Actually, the maker of this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyO8W1QCKa4
has a plan of action to fix the problem.
The problem he identifies is that science fiction was once about bold ideas
(i.e. the Campbell era) and is now about action-advanture (i.e. Star Wars).
I only watched enough of the start of the video to ensure that he wasn't
complaining about science fiction being doomed because it had become
"woke", a possibility I feared because this sort of commentary is quite
common these days.
My own analysis of the situation is that the _classic_ themes of serious science fiction, such as first contact, have pretty much been done to
death, and so new authors, to be original, have to be more ambitious -
which puts them out of reach of a mainstream audience. It also doesn't
help that technological progress has lost the power to impress us these
days - we've gone from Sputnik to TSMC. And so we've also gone from
Campbell to cyberpunk.
Aside from the JWST, I just recently became aware that a meteorite
beneath the seas to the south of Papua New Guinea is now believed
to have come from beyond the Solar System - and a project to use a
magnet to recover tiny fragments of it has now been fully crowdfunded.
So we're not living in an age entirely devoid of marvelous happenings,
even if little enough attention is paid to them.
So in my view, what has to change is culture and society to give rebirth
to the classic science fiction genre, and that's beyond fandom's power.
I'm assuming, though, the video will contain some suggestions for how
stories reflecting the essence of the genre could be written that are
relevant to more of today's readers.

John Savard

On Friday, 23 September 2022 at 17:32:03 UTC+1, Quadibloc wrote:
> Actually, the maker of this video
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyO8W1QCKa4
> has a plan of action to fix the problem.
> The problem he identifies is that science fiction was once about bold ideas
> (i.e. the Campbell era) and is now about action-advanture (i.e. Star Wars).
> I only watched enough of the start of the video to ensure that he wasn't
> complaining about science fiction being doomed because it had become
> "woke", a possibility I feared because this sort of commentary is quite
> common these days.
> My own analysis of the situation is that the _classic_ themes of serious
> science fiction, such as first contact, have pretty much been done to
> death, and so new authors, to be original, have to be more ambitious -
> which puts them out of reach of a mainstream audience. It also doesn't
> help that technological progress has lost the power to impress us these
> days - we've gone from Sputnik to TSMC. And so we've also gone from
> Campbell to cyberpunk.
> Aside from the JWST, I just recently became aware that a meteorite
> beneath the seas to the south of Papua New Guinea is now believed
> to have come from beyond the Solar System - and a project to use a
> magnet to recover tiny fragments of it has now been fully crowdfunded.
> So we're not living in an age entirely devoid of marvelous happenings,
> even if little enough attention is paid to them.
> So in my view, what has to change is culture and society to give rebirth
> to the classic science fiction genre, and that's beyond fandom's power.
> I'm assuming, though, the video will contain some suggestions for how
> stories reflecting the essence of the genre could be written that are
> relevant to more of today's readers.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNEOS_2014-01-08>

I wondered about the definition of "meteorite" when
a meteor lands in water. I suppose reasonably, when
it stops moving - relative to terrestrial coordinates -
it's a meteorite. Though ones that land on Antarctic
ice are still moving, very slowly. Wikipedia says,
"Once it settles on the larger body's surface, the
meteor becomes a meteorite.". If it grows roots...
worry.

Actually, I was going to say that "bold ideas"
of early "science fiction" are rather often nonsense,
like unlimited new chemical elements, or humans being
descended from aliens or being sexually compatible
with them... that /has/ stopped, hasn't it?

Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote in
news:a02b82e3-a8c5-4a21-8fed-21d48a5de4fbn@googlegroups.com:

> Actually, I was going to say that "bold ideas"
> of early "science fiction" are rather often nonsense,
> like unlimited new chemical elements, or humans being
> descended from aliens or being sexually compatible
> with them... that /has/ stopped, hasn't it?
>
He ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

Yeah, when sex doesn't sell movie tickets any more. Which won't be
until sometime after the heat death of the universe.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

On Friday, September 23, 2022 at 3:21:19 PM UTC-6, Robert Carnegie wrote:

> Actually, I was going to say that "bold ideas"
> of early "science fiction" are rather often nonsense,
> like unlimited new chemical elements, or humans being
> descended from aliens or being sexually compatible
> with them... that /has/ stopped, hasn't it?

