fantasy and sci-fi

[Mikman]

Of fantasy and sci-fi media which you experienced, how much would you believe is theoretically possible, and how much of it seems sensible to you?

[Dudebro]

I would say anything is possible because we don't know the limits of what we can do.

[CrispyChicken]

Can we have dragons? That'd be amazing. Destructive, but amazing.

[Dudebro]

That's fantasy not sci fi.

[CrispyChicken]

Isn't this topic called Fantasy and Sci-fi?

[Dudebro]

Oh, yeah. I got distracted by the realism thing, it's kinda the exact opposite of fantasy.

[Mikman]

Perhaps fantasy was too much. The question mainly focused on sci-fi.

---------- Post added at 06:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:44 PM ----------

Also, what do you think should be more in sci-fi media which isn't there? Not just technology, but also social and political ideas, which sci-fi hasn't explored much.

[Dudebro]

That's really hard to say because Science fiction has covered just about every topic I can think of.

Not sure if it's related to the topic but I noticed something really backwards in Star Trek TNG today. Well it's not new or anything but I was thinking about it today. Why does Geordi have that stupid hair band visor? They couldn't come up with a concept for cybernetic eyes like they gave him years later in the movies? Even an organ transplant would've made more sense than a giant clunky visor that doesn't even let him see normally. I get that his character is supposed to show how handicapped people can over come adversity but it comes off as lazy concept design.

( Click to show/hide )

( Click to show/hide )

[Mikman]

I agree. I never really accepted the visor.

Also, during outer space battles in sci-fi movies, why don't spaceships deflect missiles/torpedoes with lasers/phasers? That could protect from much damage.

Another topic which much sci-fi doesn't cover much is faith. What would be the galactic view of religion? Does it exist in spacefaring societies, and to what extent?

[Dudebro]

Well that's a big can of worms most people don't wanna touch with a ten foot pole. Star Trek gives the impression that religious belief is in the past for the most part(like currency and international politics). When it's shown it's usually in a somewhat negative light(people refusing to accept reality because of their long held beliefs) and the people usually come around to realize that their religion is probably bunk and causing them problems. They don't bash viewers over the head with a completely secular message though. There are a few examples of people with faith but they keep it to themselves unless it's brought up for a specific reason.

Star Wars on the other hand basically bashes us over the head with the Jedi religion. As far as I recall they go to great lengths to avoid the word religion though, except in one of the original movies-
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zzs-OvfG8tE"]Star Wars Episode IV: "I find your lack of faith disturbing" - YouTube[/ame]
Because George Lucas is a tool this exchange doesn't really line up with the later movies where everyone is aware and intimidated by force powers and more specifically Vader. It's also strange that Grand Moff Tarkin can command Vader like that, doesn't seem to fit.

[Mikman]

The universe of Star Wars varies greatly from that of the later films. The Force was mysterious because the empire controlled the galaxy during a much longer time than the later films suggested, and Darth Vader didn't exist in the same chain of command. Of course, what films followed didn't properly continue these ideas.

I suppose that Roddenbery didn't like religion much, but in the whole galaxy, some aliens probably have strong religious beliefs.

[Dudebro]

Nah don't try to rationalize the plot holes. The movies do not flow together well because of the decades between them and the way Lucas became by the time he got around to making the newer ones. He became arrogant and isolated from criticism so naturally his work suffered. That's also why he went ahead and butchered the old movies in the remastered versions, the people around him were too afraid to tell him that his ideas are stupid.

The force was different in the old movies. It made sense to have that scene I posted because they wanted it to be mysterious and scary. Lucas screwed the storyline up by making the force so well known and accepted during the prequel trilogy. We're supposed to believe that high ranking empire officials forgot what the force can do in a matter of 20 years or so? No amount of evil empire propaganda could accomplish that feat when you're talking about billions upon billions of people living in the empire.

So yeah George Lucas isn't a very good writer.


You're right Roddenberry didn't like religion very much. I think these quotes illuminate that point pretty well-

"We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes."

"I condemn false prophets, I condemn the effort to take away the power of rational decision, to drain people of their free will — and a hell of a lot of money in the bargain. Religions vary in their degree of idiocy, but I reject them all. For most people, religion is nothing more than a substitute for a malfunctioning brain. "

But like I said before he wasn't against it in his stories. One of the more sympathetic examples is the people of Bajor, they are very religious and their gods actually play a part in the story(the worm hole entities from DS9). They even had a starfleet captain as the prophet, Sisko.

[Mikman]

That's true, but he didn't work much on that series because he died before he could.

I personally don't believe that we should polarize sci-fi with any excessive pro-/anti-religious sentiments, but small ideas could interest.