Why aren't there more thought-provoking SciFi movies like 2001 Space Odyssey?

In summary, the conversation discusses the impact and significance of 2001 Space Odyssey as the first good science fiction movie and the lack of similar groundbreaking films in recent years. The conversation also touches on the themes and elements that make a sci-fi movie great, including hard science, philosophical depth, and thought-provoking content. Examples of other notable sci-fi films are mentioned, such as Gattaca, Bladerunner, and Brazil. The group also debates whether a movie with deeper meaning and complexity is more entertaining or if a more action-packed and easily digestible film is preferred.
  • #1
waht
1,501
4
Ever since 2001 Space Odyssey was considered one of the ultimate Scifi movies of all time, it's been 40 years and nobody shot anything close it.

The movie is very complex, it projects the significance of humanity, space exploration, and mysteries of advanced technologies while posing much deeper questions. Movies like Starwars, Startrek, Aliens are a great entertainment, and are in abundance. But what's lacking is another Odyssey movie.

So do the writers lack imagination to push the envelope, or is such a venture simply not lucrative anymore?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Are you looking for hard science in the movies? Or perhaps just something more philosophical and thought provoking? Does it matter whether its hard-scifi or not?


A very good scifi movie, if you haven't seen it, is Gattaca. Its been a while since I've seen it so I don't remember much of the details but I think the science was fairly believable.
 
  • #3
waht said:
Ever since 2001 Space Odyssey was considered one of the ultimate Scifi movies of all time, it's been 40 and nobody shot anything close it.

The movie is very complex, it projects the significance of humanity, space exploration, and mysteries of advanced technologies while posing much deeper questions. Movies like Starwars, Startrek, Aliens are a great entertainment, and are in abundance. But what's lacking is another Odyssey movie.

So do the writers lack imagination to push the envelope, or is such a venture simply not lucrative anymore?

I just watched "The Arrival" staring Charlie Sheen. It wasn't that bad. Just the kind of movie one can watch while zeroing his/her brains. And it was a really, really cheap rental.
 
  • #4
waht said:
Ever since 2001 Space Odyssey was considered one of the ultimate Scifi movies of all time, it's been 40 and nobody shot anything close it.
2001 was only ever considered the best of all time immediately after it came out. Kubric wouldn't be that arrogant: his goal was to produce the first good sci fi movie, not the all time best (though it remains considered one of the all time best).

I can name a dozen off the top of my head that were better, though, including 2010.
The movie is very complex, it projects the significance of humanity, space exploration, and mysteries of advanced technologies while posing much deeper questions.
Being deep and complex does not necessarily equal good sci fi. That's not really the point of the genre. 2001 was the first good sci fi movie not because it was deep but because it was serious. Most sci fi movies at the time were just a joke. They were so bad they were half-intentionally funny. 2001 was different in that it was believable - it looked real. That is what made it the first good sci fi movie.

My biggest problem with the movie though (it was good, but not great), is that it isn't as deep as it thinks it is. It tries too hard to be deep and comes off just being weird.
Movies like Starwars, Startrek, Aliens are a great entertainment, and are in abundance. But what's lacking is another Odyssey movie.
One important measure of how good a good sci fi movie is is how much it pushes the envelope - how groundbreaking it is. That's one reason 2001 is "good". Star Wars, on the other hand, remains the undisputable king by that measure.
So do the writers lack imagination to push the envelope, or is such a venture simply not lucrative anymore?
No, the problem with considering a sci fi movie from the last 5 years to be really good is that there is no new ground to be broken anymore. With Star Wars Episode I, Lucas said something to the effect of 'I knew it was time to make the prequels when we got to the point where literally anything was possible'.
 
  • #5
If you're not concerned with scientific accuracy Bladerunner is one of the best scifi films. It delves into what it means to be human and what makes us human. I'm not sure if the message comes across so clear in the movie though, I remember the book far better.

And if you aren't worried so much about the science or the seriousness Brazil is a great surrealist scifi dark satire. This one is a matter of taste though, its certainly not for everyone.
 
  • #6
TheStatutoryApe said:
Are you looking for hard science in the movies? Or perhaps just something more philosophical and thought provoking? Does it matter whether its hard-scifi or not?

A very good scifi movie, if you haven't seen it, is Gattaca. Its been a while since I've seen it so I don't remember much of the details but I think the science was fairly believable.

All of it. A movie that has hard science, deeper philosophical meaning, and of course must be thought provoking.

Haven't seen Gattaca yet. The reviews are pretty interesting.

I just watched "The Arrival" staring Charlie Sheen. It wasn't that bad. Just the kind of movie one can watch while zeroing his/her brains. And it was a really, really cheap rental.

Saw that many times. It's a good entertainment, about aliens quietly taking over the world.

Being deep and complex does not necessarily equal good sci fi.

It depends on the audience. I would guess the audience in general is entertained by a roller coaster type of movie like Starwars for instance. There is action, and a lot of human interaction that projects basically the same emotions as if the setting was taking place in a western or modern times. In contrast the Odyssey appeals to an audience that is entertained by having to think, rather than sitting back and enjoying the ride.

My biggest problem with the movie though (it was good, but not great), is that it isn't as deep as it thinks it is. It tries too hard to be deep and comes off just being weird.

The ending perhaps went overboard.

No, the problem with considering a sci fi movie from the last 5 years to be really good is that there is no new ground to be broken anymore. With Star Wars Episode I, Lucas said something to the effect of 'I knew it was time to make the prequels when we got to the point where literally anything was possible'.

Yes definitely. There is many sequels to Star Wars. But it's all just quick entertainment.

None of the movies since the Odyssey touch upon the really deep and profound ideas. Except maybe "Solaris" with Clooney.
 
  • #7
For me, movies like Star Wars are more fantasy than Sci-Fi.

I think Solaris is excellent! TCM aired the Russian version just the other night. Here are a few movies that I consider to be some of the best:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=290242

For anyone interested in hard sci-fi, Primer is a must!

As for 2001, it was intended that the opening scene would be a panel discussion, including the likes of Sagan, that would essentially explain the plot in scientific terms. But at the last minute the scene was cut, which gave the movie a somewhat mystical quality.
 
Last edited:
  • #8
TheStatutoryApe said:
A very good scifi movie, if you haven't seen it, is Gattaca.

+1 for Gattaca
 
  • #9
The Matrix comes to mind as fulfilling your sci fi criteria, besides, perhaps, the hard science. When I first watched it, it blew my mind. I didn't care that much about the special effects, I thought the story and thought provoking ideas were great enough on their own.

I would also recommend Gattaca, very subtle sci-fi, I liked it.

I think The Island was prettty good too. It doesn't throw you into a fantasy world, but rather a world that could be in 20 years time.

Equilibrium is a good kind of 1984 type story with a lot of fighting action, but still begs fundamental questions about human nature.
 
  • #10
I never liked 2001 that much, even when it first came out. Way over hyped and over reviewed in my opinion. The pace was very slow. The scenes took way too long, especially where some special effect for a scene, like the expanding light bars near the end (what was that, like 10+ minutes of just one special effect?) 2010 wasn't that much better. Neither 2001 or 2010 had much of a storyline. Some of the "special effects", like the carousel based scene were too obvious, remember the Fred Astaire ceiling dance scene from a 1951 movie?

The only movie slower than 2001 was probably THX 1138, especially the first 2 "segments". The modified Lola T70 used in the tunnel scenes was cool though.

I was most impressed by the first Star Wars (episode IV) movie. I saw it before it received any hype. I was expecting another "B" movie like Buck Rodgers in the 21st century, but realized it was going to be good just based on the opening scene. There were some cliche's, like the Falcon, the equivalent of a souped up hot rod that didn't look so hot, the seedy bar, ..., but the story line was descent, and it raised the level of special effects at the time. The opening crawl text supposedly was a tribute, as opposed to a rip off, of the old Flash Gordon series.
 
  • #11
Ivan Seeking said:
I think Solaris is excellent! TCM aired the Russian version just the other night.

While I prefer Solaris, Stalker (also by Tarkovsky) which can be described as sci-fi, has its moments.
 
  • #12
The science is junk but I just watched "The Watchmen" and it was pretty good, touching upon a lot of philosophical and sociological issues. I think it helps if you are a comic book fan.

Unfortunately I am having a hard time coming up with hard scifi movies. There aren't very many I don't think.
I've heard of but not seen Capricorn One. Not sure just how good it is.
 
  • #13
Slient Running
Short Circuit
Terminator
Alien
Aliens
Predator
Metropolis
Donnie Darko
Back to the Future
The Thing
E.T.
The Truman Show
Young Frankenstein
Planet of the Apes
Invasion of the Body Snatchers
Day the Earth Stood Still
A Man From Earth
Twelve Monkeys
Blade Runner
Road Warrior
Gattaca
Minority Report
Contact
Dr Strangelove
Forbidden Planet
A Clockwork Orange
Brazil
The Fly
The Abyss
 
Last edited:
  • #14
JoeDawg said:
The Truman Show

Recently I have been watching the second Twlight Zone series, from the late 1980s. When it first aired we couldn't get the signal around here. :rolleyes: Really it is surprisingly good - a few of the episodes are top-notch IMO.