Well, Avatar involved virtual reality and stuff like that... so
it didn't really involve genuine sexual compatibility.

Of course, some comic books have perpetuated obsolete
science-fiction concepts because they were baked into the
premise... Superman comes to mind.

John Savard

On 23/09/2022 11.32, Quadibloc wrote:
> Actually, the maker of this video
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyO8W1QCKa4
> has a plan of action to fix the problem.
> The problem he identifies is that science fiction was once about bold ideas
> (i.e. the Campbell era) and is now about action-advanture

Actually, if the maker of that video thinks that science
fiction is all about action-adventure now, their opinions
on science fiction are too ill-informed to be worth
considering.

--
Michael F. Stemper
Exodus 22:21

On Saturday, September 24, 2022 at 7:25:40 AM UTC-6, Michael F. Stemper wrote:

> Actually, if the maker of that video thinks that science
> fiction is all about action-adventure now, their opinions
> on science fiction are too ill-informed to be worth
> considering.

It is possible that my description of the video oversimplified
somewhat for the sake of brevity.

John Savard

On Fri, 23 Sep 2022 09:32:00 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
<jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

>Actually, the maker of this video
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyO8W1QCKa4
>has a plan of action to fix the problem.
>The problem he identifies is that science fiction was once about bold ideas
>(i.e. the Campbell era) and is now about action-advanture (i.e. Star Wars).

And that is where I would diverge from this person: I don't think
/Stars Wars/ is, properly speaking, Science Fiction at all.

I think it is an action-adventure story that happens to be set in a
context which is a Science Fiction context. Just as the Michael York
/The Three Musketeers/ is an action-adventure story set in 17th (?)
Century France. Particularly Episode IV.

That is, I think that, in this case, the two are more similar than
different, despite the different settings.
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

On Saturday, 24 September 2022 at 17:01:48 UTC+1, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Sep 2022 09:32:00 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
> <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
> >Actually, the maker of this video
> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyO8W1QCKa4
> >has a plan of action to fix the problem.
> >The problem he identifies is that science fiction was once about bold ideas
> >(i.e. the Campbell era) and is now about action-advanture (i.e. Star Wars).
> And that is where I would diverge from this person: I don't think
> /Stars Wars/ is, properly speaking, Science Fiction at all.
>
> I think it is an action-adventure story that happens to be set in a
> context which is a Science Fiction context. Just as the Michael York
> /The Three Musketeers/ is an action-adventure story set in 17th (?)
> Century France. Particularly Episode IV.
>
> That is, I think that, in this case, the two are more similar than
> different, despite the different settings.

Well... Star Wars has "The Force" stuff, and the "Death Star",
and the exciting battle to defeat it and to save Yavin 4,
which aren't precisely the stuff of conventional
"action adventure".

On the other hand, it owes a bit to "Flash Gordon", including
amazing fictional locations. Looking up the two titles leads
to an interesting comment in
<http://www.moongadget.com/origins/flash.html> -
besides stating that "Buck Rogers" begat "Flash Gordon" -
that Star Wars is "a fairytale in which technology plays the
traditional role of magic". Although that's somewhat undermined
by describing H. G. Well's "The Time Machine", "Frankenstein",
and the sci-fi of Jules Verne and, presumably, everyone else from
Ben Aaronovitch to Roger Zelazny, as being that, too.
I may be mistaken but I don't think we are supposed at all
to consider fairy tales as real. Though I'm not saying that
"Star Wars" is real.

And of course Star Wars begins: "A long time ago in a galaxy
far, far away...."

On 24 Sep 2022, Robert Carnegie wrote
(in article<82c9ca33-e618-48f6-af6f-242ed8a56ffan@googlegroups.com>):

> On Saturday, 24 September 2022 at 17:01:48 UTC+1, Paul S Person wrote:
> > On Fri, 23 Sep 2022 09:32:00 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
> > <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> >
> > > Actually, the maker of this video
> > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyO8W1QCKa4
> > > has a plan of action to fix the problem.
> > > The problem he identifies is that science fiction was once about bold ideas
> > > (i.e. the Campbell era) and is now about action-advanture (i.e. Star Wars).
> > And that is where I would diverge from this person: I don't think
> > /Stars Wars/ is, properly speaking, Science Fiction at all.
> >
> > I think it is an action-adventure story that happens to be set in a
> > context which is a Science Fiction context. Just as the Michael York
> > /The Three Musketeers/ is an action-adventure story set in 17th (?)
> > Century France. Particularly Episode IV.
> >
> > That is, I think that, in this case, the two are more similar than
> > different, despite the different settings.
>
> Well... Star Wars has "The Force" stuff, and the "Death Star",
> and the exciting battle to defeat it and to save Yavin 4,
> which aren't precisely the stuff of conventional
> "action adventure".
>
> On the other hand, it owes a bit to "Flash Gordon", including
> amazing fictional locations. Looking up the two titles leads
> to an interesting comment in
> <http://www.moongadget.com/origins/flash.html> -
> besides stating that "Buck Rogers" begat "Flash Gordon" -
> that Star Wars is "a fairytale in which technology plays the
> traditional role of magic". Although that's somewhat undermined
> by describing H. G. Well's "The Time Machine", "Frankenstein",
> and the sci-fi of Jules Verne and, presumably, everyone else from
> Ben Aaronovitch to Roger Zelazny, as being that, too.
> I may be mistaken but I don't think we are supposed at all
> to consider fairy tales as real. Though I'm not saying that
> "Star Wars" is real.
>
> And of course Star Wars begins: "A long time ago in a galaxy
> far, far away...."

Hmm. the number of nearby (less than 300, 000 lightyears out) galaxies is
limited. And 300k lightyears ain’t all that close.

On Sat, 24 Sep 2022 12:12:50 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
<rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, 24 September 2022 at 17:01:48 UTC+1, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Fri, 23 Sep 2022 09:32:00 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
>> <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>
>> >Actually, the maker of this video
>> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyO8W1QCKa4
>> >has a plan of action to fix the problem.
>> >The problem he identifies is that science fiction was once about bold ideas
>> >(i.e. the Campbell era) and is now about action-advanture (i.e. Star Wars).
>> And that is where I would diverge from this person: I don't think
>> /Stars Wars/ is, properly speaking, Science Fiction at all.
>>
>> I think it is an action-adventure story that happens to be set in a
>> context which is a Science Fiction context. Just as the Michael York
>> /The Three Musketeers/ is an action-adventure story set in 17th (?)
>> Century France. Particularly Episode IV.
>>
>> That is, I think that, in this case, the two are more similar than
>> different, despite the different settings.
>
>Well... Star Wars has "The Force" stuff, and the "Death Star",
>and the exciting battle to defeat it and to save Yavin 4,
>which aren't precisely the stuff of conventional
>"action adventure".
>
>On the other hand, it owes a bit to "Flash Gordon", including
>amazing fictional locations. Looking up the two titles leads
>to an interesting comment in
><http://www.moongadget.com/origins/flash.html> -
>besides stating that "Buck Rogers" begat "Flash Gordon" -
>that Star Wars is "a fairytale in which technology plays the
>traditional role of magic". Although that's somewhat undermined
>by describing H. G. Well's "The Time Machine", "Frankenstein",
>and the sci-fi of Jules Verne and, presumably, everyone else from
>Ben Aaronovitch to Roger Zelazny, as being that, too.
>I may be mistaken but I don't think we are supposed at all
>to consider fairy tales as real. Though I'm not saying that
>"Star Wars" is real.
>
>And of course Star Wars begins: "A long time ago in a galaxy
>far, far away...."

What they both have is:

-- a young protagonist who has to be guided by older persons
-- a political situation involving royalty (King/Queen vs Emperor)
-- a maguffin (diamond studs, Death Star)
-- a lot of action
-- a lot of humor

They are very much alike. Don't let the SF vs historical French
trappings fool you.

Incidentally, one of my coworkers was complaining about certain SF
movies (/Dark City/, /Gattaca/) when it occurred to me that the
problem was that those actually /were/ Science Fiction, as opposed to
some other genre in SF dressing. So actual SF movies are still being
made.

