Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

lareviewofbooks.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 130 posts

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#91

Post by eesmith »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #85
eesmith wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"In 1970s you would just create plastic models of spaceships and film them with normal camera" Are you sure? For example, from the ILM history at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Light_%26_Magic we see: 1975: Resurrected the use of VistaVision; first use of a motion control camera (Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope) Following the link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_control_photography gives us: > The…

Babylon 5 was unfortunately made at the very point where CG was still pretty bad, and because of that it didn't age well. If only it was shot a few years later... On the other hand, B5 had an absolutely amazing storyline. I wish someone would remaster it, replacing the exterior CG shots with new renders, and release it in full HD. It would beat the crap out of most of the things that are on TV today.

My point was that by the time of Babylon 5 it was cheaper to use CG than using plastic models and cameras.

The quality wasn't quite as good, but within a few years it was both cheaper and better than plastic models.

mamon's argument is that with plastic models the "end result wasn't that great, but it was enough to get by". The same argument applies to Bab5.

That's why I disagree with mamon's argument.

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#92

Post by ashark »

eesmith wrote: post #89
ashark wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get what "a Victorian faith in white mythologies" means re: racist colonialism and cultural imperialism, I just don't get what it means for the show to "still [believe] in 'culture' with a Victorian faith in white mythologies". The scare-quoted (I think?) "culture", in the context of the rest of the sentence, is what's getting me. To believe in "culture" with a victorian faith in white mythologies. That's some badl…

I do not believe it is a scare quote. I think it's an actual quote. The more complete quote from the show follows immediately afterward: “It would be unwise to confuse race and culture.” I believe "culture" is used to pull out that one term for further discussion. The review assumes that the reader has watched the show. I have not. I cannot comment further on this point, nor on the "deeply racist portrayal of its Kli…

> I do not believe it is a scare quote. I think it's an actual quote. The more complete quote from the show follows immediately afterward: “It would be unwise to confuse race and culture.” I believe "culture" is used to pull out that one term for further discussion.

I guess I'm gonna have to watch for context for the quote. I think the paragraph's getting a little clearer to me now.

As for the rest: haha, wow. Now I've gotta watch, just so I can figure out whether the Klingons are racist (as in, the depiction is racist and the Federation's going all high-colonial Britain on 'em) or racist (as in, they're Trump supporter stand-ins), or somehow both at the same time. Should be... interesting, anyway.

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#93

Post by alexasmyths »

mikeash wrote: post #49
alexasmyths wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original Star Trek I think did it with reason. I think 2017 is not the 1960's - and the problem is 'populist social leftism' is still using the 1960's playbook. It's tired, it lacks nuance. The new Star Trek's remind me of the Canadian government's 'soft propaganda' in 'Degrassi Street' - which is lampooned spectacularly well on 'Kroll Show'. And I don't use the term 'propaganda' lightly - it's state sponsored 'y…

Was putting a Russian guy and a black woman on the bridge of the Enterprise a nuanced thing? It strikes me that the original Star Trek was fairly blatant in this respect. It may seem nuanced looking back because we see nothing special about something like a white man and a black woman kissing on TV, but at the time it was about as subtle as a stick of dynamite.

No, I didn't meant to say it was.

My point is the lines were easier drawn then - but not in 2017.

1950 was less nuanced. Black people were not allowed on TV, it was 'shocking' to have them there. An easy choice, in retrospect.

In 2017 - real social progress is complicated, it's not black and white. No pun intended :). I do not think that 'social progress' - in the populist sense, defined by the slightly-left-of-centre popular social voices - will have history fully behind them. Surely in many ways, but think it's much more complicated now.

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#94

Post by dreamcompiler »

captn3m0 wrote: post #57

I have a theory that budget for (SF+Fantasy) at any given studio is limited. And Game of Thrones has gotten other studios to invest heavily in Fantasy, leaving very little for SF. (Might dig into "running count" of shows with genre filters on IMDB datasets for verification) The only good TV content I've seen recently is Expanse, which is quite well done. As others have mentioned, this is only limited to TV. SF Books/…

Completely agree about The Expanse. It's hard SF, and every episode is as good or better than the best SF movies. I think this certainly counts as moving forward.