Last night there was an episode called Special Service, in which a man discovers that his life is a popular TV show. It was so similar to the plot of The Truman Show that I have to wonder if the idea was copied [Twlight Zone came first].
 
  • #15
Has anyone seen Brazil?

Very clever! And I loved this: It is retro-futuristic. One wouldn't think that could make sense, but it does.
 
  • #16
I also liked Sphere.

Also, Contact. Speaking of which, what was supposed to be happening when Foster was in-transit; where we see events before they happened? Was that a legitimate play on wormhole dynamics [if there is such a thing]?

I'd bet that Selfadjoint could explain it all! I miss SA at times like this.
 
Last edited:
  • #17
While not strictly science fiction, I would recommend Intacto (2001)
 
  • #18
Jeff Reid said:
I never liked 2001 that much, even when it first came out. Way over hyped and over reviewed in my opinion. The pace was very slow. The scenes took way too long, especially where some special effect for a scene, like the expanding light bars near the end (what was that, like 10+ minutes of just one special effect?)

That was the intent. Kubrick was trying to make the movie a "visual experience", rather than the "filming of a story". He was trying to "think outside the box" of normal movie making.
 
  • #19
Yeah, unfortunately the mass media doesn't think there would be much interest in hard sci-fi movies and they are probably correct. It probably results from the fact that most sci-fi needs a large budget to pull it off correctly so the only sci-fi that gets made is the side of barn idiotic stuff for the masses. Good movies that actually require thinking are mostly low budget affairs.

Maybe as technologies progress we will start to see more real sci-fi stories make it to the big screen but for now I guess we are stuck with books and audiobooks. I remember hearing somewhere that a Ringworld movie might be getting made though, don't know how that would come across on the big screen.

It would be fascinating to see some of Clarke's other and arguably better works as movies, like "Rendezvous with Rama".
 
  • #20
waht said:
The movie is very complex, it projects the significance of humanity, space exploration, and mysteries of advanced technologies while posing much deeper questions. Movies like Starwars, Startrek, Aliens are a great entertainment, and are in abundance. But what's lacking is another Odyssey movie.

Thing is, "2001" was so successful that it spawned lots of followers. Most successful would be Tarkovsky's "Solyaris". But the others, which is most sci-fi circa 1970-1977, were crap. From "Soylent Green" to "Logans Run" to the hilariously bad and pretentious "Zardoz".

So when "Star Wars" and "Alien" came along with pure sci-fi/adventure and sci-fi/horror, it was pretty liberating - "Philosophy be damned, just make a good movie!"

Now, there are more 'philosophical' sci-fi movies being made. But I think it's simply just damn hard to do it well. I saw "The Fountain" just recently and would put it into that genre. But to me, it fell into the usual trap of coming across as pretentious and 'trying too hard'.
 
  • #21
My favourite is still 'Charly'. It qualifies as 'hard' SF in that the fictional surgical basis of the story is quite sound (and is just now beginning to be experimented with in reality), and it explores the effects of that science upon an individual and/or society as a whole. It's also the only such movie to garner a Best Actor Oscar. I loved the short story 'Flowers for Algernon', and the subsequent full-length novel, but considered it unfilmable. Damned if they didn't pull it off grandly, though.
For many of the same reasons, I think that 'The Terminal Man' qualifies as well.
 
  • #22
You guys have some good points but I am particularly dismayed with the lack of hard spaced based sci-fi, most of those are just soap operas or drama shows that just happen to be set in space. The other stuff, social sci-fi and what not I don't know too much about.
 
  • #23
russ_watters said:
One important measure of how good a good sci fi movie is is how much it pushes the envelope - how groundbreaking it is. That's one reason 2001 is "good". Star Wars, on the other hand, remains the undisputable king by that measure.
Hang on. You're talking apples & oranges (or at least, I think you should be).

Good sci-fi pushes the envelope of human sensibilities, exploring human nature. That's what all good speculative fiction (which id the super-set of sci-fi) does.

But Star Wars isn't sci-fi; it's Space Fantasy. It's not meant to speculate, it's meant to tell a traditional story.

2001 is ground-breaking both in Fx but also in story, whereas Star Wars is really only ground-breaking in FX.


Ivan Seeking said:
Has anyone seen Brazil?
Brazil was awesome! (Though ultimately depressing.)
 
