What's the future for science fiction?

Science fiction, like comic books, has long been the realm of freaks and geeks the world over. But comic books became cool. Thanks to the super hero movie and the comic book adaptation movie, everyone and their mum have started to read comic books. It broke into the mainstream. Science fiction, on the other hand, has never quite made that jump. It would be wrong to say that it hasn’t penetrated the mainstream, because it has. Films like Danny Boyle’s Sunshine have broken into the wider audience market. But science fiction is still thought of as being only for the nerds, or if you’re not a nerd, something of a guilty pleasure. Why? It could be something to do with the fact that the concepts grappled with in science fiction films are only familiar concepts to people who study science. In order to make them non- scientist friendly these concepts have to be dumbed down. And what comes out of that are films like I Robot, a criminally dull film that did nothing to explain or advertise Asimov’s Rules of Robotics as valid theories of inquiry. Though it did advertise everything else.
It is important to realise that the science fiction film now occupies the same intellectual space as the Gothic novel. Invented in 1764 by Horace Walpole with his novel The Castle of Otranto the Gothic novel, held up a mirror to society and exposed its fears. The genre was born at a time when harsh laws were held in place, not by diplomacy, but by torture and superstition was king. A prime example is Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, a novel which stood as a treatise on the dangers of medical advances. To further compound the idea that the gothic novel and science fiction are almost one and the same is the fact that Frankenstein was adapted in 1931 starring Vincent Price. Science fiction has long done the same. Philip K Dick’s Do Android’s Dream of Electric Sheep first embraced the idea of ‘the ghost in the machine’. Set in a post apocalyptic world, this novel hypothesises the dangers of nuclear armament and, more importantly, what it is to be human. Now anyone who knows their science fiction knows that this was the basis for Blade Runner, long thought to be one of the greatest films ever made. Also one of the most confusing and mentally impenetrable films ever made. So difficult that Ridley Scott made five different versions. Science fiction has long been the arena for exploring the perilous and sinister nature of the quest for knowledge. Prophetic in nature, science fiction films often present a dystopian and grim view of the future which echoes society’s anxieties about advances in technology and how to control its results. It seems to be the fate of the science fiction film that it will either be so faithful to the concepts it embodies that it will be unfathomable to the general public or it will be so simplified that those actually interested in the science of science fiction will be left feeling betrayed.
However, science fiction is also thought to be an American endeavour. Despite having its basis in English Gothic Romance exemplified by Mary Shelley, or the European Utopian Novel exemplified by Jules Verne, science fiction has long been concerned with the American ideal of endless growth. But U.K science fiction is finally fighting back. In an interview with Alistair Reynolds, a leading science fiction writer, the Guardian highlights that British writers such as Reynolds have felt the need to compete with the U.S. Where the U.K differs from the U.S is in the reach of their science fiction. A problem with American science fiction is that it tends to eschew the hard sell, or in layman terms features mostly unsupported science. U.K writers, on the other hand, have long been writing about “far future set, space- operatic, hard sci- fi.” This has also long been the tradition in British made science fiction films. Take Danny Boyle’s Sunshine for instance. Whilst its merits have caused some arguments, the science itself is fairly sound. Compared to the American made remake Solaris is neither entertaining nor scientifically accurate. And now with Duncan Jones’ Moon, being released this year and Christopher Nolan’s Inception being released next year, the British fight back has begun in earnest.
According to official box office statistics 2002 was the most successful year for science fiction in over a decade. The films released in this year included Star Wars Episode Two: Attack of the Clones, Minority Report, Solaris, Simone and Equilibrium to name but a few. Of course, the majority were American productions. It should also be pointed out that only 23 science fiction films were released in 2002, some of which cannot even be termed science fiction. Of these films two were mainstream hits and the rest were critically deemed flops. For example, Equilibrium starring Emily Watson and Christian Bale was loosely based on 1984 and Brave New World. The theme of the film was behaviour modification, the idea that society would be better if emotion could be eradicated. Equilibrium once again tackled the idea of the loss of personal individuality like in Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956). Behaviour modification could also be said to be the theme of Minority Report where the threat of prosecution for future crimes kept everyone thinking happy thoughts. But where the latter was a success, the former was a failure. Why? Because Equilibrium in trying to stay faithful to its genre came out very dry. A film full of levelly toned people and not a hint of a smile does not make for riveting viewing. Minority Report, on the other hand, eschewed the hard genre work and focussed instead on turning out a credible action thriller with just a hint of science fiction. In science fiction it is the hint that has always been key.
So what of this year? Is science fiction still only hinting at its science fiction status? In a word, No. 2009 has already seen the release of Star Trek, the J.J. Abrams re- envisioning of the classic T.V and film series, Terminator Salvation and Duncan Jones’ debut feature Moon. Still to come is Surrogates starring Bruce Willis, directed by Jonathon Mostow the man who gave us Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines. And, perhaps most excitingly of all, James Cameron’s Avatar. Of these films only a few can really be called science fiction. Star Trek, for example, is a classic example of ‘soft’ science fiction, one which refuses to recognise the more important theories that govern scientific study into space. Theories such as the Fermi Paradox which highlights the contradiction between the high likelihood of other life in space and the complete lack of evidence we have for it. Films like Star Trek show human beings interacting with alien civilisations all the time. However, Duncan Jones’ Moon in not only au fait with the more complex scientific principles but highlights and exemplifies them in such a way that the audience is left not feeling overwhelmed but fascinated with its principles.
Moon tells the story of Sam (Sam Rockwell) who after three years mining Helium 3, with only his friendly ships computer GERTY (eerily voiced by Kevin Spacey) for company, is looking forward to coming to the end of his contract and returning home. But when he gets to the final stretch strange things start happening and Sam comes to realise that he may never return home. Without giving too much away Jones incorporates three major scientific principles or areas of inquiry into the film, and all are well- informed. Scientists have long been developing ideas to tackle mining Helium 3 as a way of ending Earth’s energy crisis, gives us a terrifying view of ever increasing corporate strongholds, and the rest of the science is no stranger to the science fiction genre either. It is easy to see that Jones has got an assured handle on the tenets of the genre. Moon has strong elements of Kubrick’s 2001 especially in the characterisation of GERTY. But instead of coming across as a hash of other people’s big ideas, Jones uses well- established ideas and schools of thought to explore the dark side of human alienation. It would be a mistake to say that GERTY’s only influence is Hal, after all the title of Jones’ Masters thesis was: ‘How to kill your computer friend: An investigation of the mind/ body problem and how it relates to the hypothetical creation of a thinking machine.”
Is science finally cool? I think it’s going to be. About time too.

By R.M