Notices
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: No science fiction fans on a science forum?

  1. #1 No science fiction fans on a science forum? 
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    405
    This must be the only forum on the entire web in which the discussion on Star Wars III amounts to eight posts. And that a Science based forum has a total of 43 posts on Science fiction is frankly a disgrace!


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Sophomore spidergoat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    165
    Isn't there enough talk about Lucas' crappy movies elsewhere? I mean, Empire was OK, but since THX1138, he hasn't made anything else worth watching.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    The Science Fiction section was also added much later then the rest.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4 Low traffic = Good sign? 
    Forum Freshman Tiassa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Bothell, Washington, USA
    Posts
    72
    It could be a good sign. Topics we might start, just to make the forum seem more populous:

    <blockquote>• Foil v. Linen: The implications of hippie and industrialist fashion for the future
    •*7 of 9 v. Erin: Mud wrestling
    • If Rurouni Kenshin had lightsabers
    • Piddling About the Garden: Environmental themes in Lindholm's Alien Earth
    • "For Hate's Sake" - Great lines from Sci-Fi villains
    • From the gang of five: Which Enterprise captain is best suited for fighting the Gamilons?</blockquote>

    It is a gang of five, right? Pike, Kirk, Picard, Janeway, Archer? Have I missed one?

    Hey, there's another topic of its own: "Captains of the Enterprise".

    For instance:

    Originally intended to be a Lieutenant, Travis "Token" Mayweather was bumped down two grades to Ensign. The logical reason behind this is because Berman and Braga decided that it was too odd to have two Lieutenants (Mayweather & Reed) on the show especially so far apart in ages, choosing to ignore A) Malcolm Reed was originally invisioned as a Lt. Commander, not a Lieutenant, B) there's a grade of rank between the two, that of Junior Grade Lieutenant, C) Kirk, Spock, Scotty and Sulu were all Captains serving onboard Enterprise in the Trek Movies, and D) compare the age difference between Mayweather and Reed to that of Reed and Tucker and their excuse doesn't stand. I'm sure the reduction in rank had absolutely nothing to do with him being black. Probably.

    FirstTVDrama.com
    It's just that sometimes the thoughtful s/f topics require a certain amount of thought. Even I'm not up to the full breadth of "Bradbury As Prophet: Leo Auffman's Happiness Machine and The Internet".

    Perhaps the new Michael Bay film (The Island) will resurrect the "Matrix v. Cave" discussions. Dunno, though, I'm skipping that flick.

    Oooh ... "Better Ballistics? Starship Troopers v. Ridley and the Marines".

    One of the microdramas playing out in literary circles is the struggle for s/f's legitimacy. Despite its influence and vision, science fiction is still treated as marginal, a fringe genre; mysteries, after all, are much more dignified ... (?!)

    So it could well be that science fiction fans, being eternally conscious of society's myopia, might simply be less willing to support topics that fit merely the stereotype of science fiction fans.

    What about something like, "Communal Psychology and the Breadth of Science Fiction: Planetary and Interplanetary Themes, Conscience of Species, and Community-Adaptive Behavior"?

    I'll get back to you next year on that one. Maybe. Science fiction, like any artistic classification, bears its share of nutty adherents. However, science fiction being what it is, many people tend to treat it with a wary eye, and therefore hold the nuts against the genre where they wouldn't otherwise. In the end, if there's not a rush to blither and babble about every luscious detail of everything under the umbrella, it's good not only for the participants, but the genre itself.

    Perhaps it's not a matter of numbers, but content.
    "A red rose absorbs all colours but red; red is therefore the one colour that it is not." (Perdurabo)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5 Re: No science fiction fans on a science forum? 
    Forum Sophomore DEChengst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    NLA0:
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by Silas
    This must be the only forum on the entire web in which the discussion on Star Wars III amounts to eight posts.
    That's because Star Wars isn't SciFi. Star Wars is a fairy tale that just happens to play out in space.
    PDP, VAX and Alpha fanatic ; HP-Compaq is the Satan! ; Let us pray daily while facing Maynard! ; Life starts at 150 km/h ;
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,699
    I use to really like Babylon 5. Star trek was ok before it turned to soap opera trek. The show got really stupid. Star Wars is still the best, I'm not sold on Episode 1-3 however.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Sophomore cleft's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    137
    I guess my love for SF came from when I was a teenager and reading.

    Since it has been so long since I have read any of the old stuff, I have taken to rereading those I have not visited since being a teenager. The fact that they are out of date, not up on latest science, or that they don't have the latest greatest inventions as part of their background doesn't detract from the story line. For the most part they are still romping good reads.

    What the early scifi movies missed was any sort of near believable special effects. With todays computer assisted special effects it is almost impossible to detect the real from the fake. It does indeed make the movie a much better product in that sense. Many of the latest movies are but rehashes of old themes. This seems to be one of the largest failings of the movie industry. Doesn't seem to be many intellegent writers amoung the staff for such.

    While I enjoy the occasional tv series and movie it no longer holds the "magic" it once did. Prehaps it is that the suspending of what you know to be able to associate with the movie no longer works as well. Prehaps it is the product and what you are asked to believe can work that is stretched beyond believable limits. After all, an actor can only recoup from so many potentially fatal incidendents so many times before he crosses into the fairy tale realm.

    Sin City was just such a sort of movie where all the main characters seem to get shot over and over yet don't die, don't seem to be affected beyond the pause and backward movement that would indicate a phyiscal hit to the body. While this movie wasn't a very good movie it does demonstate the idea.

    In the quest for ever great shock value and outdoing its latest competion the endless explosions per minute just becomes a numb oh well, after the first few times. Prehaps what is missing even more is truely good story lines, not butchered beyond recognition within the novel to screenplay rewrite.
    "Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo."
    - H. G. Wells (1866-1946)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8 Re: No science fiction fans on a science forum? 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by Silas
    This must be the only forum on the entire web in which the discussion on Star Wars III amounts to eight posts. And that a Science based forum has a total of 43 posts on Science fiction is frankly a disgrace!
    Well in my opinion, Star Wars is not so much about the science behind things such as the light sabre, or the Death Star, or the flying cars or interstellar ships. It's an exciting series of adventure movies set in some environment we would consider futuristic, but I'm not sure it's about science so much.

    I do like science fiction though. Star Trek is slightly closer to what I like, still I wouldn't label it hard SF. The movies 2001 and 2010 are much more what I like, and of course the brilliant Contact. I liked the books as well, by the way. I suppose I'm more into the hard SF, where science and technology takes the centre stage, and where even the speculative science is somehow based on current science or at least not violating it as we know it. Mostly, anyway.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    405
    I'm sorry, but the biggest medium in popular culture is film, and Star Wars is more science fiction than any other genre. The new film is also the culmination of the biggest cultural phenomenon of the last thirty years. There are science fiction purists who would deny its Science Fiction credentions, but what genuine science fiction is there in the film medium? Gattaca and Pi are the only two that I can think of off the top of my head. Science Fiction fans really have to make do, in film, with spaceships and laser blasters.

    Star Wars is science fiction because, although there are fantastical and "magical" elements, by and large the events of the film proceed through advanced technology, whereas to my mind pure fantasy is that which eschews technology whether it involves magic or not.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •