Top 7 twist endings that sucked
Jul 24
A good twist will immediately set your mind spinning. You sit there in the darkened theatre with your jaw agape, breathlessly going over the last two hours of your life and combing through those memories for some kind of clue. The best twists will encourage repeat viewings; the very best twists will serve to enrich the thematic conent of the film.
The other side of the coin is the bad twist: the kind of twist that makes you go “Huh?” The worst case scenario is that the final twist is a cheap shot, a retread of a dozen other twists, or an obviously easy way out of a tricky situation. The very worst twists invalidate the entire film’s existence — such as the rightly-hated “It was all just a dream!” twist.
Here is a list (by no means exhaustive) of the film twists that annoyed me the most:
7 – Remember Me (2010)
Robert Pattinson spends a most of the movie trying to un-estrange himself from his distant father, Pierce Brosnan. He finally manages to pin him down for a meeting, to reconcile their differences. They agree on a time and a place. Pattinson arrives early, but Brosnan, as always, is late. Pattinson looks out the window, and the camera tracks out to reveal he’s halfway up the World Trade Centre. We find out the date — 11 September 2001 — and the film fades to black. I guess that’s one way to solve familial relationship problems, but it’s no way to end your movie.
6 – Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull (2008)
The infamous “space between spaces” line came after the all the fridge-nuking and monkey-swinging, and as such isn’t the target of as much vitriol as those earlier indications of inanity. But it is still mind-bogglingly stupid. The Indiana Jones movies have always had a creeping sense of the supernatural about them – Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull took it a step too far.
5 – Planet Of The Apes (2001)
People often forget that Tim Burton made The Planet Of The Apes. They’re too busy swooning over Edward Scissorhands and … well that’s it, actually. People often forget how awful the twist ending of The Planet Of The Apes is, too, because it doesn’t make a lick of sense. Mark Wahlberg travels into the future, hangs out with some cranky apes, comes back to his own time, and finds … the planet overrun by cranky apes. This sucks twice as hard because the twist of the original Apes was so much better.
4 – Saw (2004)
The first time I watched Saw, I guessed that the genial old fellow in the hospital was the killer, purely because the camera lingered a beat too long on him in the first act. What I didn’t know was that he could paralyse himself for extended periods of time, and stop his breathing, in order to convince two people in the room with him that he was a corpse. That’s an impressive skill. So impressive a skill, in fact, that it’s quite clearly bullshit.
3 – Inception (2010)
Inception was such a cortical strain that it really needed a powerful finish in order to validate all the hard work your poor cerebellum did over the past two and a half hours. What we got instead was a cheap trick, a sleight of hand that denied the film a real sense of purpose or higher meaning. Nolan delivered such a satisfying twist in Memento that we all thought he couldn’t possibly fail. Then, he did.
2 – Most M Night Shyamalan movies (2002, 2004, 2008)
It started with Signs: aliens for whom water is like acid is to us. It’s like humans landing naked on Venus and complaining about all the sulfuric acid everywhere — that is, outrageously stupid. Plus, biologists have shown that water is one of the few reliable mediums for live to get started in. So chances are, any alien life-form (especially if it looks suspiciously human-shaped) we come across will be water-dependant, not -intolerant.
Then there was The Village: all those monstrous beasts you spent the entire film evading were just people in fake-looking suits! And also you’re living in the modern world, but you’re trapped in the woods so that you’ll never escape and find out that science can cure all your illnesses! The twist ending ruins the movie, drains any sense of horror, and causes your empathy for the characters to dissolve in seconds.
Finally, there was The Happening: turns out all plants everywhere in the world have evolved a very specific airborn neurotoxin that breaks down the brain’s inhibitions! And it only applies to one species out of ten million — us! There are so many things wrong with this — including the implication that plants are sentient — that The Happening officially destroyed what little faith I had in M Night Shyamalan to deliver anything resembling a half-decent movie any more. I didn’t even watch The Lady In The Water — did that have a stupid twist as well?
1 – All those mid-noughties thrillers that tried to copy Fight Club
People watched Fight Club. A lot of people. Some of them were filmmakers. Forgetting that so many other people had also watched Fight Club, these filmmakers decided to pull the same final-reel twist over and over again in the following decade that it became something of a running joke.
Hide And Seek: the menacing killer is the protagonist’s (Robert DeNiro) split personality. Secret Window: the menacing killer is the protagonist’s (Johnny Depp) split personality. The Number 23: the menacing killer is the protagonist (Jim Carrey), before he got amnesia. Perfect Strangers: the mancing killer is the protagonist (Halle Berry) — the kicker is that she knows what she’s doing — and keeps doing it anyway.
