Be Excellent To Each Other

I've not see the film, but is there an element of science, technology or engineer that we cannot do at the moment that features in the film?

Malc

Some drug makes people with swollen brains become conscious again.

It *is* futuristic for us. Even if it's set in the past.

If aliens came to earth now with lasers, transporters, transmuters and so on, that would be futuristic tech (to us)

Malc

Do those drugs exist now?

MAlc

I think you'll find that it would be indistinguishable from magic, and hence a Fantasy film

I file my star wars films in the "Historical drama" genre.

If you tell me the genre of a movie then I expect to get a hint about what sort of emotional response I'm going to have to it: thriller, comedy, romance, horror, and so on. Sci-fi doesn't have any hints, it could be horror like Alien or a comedy like Men In Black or existential musings on the nature of man like 2001. It doesn't fit in that list. Calling it a genre doesn't convey any useful information.

Sure it does, if you're actually interested in Science Fiction, and the projection of technological trends into the future. Some people are only interested in books that are science fiction.

That's me, that is. But that's because spaceships and stuff are ace. I like my spaceships to be involved in all sorts of different hijinks. But I'm not that bothered about the effect spaceships have on the soul of man.

What do Alien or Men In Black tell us about the projection of technological trends into the future? Or do you not think that Alien and Men In Black are sci-fi films?

That one day we'll have pens that are also torches that make you forget the bad stuff.

The future will be AWESOME.

Entirely agree.

it's like an adgenre (similar to an adverb)

So Alien would be a sci-fi horror
MIB would be a sci-fi comedy
2001 would be a What the SciFuck!

etc

Malc

Alien is in some way, mainly due to it having a decent go at depicting space travel realistically. I should probably point out that I don't think the definition given on Wikipedia is the right one, or that an exact definition is even needed. I just quoted it because it mentioned Futurism as setting and Science Fiction as genre. You could also argue that what I call Science Fiction, others would call Hard Core Science Fiction. But I have read enough good Science Fiction, I think, to recognize a special element that sets it sufficiently apart from other story telling to deserve a proper genre tag, and I think Science Fiction the are the proper words for it, if they are to have any meaning at all. I am not a student of literature, though, or even that avid a reader, even if I often wish I was.

Men In Black is not Science Fiction in my book, it is comedy in a futuristic setting. I haven't spent any time analyzing any particular works in depth, though, so I might conceivably change my mind if someone could argue why this is ludicrous.

Or, maybe, a setting.

You could even argue that sci-fi and science fiction are two different things, a la Malc's post.

Is the Blues Brothers Sci-fi?

It's a good point, though. What is 2001? A "sci-fi science fiction"? How does that make any sense?

There is already a distinction between Hard Sci-Fi and Soft Sci-Fi, in the same way that there is High Fantasy and Low Fantasy

I have some pretty low fantasies.

I think you’ve hit on something there, Mink in a Sci-Fi setting.

There is definitely a je ne sai quois in certain authors' writings that sets them apart, and it's something very much to do with the science fiction element of the story - Aasimov, Greg Bear, Kim Stanley Robinson, Alastair Reynolds, Dan Simmons etc – an exploration of the possibilities of technology, and the effects it has on society, ways of living, people, our brains and more, rather than someone like Neal Asher or Peter Hamilton which is all just high tech pew pew. (I say “just”… pew pew is where it’s at…)

Similarly with fantasy actually. There’s something particular about the writings of someone like Alan Campbell or Steven Erikson that transcends “action with swords and stuff”

Is that not a theme, rather than a genre or a setting?

"low" and "high" sci-fi usually only serve to describe the importance of the "science" part of it, which again doesn't do much to describe a genre.

Both Phillip K Dick and Star Wars can be low sci-fi (don't get me started on that "space opera" nonsense).

No, that is a musical.

yeah, I know - I'm not backing down on "sci fi isn't a genre", but there's definitely a defining feature of certain sorts of hard sci fi, as it were, that merits categorisation.

Fuck off.


Wait, do I think it's a musical, or do I not think it's a musical. I forget.
I know Grim... is wrong about this though, so I think the opposite of what he thinks.

In which case you don't think it's a musical.

Craster is also confused about what he thinks, as demonstrated when we went to shout at DJ Al about it being in a musical round and Craster started out arguing that it was correct so I just shrugged and argued the opposite.

It was like being online, BUT IN REAL LIFE.

Why isn't Blue Brothers a musical?

(Chuckles)

I always thought it was a musical

That's because it is.

*glares*

Hey, banhammer! It's been a while

Banhammer? Or banwurst? On a skewer.

A musical would be have plot-advancing songs. Blues Brothers just has people singing now and then. Is Pitch Perfect a musical?

Here's a question though. Is Mamma Mia a musical?

Have you watched Blues Brothers? The music is the plot.


Yes?

If you took the songs out of Blues Brothers, like just chopped them out, the plot would still make sense. If you did that to Oliver, say, it would be a confused mess.

Blues Brothers is not a musical.

What? How would it make sense? Why would they be getting a band together? Why would they be going to an auditorium? Where would the big bag of money have come from?

It does for every song except for Think, which has Franklin breaking into song about the current situation, with music that isn't being played by anyone (except for the saxaphone). Ergo, musical.


No.

Is Vin Diesel a Musical?

I've never seen Blues Brothers, either.

I think Russell put it on, once, but it was a bit rubbish so I didn't watch it.

OH, IT'S FUCKING ON.

*burns down forum*

When did this get defined? Did I miss a memo?

Hardly definitive, but Wikipedia says "The musical film is a film genre in which songs sung by the characters are interwoven into the narrative, sometimes accompanied by dancing." which (a) seems just as reasonable a definition to me and (b) definitely includes Blues Brothers.

Is the name of your sex tape.

I watched Serenity today. I enjoyed it. I'll be yoinking Firefire next, I hope I've done this in the right order...