What tropes in science fiction annoy you?

[Mysterion]

I would argue again that some works can belong to multiple genres at the same time: an SF caper film, or a sci-fi detective story or whatever. Somewhere in Time is undeniably a fantasy, a time-travel story, and a swoony, romantic love story, for instance. (It's also been made into a musical.) See also The Ghost and Mrs. Muir. Alien is science fiction (spaceships, aliens) and horror. There's no rule that says any given work is only allowed one label or genre.

And take Alien and the sequel Aliens. The first is very much a horror story with the starship Nostromo replacing the aging gothic mansion, while the second is a military action/adventure story. But they are two pieces of the same overall story-arc in a series of movies. Not only is it a shift in style within the SF genre, it may gave been the smartest move the producers could have made. I think if Aliens had been closer in tone to the original it would have been less remembered - it would have just been just another more-of-the-same sequel.

 

[Discofan]

And take Alien and the sequel Aliens. The first is very much a horror story with the starship Nostromo replacing the aging gothic mansion, while the second is a military action/adventure story. But they are two pieces of the same overall story-arc in a series of movies. Not only is it a shift in style within the SF genre, it may gave been the smartest move the producers could have made. I think if Aliens had been closer in tone to the original it would have been less remembered - it would have just been just another more-of-the-same sequel.

Actually, the four Alien(s) are quite different from one another. The Aliens don't even look the same from one movie to the next.

 

[Mysterion]

^^^^
Ok, try this, then; in TOS you've got different styles in different episodes: for example you've got Balance of Terror which is a tense combat story and Trouble with Tribbles (or I, Mudd) which are comedic farces. City on the Edge of Forever is a time-travel story and a romance. Court-Martial is a courtroom drama. Many different styles, same overall setting/characters (Star Trek), same genre (Science Fiction).

 

[Greg Cox]

But a dog dying is a situation that you could see yourself into. I could never picture myself surrounded by vampires or zombies or whatever.

"Misery" for example is the kind of scary situation that could really happen! In fact, it could happen to any of us. Someone you don't know, for example, has a crush on you and won't take no for an answer... that's the kind of thing that could easily turn into a nightmare.

But if you're watching a monster movie and King Kong is stomping a city, don't you get thrilled and excited . . . even though you know that Kong is just a special effect and giant apes aren't real?

Heck, if we can't "believe" in monsters or superheroes or alien body-snatchers for the duration of a movie, why watch anything that isn't "believable" or "realistic"?

I mean, everyone knows that mermaids aren't real so why should we care what happens to Ariel in the Disney cartoon? Especially since she's just a drawing.

And, honestly, movies are full of situation that I can't ever really see myself being in, even if they're not overtly fantastic. I'm not an international super-spy so I don't imagine that I will ever be menaced by a laser-beam or take part in a high-speed car chase through Monte Carlo. Doesn't matter because I'm not watching a movie about me. I'm watching James Bond or Matt Helm or whoever.

 

[JD]

I completely disagree. if you don't believe in something, you don't find it scary. For example, I was never scared by any vampire movie.

I don't need to believe in it in real life, all I need is to believe it's real in the story.

 

[Greg Cox]

I don't need to believe in it in real life, all I need is to believe it's real in the story.

Exactly. Fiction is all about "believing" in things that aren't real, which provoke an emotional response, at least for the duration of the story. And fear in particular in not about reason or rationality. It's an instinctive response.

Movies, it can be argued, are waking dreams, and sometimes they operate on dream-logic.

 

[JD]

It doesn't even need to be a movie for me, I tend to react just as much to things in books and comics.

 

[Greg Cox]

Fun discussion, btw.

 

[Armus]

An overuse of computer generated imagery in science fiction, and especially fantasy, films. If overused it destroys a sense of reality, which by the way the best science fiction films, like 2001, had in abundance.

 

[Greg Cox]

In defense of CGI, applied with skill: It allows filmmakers more options when it comes to storytelling because they're not limited by the physical limitations of practical effects.

Go back and look at something like 1970s version of THE LAND THAT TIME FORGOT. The old-school puppet dinosaurs still have a certain charm, but you can see how the staging and even the plotting is restricted by the limited mobility of the creatures. (To be clear, the issue is not that the SFX are old or "fakey" or anything like that; it's that they're only capable of a limited number of motions.)

"Hey, how about the dinosaur chases them across the river, they climb up his tail, then dive off his snout over the waterfall? That would be great!"

"Um, the dinosaur is a puppet being back-projected onto a screen behind the actors. We can't really have the humans and the dinosaur interact like that."

"Okay, how about if the humans just kinda stare and gasp at the monster as it snaps its jaws?"

"Yeah, we can do that."

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

In defense of CGI, applied with skill: It allows filmmakers more options when it comes to storytelling because they're not limited by the physical limitations of practical effects.

Go back and look at something like 1970s version of THE LAND THAT TIME FORGOT. The old-school dinosaurs still have a certain charm, but you can see how the staging and even the plotting is restricted by the limited mobility of the dinosaurs. (To be clear, the issue is not that the SFX are old or "fakey" or anything like that; it's that they're only capable of a limited number of motions.)

"Hey, how about the dinosaur chases them across the river, they climb up his tail, then dive off his snout over the waterfall? That would be great!"

"Um, the dinosaur is a puppet being back-projected on a screen behind the actors. We can't really have the humans and the dinosaur interact like that."

"Okay, how about if the humans just kinda stare and gape at the monster as it snaps its jaws?"

"Yeah, we can do that."

Well they could only do so much with the technology they had with them at the time. Now that we are in the age of CGI we can do those things that we couldn't do before as you say. I love the stop motion stuff.

 

[JD]

The only time I'm really bothered by CGI is when it's really fake looking. I'm sorry, but there is no way someone is going to be able to convince me that the rubber masks in the old Planet of the Apes movies are better than the motion capture in the new ones.

 

[Gov Kodos]

For what's it worth, the movie was certainly intended as a comedy--one of several from Ealing Studios back in the day--and marketed as such. And I see that Wikipedia describes it as a "science-fiction satirical comedy."

YMMV.

I'd include 'Our man in Havana' with 'Man in the White Suit' as an epic comedy/Sci-Fi double feature.

 

[Greg Cox]

The only time I'm really bothered by CGI is when it's really fake looking. I'm sorry, but there is no way someone is going to be able to convince me that the rubber masks in the old Planet of the Apes movies are better than the motion capture in the new ones.

You don't know some of the APES fans I know.

 

[Nerys Myk]

You don't know some of the APES fans I know.

Fans love what they love. Sometimes love is blind.

 

[JD]

You don't know some of the APES fans I know.

I could see where people who grew up loving the originals could have trouble with the new ones. I've always enjoyed the original, but I didn't really fall in love with the franchise until Rise and Dawn. Dawn and War are two of my absolute favorite movies.

 

[Greg Cox]

I could see where people who grew up loving the originals could have trouble with the new ones. I've always enjoyed the original, but I didn't really fall in love with the franchise until Rise and Dawn. Dawn and War are two of my absolute favorite movies.

The original POTA is probably my all-time favorite SF movie. I'm an old-school APES fan--read the comics, built the plastic models, memorized the movies back in the day--but I was impressed by the new trilogy . . . and was thrilled to novelize WAR. I like to think that I was following in the grand tradition of Michael Avallone, Jerry Pournelle, John Jakes, David Gerrold, and George Alec Effingers, who novelized the original movies and TV series.

 

[USS Firefly]

It's maybe strange but since my wife and I have a dog we barely can watch movies where animals are getting hurt. It doesn't matter if it's another dog, we will never watch "I am legend" again or a Gorilla in King Kong, my wife cried when Kong died.
I love the new POTA movies but after the first movie my wife don't want to see the sequels because of what happend to Caesar.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

It's maybe strange but since my wife and I have a dog we barely can watch movies where animals are getting hurt. It doesn't matter if it's another dog, we will never watch "I am legend" again or a Gorilla in King Kong, my wife cried when Kong died.
I love the new POTA movies but after the first movie my wife don't want to see the sequels because of what happend to Caesar.

She wouldn't have liked Marley & Me I bet.

Was there supposed to be another POTA movie after War?

 

[USS Firefly]

She wouldn't have liked Marley & Me I bet.

Was there supposed to be another POTA movie after War?

Even I don't wan't to see that movie.

I believe POTA was supose to be a trilogy, but I really hope that I am wrong