The rash of mid-00s twist-based films has finally abated, and hopefully we can look forward to films that offer decent, rather that deficient, twists.
What final-reel twists bugged the hell out of you? Did you think Inception‘s twist was that bad, or am I crazy? Any thoughts are welcome and appreciated.
Top 10 reasons why I didn’t like AVATAR
Jul 13
I reviewed Avatar on opening day. Fresh from watching the film, my mind had a tendency to focus on the trees rather than the woods, and, while the review still holds up, it could use some clarification.
Eight months have passed since then, the dust has settled, everyone’s absorbed Avatar into their consciousness, and the film’s due for re-release in six weeks’ time. What better time to reflect on the cultural phenomenon than now?
Here follows a list of the ten main reasons why I – me, myself, and only I – couldn’t appreciate Avatar like everyone else (and their dog) seemed to.
10 – The 3D Doesn’t Really Help
Avatar is a visually busy film. Vibrant colours, eye-catching character designs, constant movement, and a lush aesthetic already do enough to overload the visual centre of your brain; putting it all in 3D didn’t help clarify it for me, it just helps to make it even busier.
Plus I wear glasses in everyday life already; having to wear another layer of plastic in front of my face for two-and-a-half hours gave me uncomfortable eyestrain.
9 – The People vs Pandora
Sometimes I felt like the people in the movie were dwarfed by the planet. I don’t mean visually; I mean thematically. I understand that James Cameron really wanted to immerse us in the world of Pandora, but the way to do that is to set the action against a detailed and fascinating backdrop. I’m not stupid. I can see that the backdrop is interesting. You don’t need to constantly derail your scenes just to rub this in my face.
8 – Science Fantasy
In my review I went to great lengths to bemoan things like the blue skin and red blood of the na’vi, the four-eyed faces of the native fauna, the breathing holes on the creatures’ chests, and the na’vi’s distinct separation (physiologically) from every other species on Pandora.
Basically what I was trying to say was that Cameron was blending science fiction with fantasy, two incompatible systems. Either you go for realistic plausibility (e.g. 2001: A Space Odyssey), or you throw realism out the window (Star Wars); trying to marry both disappoints me for some reason.
7 – The Uncanny Valley
Motion-capture bugs me. It’s not so bad when it’s aliens that are being rendered, as in Avatar, but the uncanny, rubbery faces still hurt the characters for me. I was aware that what I was watching wasn’t a human performance, but a computer-enhanced one. This annoys me for the same reason Justin Bieber’s hideously auto-tuned voice annoys me: it’s disingenuous., and it puts up a barrier between me and the characters on the screen.
6 – Meanwhile, Back On The Earth
All the way through Avatar, I wanted to see Earth as it was in whatever year the plot’s set in, because even a glimpse of the world at that time would have helped shape the universe as a whole. Where does Cameron see us going in the future? That’s important information in service of shaping the thematic content of the film. We hear mention of an Earth overcome by pollution. Could we please see that for some perspective, please?
5 – The Misanthropic Principle
Reading between the lines, Avatar wants you to believe that all humans are incapable of controlling their destructive urges, and that the only way to become a better human is to stop being a human, and turn yourself into an organism from a different species altogether.
The na’vi are presented as perfect beings, happy communities with nary a care in the world, while we are presented as bull-headed rednecks with barely a skerrick of common sense between us. This nastiness pervades the film and offended me, denting my appreciation of the story. Plus the only humans who stand up for the na’vi – Sigourney Weaver’s and Michelle Rodriguez’ characters – get killed at the end. Thanks.
4 – Upping The Ante
Following on from #5, what’s the biggest thing the na’vi stand to lose in the plot of Avatar? It all boils down to that big tree that provides the basis for their neural network with the world. The only thing that separates us from the na’vi – hence, the only thing that stops them from being human – is that link with the past, that shortcut to empathy. If you removed that link – horror! – the na’vi would become just like us, only able to generate empathy through force of will. And this is presented as the worst possible thing that could happen to the na’vi – that they might end up like us. Ouch.
3 – Too Long By An Hour
I probably wouldn’t have had time to think of complaints to throw at the movie if only it had breezed along at a steady clip, aiming for a 100-minutes-and-change run-time. The biggest problem here is the Rocky / Karate Kid-esque training montage in the middle of the movie, which goes for about 45 minutes straight. That could easily have been condensed and my butt could easily have been saved the unnecessary en-numbing-ment it unhappily underwent. I know Cameron had to establish the characters and the universe in a limited time, but if George Lucas could do it in two hours in 1977 you can sure as hell do it just as fast in 2009.
