It's one thing to revere and refresh a genre's history; it's another to live obsessively in the past, especially if science fiction's whole purpose is to extrapolate elements from today's world to create a future we've never imagined. When it comes to spaceships, giant monsters from afar, cloning, and robots, we've now been there, done that, remade it, added new CGI, seen the director's cut, played the videogame, read the fan fiction, and bought the collectibles. Where do we go from here? The answer always seems to be that we jump backwards, into the same old Cold War/Apollo-mission-era tropes.
Perhaps science fiction needs to be saved from the very people who love it the most. Nostalgia for a form can be annihilating to creativity, so while its devotees are swamped in their own canon, trying to mine now-sacred texts for any new material, I wish a great writer or director with no particular affection for the genre would let his imagination loose and see what it yields. It happened 40 years ago, when Stanley Kubrick, following his own ice-cold muse and his fascination with science itself, decided he wanted to create something that ''extended the range of science fiction,'' a genre that didn't particularly impress him. What nerve! The result was 2001: A Space Odyssey, which changed the game so completely that in movies, the sci-fi genre immediately vanished for a few years while everyone surveyed an irrevocably altered landscape.
Ideally, sci-fi's next rescuer should be someone whose ideas about the future derive from somewhere anywhere other than old sci-fi. It can be done. Just a year ago, no movie genre looked deader than the Western. Then 2007 brought us not only a familiar but lively overhaul of 3:10 to Yuma but also the gorgeously arty mood piece The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford and a handful of extraordinary films the Coens' No Country for Old Men, Paul Thomas Anderson's There Will Be Blood, and even, in its way, Paul Haggis' In the Valley of Elah that drew deeply and inventively on different aspects of Western conventions and mythmaking to create something new, often stunning, and not instantly identifiable by genre. Sci-fi desperately needs filmmakers who are interested in bending the form toward their own passions and obsessions as artists. 2001 has come and gone, and right now the future looks too much like something we've already seen.
You Might Also Like
- DVD Review I Am Legend (Mar 18, 2008) | Ty Burr
- Movie Review I Am Legend (Dec 14, 2007) | Owen Gleiberman
- Box Office Preview Will ''Bucket List'' be the surprise No. 1? | Joshua Rich
- Movie News ''I Am Legend'' vs. ''The Omega Man'' | Tom Russo
- Book News Richard Matheson's latest sci-fi project | Clark Collis
- Movie Commentary Rating the ''I Am Legend'' trailer (Dec 14, 2007) | Gregory Kirschling
Add Your Comments
You Might Also Like
- DVD Review I Am Legend (Mar 18, 2008) | Ty Burr
- Movie Review I Am Legend (Dec 14, 2007) | Owen Gleiberman
- Box Office Preview Will ''Bucket List'' be the surprise No. 1? | Joshua Rich
- Movie News ''I Am Legend'' vs. ''The Omega Man'' | Tom Russo
- Book News Richard Matheson's latest sci-fi project | Clark Collis
- Movie Commentary Rating the ''I Am Legend'' trailer (Dec 14, 2007) | Gregory Kirschling


Home