  • #24
alxm said:
Thing is, "2001" was so successful that it spawned lots of followers. Most successful would be Tarkovsky's "Solyaris". But the others, which is most sci-fi circa 1970-1977, were crap. From "Soylent Green" to "Logans Run" to the hilariously bad and pretentious "Zardoz".

Sorry, did you just call Logan's Run and Soylent Green "crap"? These are films that left an indelible impression on a generation. They are classics.

What's a matter? Not enough spaceship battles for ya?
 
  • #25
For spaced based hard science realism Ridley Scott is good, Alien is one of the most realistic space based movies.
Along the same lines as the Matrix but under appreciated (it needs more thought and doesn't have as much tight black leather) is EXistenZ.

Some movies of Iain M Banks would be nice.
 
  • #26
DaveC426913 said:
Sorry, did you just call Logan's Run and Soylent Green "crap"?

Yup. (To begin with: Charlton Heston and Michael York are horrible actors IMO)

These are films that left an indelible impression on a generation. They are classics.

You could say the same about "Animal House", but I still wouldn't consider it a cinematic masterpiece.
 
  • #27
lubuntu said:
It would be fascinating to see some of Clarke's other and arguably better works as movies, like "Rendezvous with Rama".

Actually Morgan Freeman was going to be led cast in this movie in 2008-9, but due to lack of organization or perhaps motivation, but I guess it will never happen

In the early 2000s, actor Morgan Freeman expressed his desire to produce a film based on Rendezvous with Rama. After a drawn-out development process — which Freeman attributed to difficulties in procuring funding — it appeared in 2003 this would indeed be happening.[2] IMDb at one point upgraded the status of the project to "announced" with an estimated release date in 2009.

In late 2008, David Fincher stated the movie is unlikely to be made. "It looks like it's not going to happen. There's no script and as you know, Morgan Freeman's not in the best of health right now. We've been trying to do it but it's probably not going to happen."[5] The IMDb page for the project has been removed.


In fact, the screen writers can draw a plethora of ideas from hundreds of good scifi novels by great authors. But it rarely happens.
 
  • #28
DaveC426913 said:
But Star Wars isn't sci-fi; it's Space Fantasy. It's not meant to speculate, it's meant to tell a traditional story.

In fact, it is a classic fairy tale of the struggle between good and evil.

Brazil was awesome! (Though ultimately depressing.)

It was certainly a dark movie, but I was amazed that they were able to successfully satirize subjects like terrorism. Also, the retro-futuristic setting was one of the most unique ideas that I've ever seen used. It was interesting that they never tried to explain this.

It must have taken place in a Galaxy far, far away.
 
Last edited:
  • #29
waht said:
In fact, the screen writers can draw a plethora of ideas from hundreds of good scifi novels by great authors. But it rarely happens.

Case in point:
In 1977 Niven and Pournelle published Lucifer's Hammer, A novel about a comet striking the Earth. In 1979 what did Hollywood give us?...https://www.amazon.com/dp/0792843606/?tag=pfamazon01-20
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #30
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #31
Ivan Seeking said:
It was certainly a dark movie, but I was amazed that they were able to successfully satirize subjects like terrorism. Also, the retro-futuristic setting was one of the most unique ideas that I've ever seen used. It was interesting that they never tried to explain this.

It must have taken place in a Galaxy far, far away.

I always wondered at the title until the other day I heard a folklorist on Coast to Coast mention Hy-Brazil. Seems to me that it is a kafka style satirization with the utopia the government is shooting for becoming a dystopia. I think it may actually supposed to be a future London. London is currently still run through without dated electrical and plumbing(not all of it ofcourse but some of it). So we step into the future and London has updated its technology but it is still incredibly outdated.
 
  • #32
TheStatutoryApe said:
If you're not concerned with scientific accuracy Bladerunner is one of the best scifi films. It delves into what it means to be human and what makes us human. I'm not sure if the message comes across so clear in the movie though, I remember the book far better.
I tried to explain to a friend of mine the concept of scientific accuracy in movies and failed miserably. He didn't accept why some movies were allowed to violate scientific law and some weren't. It's an odd thing:

-If a movie tries to seem realistic (based in the present or near future, in a world that looks a lot like the one we live in), it should follow science ("The Core" - yikes!).
-If a movie embraces fantasy, then it is ok that it isn't accurate (Star Wars, Star Trek, Blade Runner).
-Comic book movies can do whatever they want.
-Yes, James Bond really can do that!
 
  • #33
waht said:
The ending perhaps went overboard.
Yes, that's what I was talking about. I think if it had ended 10 minutes earlier, it would be on my top 10 list instead of somewhere around 20th (guess).
 