2 – Cartoon Villains And Cardboard Heroes
Ultimately, who is Jake Sully? He’s a wheelchair-bound ex-marine with an incongruous Australian accent. That set-up serves the dual purpose of generating sympathy for the character and conveniently proving his suitability for the Avatar Program, but it does little to help define him as a character. He’s stubborn and takes good initiative, sure – but this is generic hero stuff. What really makes Jake Sully who he is?
How about Quaritch and that character Giovanni Ribisi plays? They’re just personal manifestations of nastiness, nothing more and nothing less. (For the record, I actually enjoyed Ribisi’s performance, even at the same time I questioned his relevance to the movie as a whole.)
1 – Everything Is Pixels
Avatar may blend live-action with animation better than something like Mary Poppins, but unlike Mary Poppins it doesn’t have a stylistic justification for flip-flopping between real people and pixellated creations.
The world is presented as being real, but my eyes tell me otherwise. I’m not a fan of animated films to begin with, so that predisposition probably coloured my reaction to Avatar which is, technically, about 80% computer-generated. If it had focused more on the real people I probably would have enjoyed it a hell of a lot more.
Ultimately, watching Avatar for me became akin to looking over someone’s shoulder as they played a beautifully-rendered videogame. The blank slate hero was there, the wish-fulfilling empowerment was there, even the alien sex scene was there (kind of). It was like playing a non-interactive videogame, which is obviously the worst kind of videogame there is.
James Cameron’s big blue baby is by no stretch of the imagination a bad film; I just didn’t like it. I applaud Cameron’s success in tapping into something universal, something that touched a lot of people, and brought a unique cinematic experience to the lives of millions. But that doesn’t mean I have to like it.
There’s no denying that Avatar came at precisely the right time in history: everyone’s rightfully worried about the environment, and are looking increasingly to technology for escapism from a cruel world full of death, destruction, horror, and electricity bills. The idea of stepping into someone else’s shoes and solving the world’s problems satisfies us on a fundamental level, now more than ever.
I’m thrilled for Cameron’s success, but I think it’s born of good timing rather than masterful storytelling. That isn’t meant to belittle the film’s success in any way, but hopefully I’ve given you food for thought to chew over as you watch Avatar on DVD for the umpteenth time, or go to catch it in its re-release in August.
As always, I’m keen to hear your thoughts on this – comments are welcome and appreciated.
Top 5 movies you didn’t know were science fiction
Jul 10
Following on from my list last week about movies that people innocently mistake for science fiction, here’s a list of the opposite: five popular movies that people don’t usually think of as science fiction.
Science fiction hasn’t really been popular since the Golden Age ended forty years ago, but, following in the wake of Avatar, it’s likely that we’ll see a resurgence in the genre, so it helps to know what we’re talking about. What better time to not only help define sci-fi, but also remember some classics of the genre rarely recognised for what they truly are?
On with the list!
5 – 28 Days Later (2002)
Most zombie movies get by without a skerrick of explanatory exposition. “Er, because Hell is overflowing,” floats just as well as “um, because they watched TV for too long” in most zombie flicks — but that wasn’t good enough for Danny Boyle. He needed a semi-plausible scenario for his film, dammit, otherwise Cillian Murphy’s Jim character wouldn’t seem quite so far up the creek when he wakes up in hospital to find the universe abandoned in one of the best opening acts of the decade.
Why nobody thinks it’s sci-fi: Because it’s tense and frightening, and horror has the monopoly on scares, doesn’t it?
Why it is sci-fi: Animal testing is a reality. Diseases are a reality. Animal activists are a reality. 28 Days Later puts all these together not only to scare and entertain you, but to prod the thinking-centre of your cerebellum. The fact that 28 Days Later bases its premise firmly in reality helps it to blur the lines between science fiction and horror, to great effect.
4 – The Stepford Wives (1975 / 2004)
Even if you’ve only seen Frank Oz’s abysmal 2004 remake, you know the premise of The Stepford Wives: a bunch of men become unhappy with their liberal-minded wives and have them turned into robots to serve their every whim. The original film plays out like a thriller as Joanna struggles against the odds to uncover the conspiracy, while the remake plays out like a comedy, partly on purpose, and partly because it’s so bad.
Why nobody thinks it’s sci-fi: Again, the frights often make people think a movie is just a horror / thriller. The fact that it focuses on social issues probably confused people, too — isn’t that what dramas do?