Genres are slippery, and some films play with them. /Brotherhood of
the Wolf/ certainly /sounds/ like a werewolf movie ("local peasants
being eaten by a really big wolf") -- but it is something else
entirely.
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

On Sunday, 25 September 2022 at 17:05:20 UTC+1, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Sep 2022 12:12:50 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
> <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> >On Saturday, 24 September 2022 at 17:01:48 UTC+1, Paul S Person wrote:
> >> On Fri, 23 Sep 2022 09:32:00 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
> >> <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Actually, the maker of this video
> >> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyO8W1QCKa4
> >> >has a plan of action to fix the problem.
> >> >The problem he identifies is that science fiction was once about bold ideas
> >> >(i.e. the Campbell era) and is now about action-advanture (i.e. Star Wars).
> >> And that is where I would diverge from this person: I don't think
> >> /Stars Wars/ is, properly speaking, Science Fiction at all.
> >>
> >> I think it is an action-adventure story that happens to be set in a
> >> context which is a Science Fiction context. Just as the Michael York
> >> /The Three Musketeers/ is an action-adventure story set in 17th (?)
> >> Century France. Particularly Episode IV.
> >>
> >> That is, I think that, in this case, the two are more similar than
> >> different, despite the different settings.
> >
> >Well... Star Wars has "The Force" stuff, and the "Death Star",
> >and the exciting battle to defeat it and to save Yavin 4,
> >which aren't precisely the stuff of conventional
> >"action adventure".
> >
> >On the other hand, it owes a bit to "Flash Gordon", including
> >amazing fictional locations. Looking up the two titles leads
> >to an interesting comment in
> ><http://www.moongadget.com/origins/flash.html> -
> >besides stating that "Buck Rogers" begat "Flash Gordon" -
> >that Star Wars is "a fairytale in which technology plays the
> >traditional role of magic". Although that's somewhat undermined
> >by describing H. G. Well's "The Time Machine", "Frankenstein",
> >and the sci-fi of Jules Verne and, presumably, everyone else from
> >Ben Aaronovitch to Roger Zelazny, as being that, too.
> >I may be mistaken but I don't think we are supposed at all
> >to consider fairy tales as real. Though I'm not saying that
> >"Star Wars" is real.
> >
> >And of course Star Wars begins: "A long time ago in a galaxy
> >far, far away...."
> What they both have is:
>
> -- a young protagonist who has to be guided by older persons
> -- a political situation involving royalty (King/Queen vs Emperor)
> -- a maguffin (diamond studs, Death Star)
> -- a lot of action
> -- a lot of humor
>
> They are very much alike. Don't let the SF vs historical French
> trappings fool you.
>
> Incidentally, one of my coworkers was complaining about certain SF
> movies (/Dark City/, /Gattaca/) when it occurred to me that the
> problem was that those actually /were/ Science Fiction, as opposed to
> some other genre in SF dressing. So actual SF movies are still being
> made.

....25 years ago. _Gattaca_, 1997; _Dark City_, 1998.

But films in general aren't what they were, except for
being drama (including comedy) in moving pictures,
and, in most cases, sound. A theatrical film needs to
be a sure bet on making money: no one can afford to
lose money on a movie any more. Critics complain that
/all/ theatrical movies are in decline in the face of
Justice League and Transformers.

Adventurous "film" making is in the hands of broadcast TV
and streaming and co-production, and there it tends to come
as a serial. _The Twilight Zone_ got revived again, and
cancelled again, in that domain (2019-2020). It'll be back,
I guess. We had a real apocalypse in 2020.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Twilight_Zone_(2019_TV_series)>

> Genres are slippery, and some films play with them. /Brotherhood of
> the Wolf/ certainly /sounds/ like a werewolf movie ("local peasants
> being eaten by a really big wolf") -- but it is something else
> entirely.

On Sunday, September 25, 2022 at 8:19:15 PM UTC-4, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> On Sunday, 25 September 2022 at 17:05:20 UTC+1, Paul S Person wrote:
> > On Sat, 24 Sep 2022 12:12:50 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
> > <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
> >
> > >On Saturday, 24 September 2022 at 17:01:48 UTC+1, Paul S Person wrote:
> > >> On Fri, 23 Sep 2022 09:32:00 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
> > >> <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >Actually, the maker of this video
> > >> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyO8W1QCKa4
> > >> >has a plan of action to fix the problem.
> > >> >The problem he identifies is that science fiction was once about bold ideas
> > >> >(i.e. the Campbell era) and is now about action-advanture (i.e. Star Wars).
> > >> And that is where I would diverge from this person: I don't think
> > >> /Stars Wars/ is, properly speaking, Science Fiction at all.
> > >>
> > >> I think it is an action-adventure story that happens to be set in a
> > >> context which is a Science Fiction context. Just as the Michael York
> > >> /The Three Musketeers/ is an action-adventure story set in 17th (?)
> > >> Century France. Particularly Episode IV.
> > >>
> > >> That is, I think that, in this case, the two are more similar than
> > >> different, despite the different settings.
> > >
> > >Well... Star Wars has "The Force" stuff, and the "Death Star",
> > >and the exciting battle to defeat it and to save Yavin 4,
> > >which aren't precisely the stuff of conventional
> > >"action adventure".
> > >
> > >On the other hand, it owes a bit to "Flash Gordon", including
> > >amazing fictional locations. Looking up the two titles leads
> > >to an interesting comment in
> > ><http://www.moongadget.com/origins/flash.html> -
> > >besides stating that "Buck Rogers" begat "Flash Gordon" -
> > >that Star Wars is "a fairytale in which technology plays the
> > >traditional role of magic". Although that's somewhat undermined
> > >by describing H. G. Well's "The Time Machine", "Frankenstein",
> > >and the sci-fi of Jules Verne and, presumably, everyone else from
> > >Ben Aaronovitch to Roger Zelazny, as being that, too.
> > >I may be mistaken but I don't think we are supposed at all
> > >to consider fairy tales as real. Though I'm not saying that
> > >"Star Wars" is real.
> > >
> > >And of course Star Wars begins: "A long time ago in a galaxy
> > >far, far away...."
> > What they both have is:
> >
> > -- a young protagonist who has to be guided by older persons
> > -- a political situation involving royalty (King/Queen vs Emperor)
> > -- a maguffin (diamond studs, Death Star)
> > -- a lot of action
> > -- a lot of humor
> >
> > They are very much alike. Don't let the SF vs historical French
> > trappings fool you.
> >
> > Incidentally, one of my coworkers was complaining about certain SF
> > movies (/Dark City/, /Gattaca/) when it occurred to me that the
> > problem was that those actually /were/ Science Fiction, as opposed to
> > some other genre in SF dressing. So actual SF movies are still being
> > made.
> ...25 years ago. _Gattaca_, 1997; _Dark City_, 1998.
>
> But films in general aren't what they were, except for
> being drama (including comedy) in moving pictures,
> and, in most cases, sound. A theatrical film needs to
> be a sure bet on making money: no one can afford to
> lose money on a movie any more. Critics complain that
> /all/ theatrical movies are in decline in the face of
> Justice League and Transformers.
>
> Adventurous "film" making is in the hands of broadcast TV
> and streaming and co-production, and there it tends to come
> as a serial. _The Twilight Zone_ got revived again, and
> cancelled again, in that domain (2019-2020). It'll be back,
> I guess. We had a real apocalypse in 2020.
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Twilight_Zone_(2019_TV_series)>
> > Genres are slippery, and some films play with them. /Brotherhood of
> > the Wolf/ certainly /sounds/ like a werewolf movie ("local peasants
> > being eaten by a really big wolf") -- but it is something else
> > entirely.

I'd argue that 'Ex Machina' and 'Arrival' are recent films that definitely
are 'real SF'.

I'm heartedly tired of 'heroes' chewing up the scenery.

Pt

Michael F. Stemper <michael.stemper@gmail.com> schrieb:
> On 23/09/2022 11.32, Quadibloc wrote:
>> Actually, the maker of this video
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyO8W1QCKa4
>> has a plan of action to fix the problem.
>> The problem he identifies is that science fiction was once about bold ideas
>> (i.e. the Campbell era) and is now about action-advanture
>
> Actually, if the maker of that video thinks that science
> fiction is all about action-adventure now, their opinions
> on science fiction are too ill-informed to be worth
> considering.

Looking at bookshelfes here in Germany, science fiction has
declined a _lot_, and what is left on the shelves is indeed mostly
action-adventure. Fantasy shelves are much bigger, and that is
even more action-adventure (from what I can tell).