  • #34
Ivan Seeking said:
For me, movies like Star Wars are more fantasy than Sci-Fi.
True - based on the rules I posted above for scientific accuracy, you could simply say that those movies that are "required" to be somewhat scientifically accurate are sci-fi and the ones that can do whatever they want are fantasy.
 
  • #35
redargon said:
The Matrix comes to mind as fulfilling your sci fi criteria, besides, perhaps, the hard science. When I first watched it, it blew my mind. I didn't care that much about the special effects, I thought the story and thought provoking ideas were great enough on their own.
Like the OP's perception of 2001, think The Matrix transcends the genre. By my criteria, it is one of the best sci-fi's ever (maybe the best) and when you throw in the philosophy of a good drama, it is in my top 5 best movies of any kind.

I would also recommend Gattaca, very subtle sci-fi, I liked it.
Nothing too crazy or that profound there, but a good movie nonetheless.
 
<h2>1. Why does it seem like there are more thought-provoking SciFi movies from the past, like 2001 Space Odyssey, than there are now?</h2><p>There could be a few reasons for this perception. One possibility is that older films have had more time to establish themselves as classics, so we are more likely to remember them and view them as thought-provoking. Additionally, advancements in technology have made it easier and cheaper to produce SciFi films, leading to a larger quantity of films being made, but not necessarily an increase in quality or thought-provoking content.</p><h2>2. Are there any current SciFi movies that can be considered thought-provoking?</h2><p>Absolutely. While there may not be as many as in the past, there are still numerous SciFi films that offer thought-provoking themes and ideas. Some recent examples include Ex Machina, Arrival, and Blade Runner 2049.</p><h2>3. Is it harder to make thought-provoking SciFi movies now compared to in the past?</h2><p>It is not necessarily harder, but it may require more creativity and originality. With the abundance of SciFi movies being produced, it can be challenging to come up with fresh and thought-provoking ideas that haven't been explored before. Additionally, advancements in technology have made it easier to rely on special effects rather than complex and thought-provoking storytelling.</p><h2>4. Can SciFi movies be both entertaining and thought-provoking?</h2><p>Absolutely. In fact, some of the most successful and beloved SciFi movies are both entertaining and thought-provoking. 2001 Space Odyssey is a prime example of this, as it combines stunning visuals and an engaging story with thought-provoking themes about humanity, technology, and the unknown.</p><h2>5. Is there a lack of audience demand for thought-provoking SciFi movies?</h2><p>This is a difficult question to answer definitively, as it ultimately depends on individual preferences. However, it is worth noting that the success of movies like 2001 Space Odyssey and the continued popularity of classic SciFi films suggest that there is still a demand for thought-provoking SciFi content. Additionally, as technology continues to advance and our world becomes increasingly complex, there may be an even greater hunger for films that challenge our thinking and push the boundaries of our imagination.</p>

1. Why does it seem like there are more thought-provoking SciFi movies from the past, like 2001 Space Odyssey, than there are now?

There could be a few reasons for this perception. One possibility is that older films have had more time to establish themselves as classics, so we are more likely to remember them and view them as thought-provoking. Additionally, advancements in technology have made it easier and cheaper to produce SciFi films, leading to a larger quantity of films being made, but not necessarily an increase in quality or thought-provoking content.

2. Are there any current SciFi movies that can be considered thought-provoking?

Absolutely. While there may not be as many as in the past, there are still numerous SciFi films that offer thought-provoking themes and ideas. Some recent examples include Ex Machina, Arrival, and Blade Runner 2049.

3. Is it harder to make thought-provoking SciFi movies now compared to in the past?

It is not necessarily harder, but it may require more creativity and originality. With the abundance of SciFi movies being produced, it can be challenging to come up with fresh and thought-provoking ideas that haven't been explored before. Additionally, advancements in technology have made it easier to rely on special effects rather than complex and thought-provoking storytelling.

4. Can SciFi movies be both entertaining and thought-provoking?

Absolutely. In fact, some of the most successful and beloved SciFi movies are both entertaining and thought-provoking. 2001 Space Odyssey is a prime example of this, as it combines stunning visuals and an engaging story with thought-provoking themes about humanity, technology, and the unknown.

5. Is there a lack of audience demand for thought-provoking SciFi movies?

This is a difficult question to answer definitively, as it ultimately depends on individual preferences. However, it is worth noting that the success of movies like 2001 Space Odyssey and the continued popularity of classic SciFi films suggest that there is still a demand for thought-provoking SciFi content. Additionally, as technology continues to advance and our world becomes increasingly complex, there may be an even greater hunger for films that challenge our thinking and push the boundaries of our imagination.

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
2K
Back
Top