Why it is sci-fi: Because it focuses on social issues, funnily enough; because the men use technology — robots — to solve their problem; and because doing so says something about the mindset of the times: some men would prefer obedient toys to real wives. Now that’s a scary thought.
3 – A Clockwork Orange (1971)
Stanley Kubrick’s nasty masterpiece is an exercise in dread. You just don’t know what Alex is going to do next. Beatings, rapes, verbal abuse, idiosyncratic dialogue and sinister voiceover– it makes for a generally unpleasant time at the cinema. Then there’s that final-shot dream-sequence what-the-heck moment that makes you question everything you just watched — it’s no wonder A Clockwork Orange stays with people long after they’ve seen it.
Why nobody thinks it’s sci-fi: Because A Clockwork Orange is a “classic,” and classics are often thought of as existing entirely without genre. People often forget that classics are also westerns, crime dramas, thrillers, horrors and — yes — science fictions.
Why it is sci-fi: Because it takes elements of modern society and extrapolates them into the foreseeable future, and uses that set-up as a way to comment on the human condition. I don’t know what’s more frightening — teenaged gangs going around beating and raping people on a whim, or the use of audiovisual media to brainwash people into shells of their former selves. It’s difficult to grapple with, ethically and intellectually, and that alone scores Clockwork a spot on this list.
2 – Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind (2004)
I’m going to go ahead and let the cat out of the bag up front: I didn’t like Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind. Could be I was too young to really get it at the time, could be the moody aesthetic registered as “wanky” in my brain, or it could be that the non-linear narrative overwhelmed my developing brain and caused it to report an unsatisfactory experience. Whatever the explanation, Sunshine has been on my to-watch(-again) list for some time.
Why nobody thinks it’s sci-fi: Because it’s all, like, indie, and hip, and stuff, and science fiction is many things, but none of them is “hip.”
Why it is sci-fi: The challenges facing Jim Carrey’s character were put there by technological means, and his reactions mirror that of people in general. As such the movie says as much about people as it does about technology; a defining characteristic of any work of science fiction.
1 – The Truman Show (1998)
Peter Weir’s jaw-dropping satire of reality TV ironically came before reality TV became really big, in the early noughties. Besides being a fascinating tale of “what if?”, The Truman Show is also a tightly-wound narrative propelled by Jim Carrey’s breakout dramatic performance. It’s one of the defining films of the 90s, and even though it loses impact with repeat viewings, it’s still a good watch to this day.
Why nobody thinks it’s sci-fi: Because it’s so full of warmth and humanity, and science fiction is all about aliens and robots, right?
Why it is sci-fi: Because it’s an extrapolation of our current environment into an exaggerated future. As technology progresses, what’s to stop us from putting a man in a fishbowl and filming him 24 / 7? The Truman Show answers that question with enough emotion to break the heart of a convicted serial killer, and tells a ripping yarn to boot.
Looking back over this list, every single one of the films listed takes place right here on Earth, in the not-too-distant future; they all feature strong human characters, exhibit strong plots, and feature in pop culture consciousness to some degree or another; but they don’t get lumped into the same category as 2oo1, Blade Runner, The Thing, Starship Troopers or Children Of Men.
I often wonder why that is, and the only reason I can think of, as hinted above, is that sci-fi just plain isn’t cool; all those naff 80s and 90s budget flicks, Alien knock-offs, and Transformers films have given sci-fi a bad name. So when a great film comes out with elements of sci-fi in its framework, people ignore the sci-fi and focus on the film’s brilliance.
The best thing about Avatar, for me, has been the veritable deluge of sci-fi film projects announced in the wake of Avatar‘s impressive performance: Dune, Flash Gordon, The Forever War, Foundation, Neuromancer, John Carter of Mars and The Martian Chronicles are all in the works, and that’s just the beginning; who knows what other new or classic sci-fi flicks we’ll see on the silver screen in the decade to come?
I can just see it now … in eight years’ time, on the original film’s 50th anniversary, they’ll reboot 2001: A Space Odyssey. It will be directed by Brett Ratner, and it will star Kevin James (who by then will be one of the biggest action stars in the world), and it will be the first in a planned trilogy. Oh, but it won’t be in 3D, because that was SO 2010 …
10 sports movies I am watching instead of the FIFA World Cup
Jul 05
So, the FIFA World Cup 2010 is on, and while Australia’s Socceroos crumbled to yet another dismal early-exit from the tournament, I’ve decided to re-watch some of my favourite sporting movies instead of enduring what remains of the event. After all, the running time for a lot of films is pretty close to a single game of soccer. I might just tune in to the final.