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#95

Post by dragonwriter »

ashark wrote: post #92
eesmith wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not believe it is a scare quote. I think it's an actual quote. The more complete quote from the show follows immediately afterward: “It would be unwise to confuse race and culture.” I believe "culture" is used to pull out that one term for further discussion. The review assumes that the reader has watched the show. I have not. I cannot comment further on this point, nor on the "deeply racist portrayal of its Kli…

> I do not believe it is a scare quote. I think it's an actual quote. The more complete quote from the show follows immediately afterward: “It would be unwise to confuse race and culture.” I believe "culture" is used to pull out that one term for further discussion. I guess I'm gonna have to watch for context for the quote. I think the paragraph's getting a little clearer to me now. As for the rest: haha, wow. Now I'…

> Now I've gotta watch, just so I can figure out whether the Klingons are racist (as in, the depiction is racist and the Federation's going all high-colonial Britain on 'em) or racist (as in, they're Trump supporter stand-ins)

Possibly both, actually, from the one-hour broadcast “pilot” (which seems more of a teaser than a pilot, but I'm not buying CBS All Access on the strength of that teaser, so I probably won't see the rest.)

That is, the focal Klingons are xenophobes looking for a war with the Federation to Make the Empire Great Again, but also there is strong indication of the other, as well. So, something for everyone on that department.

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#97

Post by occultist_throw »

metaphorm wrote: post #90
eesmith wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling for a safe spaces? "Trump demands safe space for Mike Pence after he was booed at Hamilton" - https://news.avclub.com/trump-demands-safe-space-for-mike-pe... ("The Theater must always be a safe and special place.The cast of Hamilton was very rude last night to a very good man, Mike Pence. Apologize!") Trying to ruin someone's career? "Donald Trump Casually Threatens To ‘Destroy’ The Career Of State Lawmaker"…

Trump is deliberately using the language and tactics of his political enemies against them in a kind of counter-trolling demagoguery. This is ugly stuff. The discourse has descended to the level where the media is dominated by two different groups of extremist trolls taking potshots at each other using the language of outrage and grievance. The rest of us are caught in the middle and our society is becoming deranged…

Indeed he is. Even more so, go download Tor Browser Bundle and read what the Daily Stormer has to say. Aside the obvious racism, it seems to match what and how Trump talks. Its one of their ways of conducting rallies as well, to cloak themselves in "normalcy" and use the weapons of the other side against them.

On the other side, they are willing to stop at nothing to destroy lives of people they see a threat as well. Ive seen it time and again. It turns into what amounts to a mob, exerting its will.

This is going to end very badly, for many. I see the underlying grievances as something neither side can amicably talk about, nor will either side give up.

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#98

Post by eesmith »

Yetanfou wrote: post #86
eesmith wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've not read Lit Crit. I have read history. The European colonial period was justified using logic very similar to the argument described in this article. British colonialism specifically argued for Anglo-Saxon superiority, and the Kipling's "The White Man's Burden: The United States and the Philippine Islands" used a similar logic to argue that the US should take over the Philippines.

A far better way to describe this phenomenon is to generalise it to the behaviour of a conquering culture or nation instead of one specific 'race'. Whether it be Mohammedans invading the Byzantine empire, Genghis Khan setting off to conquer the known world, Khoikoi on the war path against the San, Aleuts battling Inuit or Yupik, nearly all of them feel themselves superior to their opponents in some way. This is not a…

I have lost the thread of what you are talking about. What is "this phenomenon"?

Is the Federation in the new series supposed to be a conquering culture or nation, trying to take over the quadrant? If so, that's a huge change.

"It is a human trait which is universal"

Universal? What does that mean? Swedes and Norwegians each feel themselves to be better than the other nationality. They have flags and banners too. So, what is the consequence of this universal trait? Will Swedish tanks be going over the border soon?

Does that mean those who believe in internationalism ("the people of the world should unite across national, political, cultural, racial, or class boundaries to advance their common interests") are not human?

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#99

Post by micheljones »

outsidetheparty wrote: post #17
micheljones wrote: post #4

Because it became saddled with SJWism and PC culture.

That totally makes sense. The original Star Trek, of course, was completely unconcerned with issues like race relations, social justice, equality, multiculturalism, and all that other socialist garbage. If only we could go back to those long-ago days of the 1960s when nobody ever talked about these terrible newfangled hippie-dippie ideals!

Dear Sir, thank you for your valuable snarkasm. You have proven me wrong on all accounts. The neoreligion of SJWism and PC culture that you subscribe to cannot be wrong in any way, and is always 100% right. I have seen the error of my ways and humbly accept my punishment.

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#100

Post by micheljones »

metaphorm wrote: post #78
krisdol wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you rephrase what you said? Whenever I see "SJW" or "virtue signaling" in a post, I immediately stop reading and move on. Those terms are meaningless to those who don't subscribe to the groupthink of a devout cult of sheltered sexists.

you just reflexively accused someone of being a sexist on no evidence

Thereby proving the OP's point. lol.
Post reply on HN