The 25 Best Sci-Fi Movies of the Last 15 Years

[Paul Farquhar]

"Forbidden Planet" - Another one with action and a big robot, but it's based on Shakespeare's "The Tempest." It covers the nature of man, good and evil, etc..

It's also proto-Star Trek.

"The Thing From Another World" - aka "Invasion of the Carrot Man from Outer Space." A good enough shoot-'em-up SF that it has been remade, twice.

Three times, at least. The Seeds of Doom - Wikipedia

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The true roots of science fiction, AFAIC, have always been about using stories set in the future to tell us about the present.

Frankenstein is often cited as the first science fiction novel, and that was set in the present (at the time of writing). So where Jules Verne's novels, and several of H. G. Wells's. They certainly addressed present-day concerns, but they didn't need to be set in the future in order to do so.

 

[Ryujin]

It's also proto-Star Trek.

Three times, at least. The Seeds of Doom - Wikipedia

I was thinking movie remakes, however, I had admittedly forgotten that series of Who.

 

[Ryujin]

You think low quality special effects don't matter? They don't hurt the audience's suspension of disbelief?

It certainly can, but we got along just fine with what we had at the time. For example "Battlestar Galactica" really wasn't far above this level of SFX, in the '70s, despite its something like million dollar per episode budget, that eventually killed it.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Frankenstein is often cited as the first science fiction novel, and that was set in the present (at the time of writing). So where Jules Verne's novels, and several of H. G. Wells's. They certainly addressed present-day concerns, but they didn't need to be set in the future in order to do so.

Good point. It would have been better if I had been using something more like, "Placing the story in the future is a sufficient, but not necessary, indicia that it is science fiction." After all, not only do you have novels like Frankenstein, you also have a number of alternate histories that take place in an imagined past that are usually considered science fiction (and, weirdly, often involve Nazis and/or dirigibles, but that's another issue).

Of course, the problems with defining the term itself have long been noted, and it is usually better to be over-inclusive with the umbrella term than under-inclusive.

 

[MarkB]

Good point. It would have been better if I had been using something more like, "Placing the story in the future is a sufficient, but not necessary, indicia that it is science fiction." After all, not only do you have novels like Frankenstein, you also have a number of alternate histories that take place in an imagined past that are usually considered science fiction (and, weirdly, often involve Nazis and/or dirigibles, but that's another issue).

Of course, the problems with defining the term itself have long been noted, and it is usually better to be over-inclusive with the umbrella term than under-inclusive.

Basically the classic sci-fi paradigm, especially in short-story form, was to introduce a single novel element and then imagine how that one change would affect the world, as a lens for examining our society.

The goal, then, was to minimise any other differences from the real world as far as possible, in order to focus on that one new element, so it was common for stories to be set in the present day or the very near future.

Of course, that didn't make for realistic worldbuilding or interconnected works, so many authors quickly expanded beyond that "one new thing" concept once they started building into larger settings and longer-form works. But even then, the emphasis in any particular story will often be on a specific change or innovation.

 

[Ryujin]

Good point. It would have been better if I had been using something more like, "Placing the story in the future is a sufficient, but not necessary, indicia that it is science fiction." After all, not only do you have novels like Frankenstein, you also have a number of alternate histories that take place in an imagined past that are usually considered science fiction (and, weirdly, often involve Nazis and/or dirigibles, but that's another issue).

Of course, the problems with defining the term itself have long been noted, and it is usually better to be over-inclusive with the umbrella term than under-inclusive.

These days a lot of people seem to use the term "speculative fiction" as a more all encompassing label.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Of course, that didn't make for realistic worldbuilding or interconnected works, so many authors quickly expanded beyond that "one new thing" concept once they started building into larger settings and longer-form works. But even then, the emphasis in any particular story will often be on a specific change or innovation.

A classic example here would be Bester's "The Stars My Destination"; while its set in the future he assumed time marches on, the core element of the novel is about the teleportation and its effects on the world and society (and, of course, the protagonist).

 

[MarkB]

These days a lot of people seem to use the term "speculative fiction" as a more all encompassing label.

These days? I recall seeing that term 20+ years ago. I thought it had largely gone out of fashion.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

I really liked Moon.
I thought Moon was fantastic.

Did I mention I really liked Moon?