On Sun, 25 Sep 2022 19:18:20 -0700 (PDT), "pete...@gmail.com"
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, September 25, 2022 at 8:19:15 PM UTC-4, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>> On Sunday, 25 September 2022 at 17:05:20 UTC+1, Paul S Person wrote:
>> > On Sat, 24 Sep 2022 12:12:50 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
>> > <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > >On Saturday, 24 September 2022 at 17:01:48 UTC+1, Paul S Person wrote:
>> > >> On Fri, 23 Sep 2022 09:32:00 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
>> > >> <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> >Actually, the maker of this video
>> > >> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyO8W1QCKa4
>> > >> >has a plan of action to fix the problem.
>> > >> >The problem he identifies is that science fiction was once about bold ideas
>> > >> >(i.e. the Campbell era) and is now about action-advanture (i.e. Star Wars).
>> > >> And that is where I would diverge from this person: I don't think
>> > >> /Stars Wars/ is, properly speaking, Science Fiction at all.
>> > >>
>> > >> I think it is an action-adventure story that happens to be set in a
>> > >> context which is a Science Fiction context. Just as the Michael York
>> > >> /The Three Musketeers/ is an action-adventure story set in 17th (?)
>> > >> Century France. Particularly Episode IV.
>> > >>
>> > >> That is, I think that, in this case, the two are more similar than
>> > >> different, despite the different settings.
>> > >
>> > >Well... Star Wars has "The Force" stuff, and the "Death Star",
>> > >and the exciting battle to defeat it and to save Yavin 4,
>> > >which aren't precisely the stuff of conventional
>> > >"action adventure".
>> > >
>> > >On the other hand, it owes a bit to "Flash Gordon", including
>> > >amazing fictional locations. Looking up the two titles leads
>> > >to an interesting comment in
>> > ><http://www.moongadget.com/origins/flash.html> -
>> > >besides stating that "Buck Rogers" begat "Flash Gordon" -
>> > >that Star Wars is "a fairytale in which technology plays the
>> > >traditional role of magic". Although that's somewhat undermined
>> > >by describing H. G. Well's "The Time Machine", "Frankenstein",
>> > >and the sci-fi of Jules Verne and, presumably, everyone else from
>> > >Ben Aaronovitch to Roger Zelazny, as being that, too.
>> > >I may be mistaken but I don't think we are supposed at all
>> > >to consider fairy tales as real. Though I'm not saying that
>> > >"Star Wars" is real.
>> > >
>> > >And of course Star Wars begins: "A long time ago in a galaxy
>> > >far, far away...."
>> > What they both have is:
>> >
>> > -- a young protagonist who has to be guided by older persons
>> > -- a political situation involving royalty (King/Queen vs Emperor)
>> > -- a maguffin (diamond studs, Death Star)
>> > -- a lot of action
>> > -- a lot of humor
>> >
>> > They are very much alike. Don't let the SF vs historical French
>> > trappings fool you.
>> >
>> > Incidentally, one of my coworkers was complaining about certain SF
>> > movies (/Dark City/, /Gattaca/) when it occurred to me that the
>> > problem was that those actually /were/ Science Fiction, as opposed to
>> > some other genre in SF dressing. So actual SF movies are still being
>> > made.
>> ...25 years ago. _Gattaca_, 1997; _Dark City_, 1998.
>>
>> But films in general aren't what they were, except for
>> being drama (including comedy) in moving pictures,
>> and, in most cases, sound. A theatrical film needs to
>> be a sure bet on making money: no one can afford to
>> lose money on a movie any more. Critics complain that
>> /all/ theatrical movies are in decline in the face of
>> Justice League and Transformers.
>>
>> Adventurous "film" making is in the hands of broadcast TV
>> and streaming and co-production, and there it tends to come
>> as a serial. _The Twilight Zone_ got revived again, and
>> cancelled again, in that domain (2019-2020). It'll be back,
>> I guess. We had a real apocalypse in 2020.
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Twilight_Zone_(2019_TV_series)>
>> > Genres are slippery, and some films play with them. /Brotherhood of
>> > the Wolf/ certainly /sounds/ like a werewolf movie ("local peasants
>> > being eaten by a really big wolf") -- but it is something else
>> > entirely.
>
>I'd argue that 'Ex Machina' and 'Arrival' are recent films that definitely
>are 'real SF'.
>
>I'm heartedly tired of 'heroes' chewing up the scenery.

Although I wasn't particularly impressed by them (or by
/Interstellar/, an earlier probable example of an SF film) or by
others I have seen in the same vein, they do show that real SF films
are still being made.

But mostly not by Hollywood.
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."