Science fiction is a hard genre to define, as seen by the numerous different definitions gathered in the article. I personally agree most with Larry Niven's definition of Sci-Fi:
"...The short answer is, science fiction stories are given as possible, not necessarily here and now, but somewhere, sometime." — Larry Niven
Science Fiction stories and films have some sort of connection with reality, as opposed to just fiction or fantasy. Sci-Fi films deal with some sort of future innovation in technology, and convey a message using that advancement in science. The films involve something that doesn't exist in our current society, but is in the realm of possibility. The filmmakers use their imagination to see what the future may hold, and what type of issues or conflicts may arise if our society becomes that way, or continues the way it is today. While there are many definitions in the article, they do all seem to surround the idea of some sort of development in science which humans have not experienced in our current day. While some films do include real science as their basis for scientific development, I don't think that is a necessity for a film to be a Sci-Fi film, and many times it does not. The fact that most Sci-Fi films include some sort of advancement in science that has not happened yet means that it cannot really be based on "real science". I think the biggest differentiation between SF films and other films is that the films are set in the future or in an alternate reality with technology that doesn't currently exist.
No comments:
Post a Comment