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

[EnderAKH]

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.

My broader point that you either, willingly or not, seem to have ignored is just because I like a movie does not mean I hold the writer or director of said movie to be a master of that genre. Movies are a mysterious mix that are a confluence of intangible elements contributed to by a virtual army of people including the actors, director, credited writer, uncredited writers, cinematographer, etc. That line of thinking is just insane. Another example: I love the Matrix. I, personally, think it is a masterpiece of cyberpunk anime brought to life. However while I enjoy the two sequels I find them to be lesser works, even though they have largely the same players involved. So even though I love the Matrix, I would never count the Wachowski's "the mothers of science fiction," just because they managed against the odds to put together a movie I loved. So the idea that if you like or love TLJ or Discovery that that means you somehow MUST think the makers are the top tier of genre artists is ludicrous.

 

[Professor Zoom]

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.

It’s a stretch because it’s a ludicrous torture of logic?

Johnson, I feel, created a great Star Wars movie, second only to Kershner. The visuals are amazing, and yes, how the story subverts expectations and deepens the Universe

But one movie does not a father make. Or you would be saying Kershner is a father of science fiction because of his work on Empire.

But that’s not really the point of the thread, is it?

 

[Qonundrum]

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.

You're forgetting the other toddler, the one who was wanting Shatner dead was another of the modern so-called "geeks": https://mobile.twitter.com/WilliamShatner/status/1138871183011528704/photo/1

Allegedly the person who made the initial comment was under 20 and a rabid fan of STD. Just what is the takeaway that modern day Trek telling these kids anyway?

Kurtzman, Abrams/Johnson, et al, have slick production styles and even the 1977 original Star Wars had little apart from shiny new special effects. The new teams just need writers to slow down the pace (a tad, not majorly) and do an extra revision and ditch the rough drafts and put out something that's on par with 1977's and not be by-the-numbers remake of it, since most sagas don't repeat the same plot every 3 or 4 chapters. Or 1 or 2 if one includes episode IV and VI.

 

[Qonundrum]

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!

B7 had more to do with The Dirty Dozen and The Great Escape, and was made when Star Wars came out, which then had the producers getting nervous since B7 was about to be released and looked cheaper than Doctor Who. But plot content and stout, robust characters of genuine interest prevailing, B7 had 4 years of storytelling. 2 without its lead due to fear of typecasting but they still made much with where they went with it.

It’s a stretch because it’s a ludicrous torture of logic?

Johnson, I feel, created a great Star Wars movie, second only to Kershner. The visuals are amazing, and yes, how the story subverts expectations and deepens the Universe

But one movie does not a father make. Or you would be saying Kershner is a father of science fiction because of his work on Empire.

But that’s not really the point of the thread, is it?

They're more like stepfathers and there are ways to narratively fix omissions from TFA and TLJ (the latter I still adore) without reset buttons. One issue is, Episode IX was slated for 2019 and ideas just don't happen overnight like on an assembly line...

 

[Professor Zoom]

They're more like stepfathers and there are ways to narratively fix omissions from TFA and TLJ (the latter I still adore) without reset buttons. One issue is, Episode IX was slated for 2019 and ideas just don't happen overnight like on an assembly line...

Why are they even considered step-fathers? Johnson has made a total of two science fiction movies. When, Knives Out is released, will he also be considered a father (step-father) of Modern crime because he made Brick?

Being a Father or Mother of something has to suggest influence. Iggy Pop is the considered a Father of Punk because his work with Iggy and the Stooges were the foundations of punk. Issac Asimov is considered a father of Science Fiction because he established a lot of the tropes and shape of science fiction. Raymond Chandler is considered a father of the Private Eye detective fiction because his work influence those that followed.

Johnson is a filmmaker, not a father of anything, as of yet.

The Wachowskis have had, arguably, a much greater influence on modern filmmaking than Johnson has.

 

[JD]

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.

I'm starting to think you have a different definition of "father/mother of the genre" than the rest of us. Typically when someone says a person is a "father/mother of the genre" I think of that person as some who basically helped to create the genre, either by creating some of the earliest works in that genre, or by creating something that brought about a massive shift in that genre.
You seem to be simply making this about whether or not you're a fan of a person, but it takes a lot more than just liking a person's work for them to be considered a "father/mother" of the genre.
It's also helpful if you tell us if you are talking about the whole genre of just one element of it. There is a lot more to science fiction than just movies, just off the top of my head there is also TV, books, comics, audio stories, plays, video games, board games, tabletop RPGs, strategy games, and probably even a few things I'm not even thinking of.
The biggest problem with trying to name Rian Johnson a father of science fiction, is that he's too new to it to really be able to tell just how influential The Last Jedi and Looper are going to be. Alex Kurztman has been around a bit longer, and I haven't really seen any of the stuff he's done really have that big of impact on the genre as a whole, so I'd say it's pretty safe to rule him out. It's worth keeping in mind with Kurtzman that pretty much everything he's done has been in collaboration with other people, so it's kind of hard to really get a good feel for what he is like as a solo storyteller. Probably the closest we can get to that is the Tom Cruise The Mummy, which he co-wrote and directed, and it was a complete bomb that got horrible reviews, so if go solely by that, then he is definitely not even close to a "father of modern science fiction".

 

[The Wormhole]

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.

The Expanse, though admittedly that applies to the novels moreso. The show tried to downplay the Firefly connections quite a bit.

 

[Kelso]

Put me on Team Villeneuve.

 

[jaime]

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.

I suppose if we squint, then Killjoys and Dark Matter have an element of ‘western in space’ to them. Though Dark Matter is more cyberpunk child of Trek, frozen in vitro since the nineties...and sadly cancelled, whereas Killjoys is somewhere out in a place of its own involving role playing games, and also feel through a crack in time from a better era.

 

[jaime]

My broader point that you either, willingly or not, seem to have ignored is just because I like a movie does not mean I hold the writer or director of said movie to be a master of that genre. Movies are a mysterious mix that are a confluence of intangible elements contributed to by a virtual army of people including the actors, director, credited writer, uncredited writers, cinematographer, etc. That line of thinking is just insane. Another example: I love the Matrix. I, personally, think it is a masterpiece of cyberpunk anime brought to life. However while I enjoy the two sequels I find them to be lesser works, even though they have largely the same players involved. So even though I love the Matrix, I would never count the Wachowski's "the mothers of science fiction," just because they managed against the odds to put together a movie I loved. So the idea that if you like or love TLJ or Discovery that that means you somehow MUST think the makers are the top tier of genre artists is ludicrous.

I think the matrix had a brief burst of influence, more in effects than anything else...and you could argue for it opening the doors to how much mind-fuckery was allowed...
But I think the Wachowskis would like to be a generated influence than they are. And I liked Cloud Atlas. Is liking five of their films enough to qualify me as a fan? No idea.

 

[Mysterion]

Really, if anyone is the "father of modern science fiction" it's probably either Jules Verne and/or H.G. Wells.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Really, if anyone is the "father of modern science fiction" it's probably either Jules Verne and/or H.G. Wells.

One could even drop the "modern".

 

[jaime]

Really, if anyone is the "father of modern science fiction" it's probably either Jules Verne and/or H.G. Wells.

That’s not really teh modernz.
Though given there recent rebranding as ‘cyberpunk’, which is a bit like rebranding the epic of Gilgamesh (and Beowulf) as urban fantasy, you may be onto something.
If so, can I propose God as the father of modern Young Adult fiction, and New Young Adult fiction (aka, twenty and thirty somethings trying to feel better about easing teenie books for some reason.) on the grounds of David and Goliath and most of Song of Songs?

 

[jaime]

One could even drop the "modern".

I am down with Mary Shelley being mummy.

 

[Marsden]

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

I think they are more the strange uncles you don't leave the children home alone with..

Unless Modern Science Fiction is the name of their test tube baby, I'm going with no.

This is the BEST answer in this thread.

 

[Infern0]

You're forgetting the other toddler, the one who was wanting Shatner dead was another of the modern so-called "geeks": https://mobile.twitter.com/WilliamShatner/status/1138871183011528704/photo/1

Allegedly the person who made the initial comment was under 20 and a rabid fan of STD. Just what is the takeaway that modern day Trek telling these kids anyway?

Kurtzman, Abrams/Johnson, et al, have slick production styles and even the 1977 original Star Wars had little apart from shiny new special effects. The new teams just need writers to slow down the pace (a tad, not majorly) and do an extra revision and ditch the rough drafts and put out something that's on par with 1977's and not be by-the-numbers remake of it, since most sagas don't repeat the same plot every 3 or 4 chapters. Or 1 or 2 if one includes episode IV and VI.

Well it taught me that it's ok to laugh at someone dying as long as they are a mansplainer.

 

[Infern0]

Why are they even considered step-fathers? Johnson has made a total of two science fiction movies. When, Knives Out is released, will he also be considered a father (step-father) of Modern crime because he made Brick?

Being a Father or Mother of something has to suggest influence. Iggy Pop is the considered a Father of Punk because his work with Iggy and the Stooges were the foundations of punk. Issac Asimov is considered a father of Science Fiction because he established a lot of the tropes and shape of science fiction. Raymond Chandler is considered a father of the Private Eye detective fiction because his work influence those that followed.

Johnson is a filmmaker, not a father of anything, as of yet.

The Wachowskis have had, arguably, a much greater influence on modern filmmaking than Johnson has.

Jesus only wrote one book but he's considered the father of Christianity.

 

[jaime]

Jesus only wrote one book but he's considered the father of Christianity.

Which book did he write?
(I am aware this can only go two ways... xD)

 

[Nerys Myk]

Jesus only wrote one book but he's considered the father of Christianity.

I don't think he wrote any books. You"ll find the "books" are attributed to others, including a guy named Paul who is the probably considered actual father of Christianity by those who bother to study it.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Allegedly the person who made the initial comment was under 20 and a rabid fan of STD. Just what is the takeaway that modern day Trek telling these kids anyway?

I've heard some pretty horrible things come out of the mouths of older fans* who seemed to have missed a lot of old Trek's "message". So I don't thinks it's a modern day Trek problem as much as a humanity problem.

*Full disclosure at 60, I am an older fan.