3 ms·

The 2010s in sci-fi gaves us: - Dredd - Melancholia (may not qualify for some sci-fi fans, I suppose, and I can understand why—it's so very allegorical) - Hi

The 2010s in sci-fi gaves us: - Dredd - Melancholia (may not qualify for some sci-fi fans, I suppose, and I can understand why—it's so very allegorical) - High Life - Under the Skin - Annihilation - Ex Machina - Edge of Tomorrow - Looper - Blade Runner 2049 - Sorry to Bother You - Arrival - Mad Max: Fury Road - The Last Jedi (I know lots of people hated it—I think it's the only more-or-less good Star Wars movie since the original trilogy, and was shocked at the broadly-negative reaction, having come out of the theater thinking "finally, we got a good one, even if it did play the ending way too safe; everyone's going to be so happy!". We're not gonna change each other's minds in HN comments. Agree to disagree.) And that's just the ones I've seen and thought were somewhere between good and great. And that I could remember or quickly find a reminder of with a quick search. I hear very good things about the new Planet of the Apes series (like, "each entry is better than the last" good) but have only seen the first one. Lots of people liked Rogue One, Snowpiercer, Ad Astra, and Interstellar (I didn't, or at least didn't think they were notably good, but hey, lots of people did). Godzilla, Pacific Rim, and Kong were OK romps. Heard good things about Upgrade and Attack the Block, but haven't seen them. The Martian was OK (some loved it). Inception was alright (again, lots of others like it way more than I do). How many really good sci-fi movies did the 70s produce? The 80s? I think we're doing fine.

2-718-281-828 3y ago
> Melancholia (may not qualify for some sci-fi fans, how about there is no fictitious science in that movie?
- yamtaddle 3y ago
  The science being made-up isn't a feature of every credible definition of what sci-fi is. Some would perhaps admit Melancholia, others would definitely not. IMO the stronger argument for its falling outside sci-fi is that the scientific elements are basically all metaphorical—it's not actually about what would happen under those circumstances. The other planet and the impending, unavoidable doom are all externalizations of internal states of mind, and manifestations of a shared and very real and certain doom we all face. It's depression's weight realized, given physical form where all can see it. [EDIT] I mean, then again, that's almost as true of Annihilation... which is why it's hard to nail these things down with certainty.
  - 2-718-281-828 3y ago
    i love melancholia and i wouldn't even remotely consider it as science fiction ... lol

2-718-281-828 3y ago

> Melancholia (may not qualify for some sci-fi fans, how about there is no fictitious science in that movie?

yamtaddle 3y ago
The science being made-up isn't a feature of every credible definition of what sci-fi is. Some would perhaps admit Melancholia, others would definitely not. IMO the stronger argument for its falling outside sci-fi is that the scientific elements are basically all metaphorical—it's not actually about what would happen under those circumstances. The other planet and the impending, unavoidable doom are all externalizations of internal states of mind, and manifestations of a shared and very real and certain doom we all face. It's depression's weight realized, given physical form where all can see it. [EDIT] I mean, then again, that's almost as true of Annihilation... which is why it's hard to nail these things down with certainty.
- 2-718-281-828 3y ago
  i love melancholia and i wouldn't even remotely consider it as science fiction ... lol