Regarding our recent time-travel discussion and our less recent Sci-Fi discussion:
Just watched part of A Sound of Thunder, a straight-to-SyFy movie based on the Ray Bradbury short story about people who go back in time and hunt dinosaurs that are about to die anyway using ice bullets. (I don't remember if the ice bullets are in the book. They totally use ice bullets in the movie, though.)
In the movie, the hunters step on a bug or something and go back to the present, which is okay at first but then starts changing in big, visible, effectsy "time-waves". Only one thing changes at a time, and it's very confusing for people. Like, after one time-wave all the trees grew bigger. Everything else stayed the same. People screamed and screamed. In the short story, I think the hunters return to the present to find that everything had changed, all at once, and they were the only ones who were the wiser (which despite being scientifically improbable, made a good deal of goddamned sense). Here, however, the movie's "scientist" knows somehow that the organisms to evolve first will change first. So any changes they made in the past will happen in distinct ripples changing more and more until--dan dan daaaaaaaan--people themselves change! Or maybe they don't exist at all! Or won't! Or will not ever have! You have to wait about seven to ten time-waves, though, and see what happens to life forms that evolved before people, though; because that's how time works. God, whatever!
Way to stretch out a 10 page story into a feature-length movie, guys! Time-waves! Yay! Not only does time organize itself around the perceptions of human beings, but the perceptions of stupid writers! I was really trying to watch the whole thing, but it was such tremendous horseshit that I think I'll just get back to work. I have a lot of email that needs answering.
(Why is this making me so angry? It's not like there are really Wookies, but I like Chewbacca just fine. It's not Sci-Fi that makes me angry, it's this other stuff, this pseudo-sciencey crap that somehow feels more like a lie than warp drive or magic wands. Why are so many movies like this even made? Is Hollywood really that broken? Why are movies that are written by people who know what they are talking about (or have at least thought about it) the exception instead of the rule? Can the newly-christened SyFy channel not find enough infomercials to run? Anyway, my point is this--Shit like this; committee-written senseless pseudo-science fiction, I'm going to refer to from now on, not as "Sci-Fi", but as "SyFy". Congratulations, dummies; you earned it!)
EDIT: I immediately regret posting this uncharitable rant. The Science Fiction Channel has brought us a great many wonderful things, such as Battlestar Galactica, Farscape, and extremely occasional marathons of The Invaders. Still, nothing more shocking than sitting on the edge of my seat watching BSG, only to be slammed at commercial with a face-full of "Mansquito" promo. Nevertheless, poop with diamonds in it is still worth keeping.
7 comments:
[Ref. graph 0], "Regarding our recent time-travel discussion and our less recent Sci-Fi discussion:"
I can relate to graph four, or at least the first part of it. In my younger years, when me and my AD&D crew… .. when me and my AD&D crew were debating over some of the less realistic aspects of some of the combat rules, one dude pipes up (and it was always the same dude fighting me on this), “guy,” he goes, “unicorns, pixies, dragons, and magic missile aren’t realistic either. It’s a fantasy game, it doesn’t have to be realistic.”
I was always really angry when he or anyone else said these things, but I couldn’t figure out why they were so wrong. There’s a dragon flying in the sky breathing, like, chlorine, and my problem is with the fact that a domestic cat can kill a grown man with a paw swipe in this universe. (Wiz HP: 1D4, Cat claw: 1D4). I have no problem with the dragon. Why does a weird sloppy detail in a sci-fi flick bother the shit out of me, when in the same movie, there are these alien dudes flying in big fucking spaceships in space cutting through the fabric of time to go shoot plasma beams at an intelligent space monster, and I’m totally cool with that?
It is because sloppy details halt our suspension of disbelief. That is a killer for an audience where the target demographic seems to be hung up on details like this, as I’ve hypothesized on this forum prior.
No fucking wonder Sci-Fi and Fantasy are hard to execute. The only time in history when these two hit the big screen with success are when their authors, producers, or directors take it seriously. For seriouslies.
Litcube's graph 4 pretty much sums up everything wrong with bad Scifi/fantasy. I'm going to go ahead and quote it, cause it's awesome, right after I quote this: "In my younger years, when me and my AD&D crew… .. when me and my AD&D crew..."
"It is because sloppy details halt our suspension of disbelief. That is a killer for an audience where the target demographic seems to be hung up on details like this, as I’ve hypothesized on this forum prior."
So very much, yes. I think I've also said suspension of disbelief is the problem. If I said it more often I'm sure there's a page or two that could have been shortened to like a sentence.
I find it interesting though, Mr. Pony, that your rant is pretty much exactly like mine for the BSG ending. Bad science feels bad to us, and it is distracting. I'd say that any bad writing that doesn't make sense is equally jarring. I wonder... if you hadn't been following the show for 4 years (read wikipedia instead, for example) and had just seen the finale on it's own, do you think your suspension of disbelief would have held?
Seriously feel free not to answer that here so we don't have to relive the horror.
Litcube I think you may like the work of China Mieville. If there was ever an attention to detail in regards to a universe... It's kind of like Moby Dick for alternate universes.
Michael Chabon as well. Except he tends to make more realistic fiction.
Oh, and "when me and my AD&D crew were debating over some of the less realistic aspects of some of the combat rules"
Litcube's got it--suspension of belief is important in a good story.
I second the China Mieville recommendation. The worlds in his stories are so vivid because he writes about them like he actually gives a shit about them. Whether its science fiction or fantasy (or art), you really have to give a damn about your work. Otherwise if you're just phoning it in or pulling it out of your butt you're wasting our time.
I think its cute that Litcube has a AD&D crew.
What science in the BSG finale felt bad to you? I thought you had more of a problem with the motivations of the people to ditch their tech and disappear into the jungle. In which case, I think our arguments are similar. I just don't think the colonists' behavior sounds as made up as you do, I guess.
Unless you're talking about the other stuff--Starbuck is Magic, There is a God, etc.--themes that were building in the show all along. If you still think the expressions of those themes in the finale were at all out of left field, I'm not sure there's anything I can say to convince you otherwise.
I think if we continue to have this argument we should move it to Twitter. Or at least limit ourselves to 140 characters, so we stay on point.
I agree, Litcube's right on about this, too. You don't play fast and loose with details when your audience is a bunch of huge nerds.
I am fast-forwarding through the remainder of The Sound of Thunder. There are dinosaurs with baboon heads, flying dinosaurs with bat heads, and a hard drive that can turn any particle accelerator into a time machine with a minute's worth of modifications.
Post a Comment