit.