Are Rian Johnson and Alex Kurtzman the fathers of modern science fiction?

[The Wormhole]

Considering an overwhelming majority of modern science fiction (or at least modern American science fiction) draws from Firefly or nu BSG, then I'd say Joss Whedon or Ron Moore have more of a claim to being the "fathers of modern science fiction." Aside from being the current head honcho of Star Trek, what has Kurtzman contributed to science fiction? And I'm not even sure how Rian Johnson qualifies as a father of science fiction. I'm not saying that to diss the guy, in fact I quite enjoyed TLJ. But one Star Wars movie is not enough to have under your belt to be a father of science fiction. And Looper certainly didn't have enough of an impact to bestow the title on Johnson. I think that's it as far as his contributions to sci-fi go.

 

[BillJ]

Is this just another way to complain about Kurtzman and Johnson?

 

[jaime]

Considering an overwhelming majority of modern science fiction (or at least modern American science fiction) draws from Firefly or nu BSG, then I'd say Joss Whedon or Ron Moore have more of a claim to being the "fathers of modern science fiction." Aside from being the current head honcho of Star Trek, what has Kurtzman contributed to science fiction? And I'm not even sure how Rian Johnson qualifies as a father of science fiction. I'm not saying that to diss the guy, in fact I quite enjoyed TLJ. But one Star Wars movie is not enough to have under your belt to be a father of science fiction. And Looper certainly didn't have enough of an impact to bestow the title on Johnson. I think that's it as far as his contributions to sci-fi go.

Even those were pastiche or reboots of existing stuff. Firefly maybe less so, but I am sure Joss would have been aware of BraveStarr or Galaxy Rangers, and even Trek had its Wagon Train To The Stars thing. (Star Wars is also a pastiche and patchwork, but it is at least a revolutionary one.)

 

[Jayson1]

I think it comes down to a short list of Whedon,Abrams,Feige and Christopher Nolan. Jason

 

[Noname Given]

I saw a post in Facebook star trek group discussing this.

They said that Kurtzman and Johnson created the best versions of Trek and Wars and referred to Gene "Rotten berry" and George "Doofus" as overrated.

^^^
This translates to: "A couple people said something really dumb on the Internet -- Discuss"

And hell, I'\m not even putting these two (Kurtzman & Johnson) down in any way. As much as I LOVE TOS (for example) - I would NEVER posit that "Gene Roddenberry was the father of (then in the 1960ies) 'modern' science fiction. It would be ludicrous.

 

[Armus]

No one is overrated if their contributions are correctly accessed.

And it's not a zero-sum game between the old Star Trek/Star Wars and the new.

 

[jaime]

Oddly enough, Trek doesn’t seem that influential in the field of TV SF.
I actually think the most obvious child of TNG is actually NCIS.

Even overall, your space opera thing often seems very rare, at least in Trek terms. There’s a few with overt influence from Trek, but they wear it on their sleeves (Babylon 5, Dark Matter, the half brother to Trek that is Andromeda...I don’t think I even need mention The Orville.) but overall the main influence of Trek was the post TNG TV-SF boom in the nineties. But they were all very very different to Trek.

It might be low in the mix...the biggest influences have been Star Wars, Bladerunner, and Alien(S) in that order. I’ll give Buffy the latecomer award for helping push the serialised format and arc in genre fiction, but really I think that’s something that was already happening and had happened before.
I didn’t feel BSG was that groundbreaking truth be told...and I even like the ending on that, which actually was fairly brave.

But modern SF is still drawing on that well, with perhaps a nod to the X-Files as a latecomer, particularly in the cinematography and that nineties era down to earth stuff. Maybe Proyas...but...am not sure I am comfortable putting that squarely in the SF arena anymore than I would put his obvious predecessor Terry Gilliam in there.

The idea of Johnson being anywhere in the list is...laughable tbh. Denis Villeneuve and Blomkamp are going to be, if not already are, more of the modern eras leading lights, but still from the DNA I already mentioned. Cursory shoutout to some of the Britpack directors, but...I dunno. Nolan for sure, but he’s working very much with echoes of the past in a very deliberate fashion, but with a lot more ambition than JJ.
I’d also give the Duffer Bros a tip in that area, but it’s too early to see what will happen there in terms of influence or growing and mutating something new from the DNA they very deliberately started with.

There are no fathers or mothers of modern SF. Probably a couple of godparents floating about. But it’s still the old Zeus and Hera movies from thirty years ago popping out the descendants.

 

[tomalak301]

Considering an overwhelming majority of modern science fiction (or at least modern American science fiction) draws from Firefly or nu BSG, then I'd say Joss Whedon or Ron Moore have more of a claim to being the "fathers of modern science fiction." Aside from being the current head honcho of Star Trek, what has Kurtzman contributed to science fiction? And I'm not even sure how Rian Johnson qualifies as a father of science fiction. I'm not saying that to diss the guy, in fact I quite enjoyed TLJ. But one Star Wars movie is not enough to have under your belt to be a father of science fiction. And Looper certainly didn't have enough of an impact to bestow the title on Johnson. I think that's it as far as his contributions to sci-fi go.

I'm just curious, what sci fi right now draws from Firefly? The show had a niche following, but other than maybe Westworld, I can't think of another show that is like Firefly at the moment.

 

[crookeddy]

I'd say Lost was at least the influence for most modern sci-fi TV shows. However, if we agreed to limit to movies, Lost isn't that relevant. And Lost was influenced by X-files and Babylon 5.

 

[JD]

I'll admit, I haven't really read a lot of books and comics, but I'd still say that the most original, influential stuff is coming from there. Hell, most of the biggest shows and things these days are based on books and comics, so I'd say the people who wrote the original source material have a bigger claim to the title "fathers/mothers" of modern science fiction.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

Considering an overwhelming majority of modern science fiction (or at least modern American science fiction) draws from Firefly or nu BSG, then I'd say Joss Whedon or Ron Moore have more of a claim to being the "fathers of modern science fiction."

Which in turn drew from Farscape and Blake's 7, which in turn drew from...Star Wars (which in turn drew from Seven Samurai and Buck Rogers...).

Is this just another way to complain about Kurtzman and Johnson?

What?! This is a trolling thread? Say it ain't so!

 

[tomalak301]

Which in turn drew from Farscape and Blake's 7, which in turn drew from...Star Wars (which in turn drew from Seven Samurai and Buck Rogers...).


What?! This is a trolling thread? Say it ain't so!

I still don't understand the gist of the thread. What is Modern Sci Fi and what is the meaning by the "Father" of modern sci fi. I mean the genre itself is so large from TV to movies to books, to audio that it's just hard to quantify this question at all.

Also, now that I've seen it, I agree with the significance of Joss Whedon, but not for Firefly, but Buffy, even though Buffy is more fantasy than sci fi.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Is this just another way to complain about Kurtzman and Johnson?

Sure seems like it, but it was saved by BSG.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

If we're talking science fiction in film, which we seem to be, the single most influential living individual of the state of the art was/is/and remains George Lucas on account of his little 1977 film.

Next to him among writers and directors we have Stanley Kubrick, but he isn't alive anymore, so he gets, what, grandfather status. Steven Spielberg is at least as influential as J.J. Abrams.

For the most influential science fiction filmmaker in recent years, I would have to go with Alfonso Cuarón, for Gravity (2013).

Ron Moore's nuBSG was also an important and influential work.

Ridley Scott is among those deserving honorable mention for Alien, Blade Runner, and more recently The Martian, though the unsung genius behind Alien was Dan O'Bannon.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I think Lost had major TV influence. It led to shows like Westworld making sci-fi audiences more willing to be confused for a long period of time. Also the format of each episode using parallel flashbacks to flesh out one character was used by other shows like Orange Is The New Black.

NuBSG didn’t do anything movies and novels weren’t already doing but did bring that kind of negative portrayal of the human race to a serialized TV format and also did things aesthetically like with lighting techniques that was new to TV.

But all of this is talking about TV specific influence. BSG borrowed a lot from Blade Runner, to the point EJO said in his mind they were in the same universe.

 

[Armus]

Every film should look as beautiful as Blade Runner. It has never been surpassed visually.

 

[Professor Zoom]

Every film should look as beautiful as Blade Runner. It has never been surpassed visually.

As long as they look just like Blade Runner. I don’t need that.

 

[Armus]

Rephrased: Every film should be made with the same eye for beauty and detail as Blade Runner.

 

[Professor Zoom]

If we're talking science fiction in film, which we seem to be, the single most influential living individual of the state of the art was/is/and remains George Lucas on account of his little 1977 film.

Next to him among writers and directors we have Stanley Kubrick, but he isn't alive anymore, so he gets, what, grandfather status. Steven Spielberg is at least as influential as J.J. Abrams.

For the most influential science fiction filmmaker in recent years, I would have to go with Alfonso Cuarón, for Gravity (2013).

Ron Moore's nuBSG was also an important and influential work.

Ridley Scott is among those deserving honorable mention for Alien, Blade Runner, and more recently The Martian, though the unsung genius behind Alien was Dan O'Bannon.

Is JJ Abrams really that influential? While he created and directed the pilot of Lost, he wasn’t the shownrunner. He wasn’t really around. What’s left? Star Trek? While I actually liked the lens flares, did that create an influence? Star Wars? Super 8? Those are more Spielberg than anything.

I feel he was more influenced by those that came before that influential to those who will follow him.

 

[Infern0]

Wait, so your supposition is because someone may like The Last Jedi and/or Discovery, that makes them think Alex Kurtzman and Rian Johnson are the fathers of modern science fiction? The Princess Bride is my favorite film of all time, do you think that means I think Rob Reiner is a better fantasy director than Peter Jackson? I am baffled at the logic here.

You could make an argument. Jackson was exposed somewhat by the hobbit trilogy. When he couldn't do a line for line adaption backed up by incredible budget he faltered considerably. King Kong wasn't great either. I think Jackson is overrated.

On topic, Star Wars is the biggest Sci fi property of all time, if someone be lives The Last Jedi us the GREATEST movie in the biggest Sci fi fantasy property EVER, then how's it a stretch for them to bestow that kind of a title on Rian Johnson, the expectation subvertor who was almost entirely responsible for that film.

He gets a lot of heat from those who didn't like the movie, so it's only fair he be praised by those who did enjoy it imo.