19 replies to this topic

[jjf3]

There are only a few sci-fi shows I haven't seen and a few movies.

However, as I start to read more and more books in the genre I realize that a whole bunch of em can be adapted into film? Sci-fi usually has a lot of elements from all the other movies inside of them. Why isn't the genre larger and why can't more sci-fi books be brought into film

Or hell more great books in general be converted into movie form?

Thoughts?

[Craven]

Thoughts?

Two.

First: It seems it's new dawn of SF movies. We had some strong ones recently - Avatar, District 9, Moon. Prometheus will be here soon, and there are plans for another Dune, Ender's Game, Forever War and Foundation.

Second: Your thread reminded me of very nice speech by Carolny Porco about scientists in movies


Long, but if you got spare time you probably won't regret.

[jjf3]

That's very interesting she was talking more along the lines of things like real science and ideas like the social network. Or also Primer popped into my mind during a lot of her examples.

I was just wondering why Hollywood doesn't take sci-fi too seriously they might release like maybe at most 10 sci-fi films a year.... where there are sooo many more books out there just waiting for their shot, although too the movie could butcher the book itself. You also forgot Hunger Games (one I am really looking forward too)

For a great example of what I am talking about just look at syfy channel. They have like two syfy show on there!!! And Eureka is ending this year!

Edited by jjf3, 30 November 2011 - 08:03 AM.

[Craven]

Isn't Hunger Games more like dystopian teenage movie? I don't think there's much pressure on SF elements there.

I also forgot Source Code

Anyway while I want more SF movies, books are troublesome. They are pretty much always torn between fans and regular audience, being true to original and fitting story to cinematic format. There's really much that can go wrong.

[GNR Rvolution]

Sci-fi is still a niche market, the appetite from the masses is generally poor compared to the awful Rom-Coms and buddy movies that they churn out. And whilst Sci-fi can be done on a low budget you generally need a fair investment to generate the kind of special effects that wow the audience. Yes, Avatar, Star Wars, Star Trek, Matrix etc. make money but they have rather large budgets, something that no-one (including Hollywood) is likely to spend without a guarunteed return. Hopefully people will continue to make sci-fi films on a low budget though as it is normally the idea that makes me watch and not the big bangs. I mean look at the new star wars films, bangs everywhere and they were still shocking!

[Zaphod]

The budget for Duncan Jones 'Moon' was a fairly modest $5 million, but I thought it was one of the best Sci-fi films of recent years. I'd like to see a few more lower budget sci-fi's that concentrate on ideas rather than exclusively special effects.

[Craven]

Even District 9 had fairly reasonable budget yet delivered it's share of wow to the audience.

[jjf3]

District 9's Budget was 30 Million and it started as a lower budget but yes, was a really great movie.

Another movie, my personal favorite is called the man form earth. It had a $200,000 budget, had no CGI whatsoever, and remains one of the most downloaded movies in history because the creators are open to filesharing!

[Craven]

Love Actually had same budget as D9

[jjf3]

some sci-fi movies have great complex plots and great writing however, the average american or international movie goer cannot or does not want to think during movies and tv time. They want it to be relaxing and stress free. An escape from reality.

This is why American Networks are favoring Reality TV as well as their much cheaper budget. But as proven here great sci-fi doesn't always need a big budget.

Edited by jjf3, 01 December 2011 - 06:43 AM.

[Craven]

I don't believe that. It's what studios are shoving in audience's faces. They're convincing themselves that people don't want intelectually engaging movies, because that's convinient for them. Look how hard they try to ignore sucess of Inception, claiming that people liked it only because it was Nolan's work.

http://www.gq.com/en...s?currentPage=1

[GNR Rvolution]

Agreed, any actor who wants to take it easy and not think about what they are doing is a poor actor. Real actors want to be challenged, engaged, become part of their character. I'd love to see Daniel Day-Lewis do some Sci-Fi, that dude embodies the method acting spirit. Although he would probably want to get into character by actually living in a vacuum or something....

Edited by GNR Rvolution, 01 December 2011 - 09:35 AM.

[jjf3]

Oh I am not saying actors don't want to work and are the lazy ones, some are but most are good at what they do.

I'm talking about the American public in general. They don't like to think during movies. That's also probably why people are reading less books. They don't want to think about things. The internet has almost made our fictional mind uploading devices a reality. In a sense where you can get the jist of any topic in the world any time you want.

Internet can affect movies as well. How many times have you seen a trailer online that you didn't like so that prevented you from watching the movie?! People do that. IN reality how can two minutes compare to two hours? But people want things now and instant! If they think they don't like it now, they are not going to sit through the whole two hour thing. I think it's got very little to do with the media, but of course the ones with bigger budgets and franchise brand names will make the most money and will spend the most in advertising.

Edited by jjf3, 01 December 2011 - 04:01 PM.

[Craven]

Internet can affect movies as well. How many times have you seen a trailer online that you didn't like so that prevented you from watching the movie?!

But it's other way around. I don't want cat in a bag, I don't go to cinema blindly, I wanna see trailer first.

[Dead Redshirt]

I was just wondering why Hollywood doesn't take sci-fi too seriously they might release like maybe at most 10 sci-fi films a year.... where there are sooo many more books out there just waiting for their shot, although too the movie could butcher the book itself. You also forgot Hunger Games (one I am really looking forward too)

For the most part, a big part of the problem in my eyes is how science is treated on TV shows and movies. It always seems to take a backseat, even when the science of something is important to the plot. They always tend to cut corners to make it fit the plot rather than the other way around. Love Eureka. I find it's a bit better than most at using science. So, I think your question actually has two sides to it. Unrealistic science is one, which in turn makes it uninteresting for the viewer.

[Craven]

I love it

[eacao]

Thoughts?

First: It seems it's new dawn of SF movies. We had some strong ones recently - Avatar, District 9, Moon. Prometheus will be here soon, and there are plans for another Dune, Ender's Game, Forever War and Foundation.


Long, but if you got spare time you probably won't regret.

Thats terrible! ender's game is the best sci fi book i've ever read. Hollywood, the new hollywood anyway is making terrible movies, and interpretations of books, save for the movie Fight Club are always terrible as movies. I hope Ender's game (EG) is never made into a movie. Having an actor play the part spoils the characters and the setting is never up to scratch. The forever war as a movie, I cannot see how that could be good when acted and set up by hollywood. The will over-dramatize everything and 'tweak' the plot to make it stupid, literally.

Edited by eacao, 19 January 2012 - 04:19 PM.

[Craven]

ender's game is the best sci fi book i've ever read.

Ha! It's my all time favorite book too. Only book I read multiple times.

[Logically Irrational]

ender's game is the best sci fi book i've ever read.

Ha! It's my all time favorite book too. Only book I read multiple times.

Almost the same for me. I've read the Harry Potter Books and The Maze Runner multiple times as well (though that was a while ago). Maze Runner is apparently being looked at for a movie.

[Logically Irrational]

Kind of related:

NASA Relents: Apogee of Fear, First Sci-Fi Film Shot in Space, Will Be Released
http://www.wired.com...apogee-of-fear/

NASA is working with Richard Garriott to facilitate the video’s release. While the project was not part of his original Space Act agreement with NASA, everyone involved had the best of intentions. We hope to resolve the remaining issues expeditiously, and we appreciate Richard’s cooperation and his ongoing efforts to get people excited about the future of space exploration.