What is the single best science fiction or fantasy franchise?

[Parmandur]

When you find an objective way to measure "best" you let me know.

Admittedly complicated, but Potter ain't. It’s already fading, really, see the disaster of the Fantastic Beast movies crashing and burning.

 

[Clint_L]

Admittedly complicated, but Potter ain't. It’s already fading, really, see the disaster of the Fantastic Beast movies crashing and burning.

Its impact has been monumental already, and it remains to be seen what happens in the long run. All those kids who grew up on it are starting to have kids of their own. It’s too big to vanish; the question is whether it fades or resurges.

If a few bad movies could kill a franchise, Star Trek and Star Wars would be long gone. Potter is more like the latter, except even more so in its immediate cultural impact that went way beyond nerdom. I can’t tell you how many students I’ve had for whom the Potter books are the only novels they’ve willingly read.

 

[Parmandur]

Its impact has been monumental already, and it remains to be seen what happens in the long run. All those kids who grew up on it are starting to have kids of their own. It’s too big to vanish; the question is whether it fades or resurges.

If a few bad movies could kill a franchise, Star Trek and Star Wars would be long gone. Potter is more like the latter, except even more so in its immediate cultural impact that went way beyond nerdom. I can’t tell you how many students I’ve had for whom the Potter books are the only novels they’ve willingly read.

Sure, it has been popular. But popularity comes and goes. That's why I used the example of the Oz franchise: those books were tremendously hot a hundred years ago. It still has cultural impact, but it has dimmed considerably. In 2123, Harry Potter may still be remembered, same as Oz.

 

[Parmandur]

My own relationship to Harry Pottwr is a bit peculiar: the first book came out when I was almost 12, and by that point I wouldn't be caught dead reading a "kid's book," I was too busy reading the Silmirillion, or something else old and weird like Chronicles of Amber. By the time I had matured enough to be chill reading a young adult book, I was getting an English degree and picked up the Harry Potter books as a distraction between reading Shakespeare or Milton and stopped after the second book because it was kind of boring?

I recognize the current cultural impact, since so many of my fellow Engliah majors got into literature because of Harry Potter. But moat people I knew who loved the books have started trashing then due to the author's shenanigans destroying what joy there was to be found. Passing the test of time is hard.

I wouldn't bet on the longterm viability of Star Wars to be honest: I was obsessed with it as a kid, but my kids think Star Wars is boring, and the stats Iveseen bear that generation gap out. It's kind of a Gen X/Millennial thing.

 

[MGibster]

I wouldn't bet on the longterm viability of Star Wars to be honest: I was obsessed with it as a kid, but my kids think Star Wars is boring, and the stats Iveseen bear that generation gap out. It's kind of a Gen X/Millennial thing.

I'd say nearly 50 years is a pretty good run for any franchise. In 1987, could you imagine kids in 2023 would still be into the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles? But in the words of Ted Theodore Logan, "All we are is dust in the wind, dude." There's going to come a point where Harry Potter, Middle Earth, Star Wars, etc., etc. are mostly forgotten save by a few afficionados, art historians, and artists. Well, probably. Who knows? Maybe some of them will have legs like Frankenstein or Dracula. But you're right, I wouldn't bet on the longterm viability of any of them. Depending on what we're considering longterm. A century? Two centuries?

 

[Parmandur]

I'd say nearly 50 years is a pretty good run for any franchise. In 1987, could you imagine kids in 2023 would still be into the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles? But in the words of Ted Theodore Logan, "All we are is dust in the wind, dude." There's going to come a point where Harry Potter, Middle Earth, Star Wars, etc., etc. are mostly forgotten save by a few afficionados, art historians, and artists. Well, probably. Who knows? Maybe some of them will have legs like Frankenstein or Dracula. But you're right, I wouldn't bet on the longterm viability of any of them. Depending on what we're considering longterm. A century? Two centuries?

In 1987, I was a toddler, so...no? Lol

Tolkien's work will go the long haul. It had already been popular for decades even after Tolkien's death when the median American was born (~1983). Most authors work gets forgotten shortly after they die.

 

[Blue Orange]

I'd say nearly 50 years is a pretty good run for any franchise. In 1987, could you imagine kids in 2023 would still be into the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles?

No, but I've had it pointed out to me kids have liked animal stories for a while.

 

[MGibster]

In 1987, I was a toddler, so...no? Lol

Ouch!

Tolkien's work will go the long haul. It had already been popular for decades even after Tolkien's death when the median American was born (~1983). Most authors work gets forgotten shortly after they die.

Yeah, I'd have to agree that he's a pretty good contender. I think last year for some reason I thought of the Chronicles of Amber and it occurred to me that I haven't heard anyone talk about Roger Zelazny and that made me sad. "Dust in the wind" indeed.

No, but I've had it pointed out to me kids have liked animal stories for a while.

Here's an actual photo of me as my father read Animal Farm to me.

 

[Parmandur]

Ouch!


Yeah, I'd have to agree that he's a pretty good contender. I think last year for some reason I thought of the Chronicles of Amber and it occurred to me that I haven't heard anyone talk about Roger Zelazny and that made me sad. "Dust in the wind" indeed.


Here's an actual photo of me as my father read Animal Farm to me.

View attachment 296697

It is interesting to think back on what was big when I started reading sci-fi/fantasy seriously (early 90's) to now: a lot has fallen off, but quite a bit has staying power. Earthsea, Narnia, Middle Earth, and Prydain all still get a lot of love and attention.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I think last year for some reason I thought of the Chronicles of Amber and it occurred to me that I haven't heard anyone talk about Roger Zelazny and that made me sad. "Dust in the wind" indeed.

I feel kind of lucky because I have a friend who mentions Amber like almost ever time I see him (if we hang out more than an hour or two). It's a pity so many 1970s fantasy series, however massively influential they were at the time, seem to be being forgotten by the march of time. That said 1980s fantasy is, if anything, even more forgotten, albeit perhaps more of it justifiably (though some even less - c.f. Glen Wolfe's stuff).

In 1987, could you imagine kids in 2023 would still be into the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles?

I think the only reason they are is the very dedicated efforts of the various licence-holders, and the fact that fans of the 1990s cartoon are now of the age where they're in charge of the media and can indulge their nostalgia.

Maybe some of them will have legs like Frankenstein or Dracula. But you're right, I wouldn't bet on the longterm viability of any of them.

I mean the big issue is going to be copyright. Frankenstein might well not have "had legs" if copyright extended as long as it does now in the early and middle 20th century, and whilst Dracula itself didn't leave copyright until 1962, the original legends were there to lean on, just without the Stoker specifics.

LotR will probably last a lot longer than most because it's foundational to the entire approach authors take to the fantasy genre, not merely influential. It's actually surprising how un-influential most specific elements from LotR are in fantasy writing, but the general approach of massive world-building together with an epic story told across multiple books? That's basically the vast majority of fantasy that gets published today, and profoundly different to the Sword and Sorcery approach.

Harry Potter will probably largely be a generational thing, due to the author's decision to destroy her relationship with her audience (I would personally note that I believe this is essentially a personality issue with Rowling - she's often been extremely rude, sneering and adversarial in interviews all the way back to the 1990s, and if she hadn't found transphobia, I think she'd have found some other axe to grind that grated with her audience - being anti-animal-rights or something probably). It'll soon be that thing that grandma loves, and made you watch, and it was cool when you were a kid, but didn't influence you deeply (to the extent that it isn't already!).