Note: I’m not saying these are the greatest sporting movies of all time. They are films from my collection that I’ve been watching while the World Cup is on, since I’m not much of a soccer fan but the hype has put me in a sporty mood. If there’s a sports movie you enjoy, please leave a comment below (or nag me on facebook like everyone else).
#10 THE KARATE KID (1984)
Forget the recent remake with Will Smith’s kid and Chackie Chan, the 1984 original will always stand as the first martial arts film to break into the children’s market. Wax on, wax off! Daniel Larusso coming to terms with his new town and bonding with Mr. Miyagi, whooping that gangs ass after they beat him up on the beach (oh, spoilers, by the way…). The Karate Kid has actually gotten better with age, the retro style adds a timeless quality that most films lack when they age so quickly. My kids will be seeing this, and they will always understand that, as a 6 year old boy, this movie meant a great deal to their Daddy. That little bastard on the playground never picked on me again the day after I saw this…
#9 HAPPY GILMORE (1996)
Please bear with me… I saw this as a teenager and, at the time, it was the funniest thing on the planet. Of course, now I’ve matured past the humour of it, but the nostalgia still remains when I put it on. Adam Sandler as a no-good hockey player whooping Shooter McGavin’s ass on a golf course? Timeless. Who hasn’t tried the Gilmore Shot when playing golf with their buddies? This film sprung to mind because I find myself partly quoting this flick whenever I try to watch soccer: “Get in the net, baaalll!”
#8 CADDYSHACK (1980)
If I’m going to watch Happy Gilmore, I’ll need to watch Caddyshack right afterwards to wash the taste out. Bill Murray, Chevy Chase and a gopher on a golf course. This will always be a classic.
#7 SLAPSHOT (1977)
Wonderful things happen when you put Paul Newman in a hockey jersey and let him swear a whole bunch. Still the best ice hockey film ever made, you’ll find this on any of those ‘proper’ best sports movies lists and with good reason. Helps that I adore ice hockey, a sport that, like soccer, usually results in only a few goals per game, but at least you can smack the shit out of your opponent in the process.
#6 COOL RUNNINGS (1993)
John Candy, how I miss your delightful humour. Remember, kids, your bones do not break in a bobsled. No, no. They shatter. Would you believe I only discovered recently that Cool Runnings is based on the true story of the Jamican bobslead team qualifying for the Winter Olympic Games? I mean, I was 12, how was I supposed to know? I always thought it was just a super-clever original premise. Anyway, this Disney classic hasn’t aged well at all, but nothing beats that delicious early-90s nostalgia.
#5 THE WRESTLER (2008)
The return to form for Mickey Rourke snagged him a Golden Globe for Best Actor (he was robbed at the Oscars) and put one of the most controversial ’sports’ back under the spotlight for a brief moment. Yeah, I consider it a sport. The stuff these guys can achieve in the ring is (sometimes) staggering, and this film wonderfully illustrates how much they go through to entertain their huge fan-base. Tell you what, you go and tell one of these beefy blokes in person that what they do isn’t real, and if you can still speak coherently afterwards, I’ll listen to your side of the argument.
#4 FIELD OF DREAMS (1989)
Lads, don’t watch this one with your Father. I had no intention of seeing this (baseball AND Kevin Costner? No thanks…) until my wife enforced it with one of those embargos where I had no choice. Sorta maybe had me a little sooky toward the end there… Let’s just leave it at that.
#3 ROCKY (1976)
Not just for the thumping music, inspiring journey and slurring Sly, but also for the screenplay. Rocky is an independent film that is pure legendary. People are often surprised when I remind them Rocky won the Oscar for Best Picture that year… might have something to do with all of those average sequels that blurs their appreciation. Still, any budding screenwriters out there who need a good template and an inspirational story to keep them going, remember Sly wrote the script in a matter of days and it landed him an Oscar nod.
#2 JERRY MAGUIRE (1996)
Cameron Crowe’s would-be romantic comedy Jerry Maguire is easily forgotten as a sports film. It coined one of the most repeated and mocked lovey-dovey quotes of the past two decades: “You had me at ‘hello’.” whimpers a tearful Renée Zellweger to a desperate Tom Cruise (who wasn’t quite completely nuts yet). There’s also the aged classic “Show me the money!!” which Tom screams down the phone in an effort to sign Rod Tidwell, a role which won Cuber Gooding Jr. an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor. The less said about his career after that night, the better. It’s the corporate backstabbing and eventual success of Tidwell that keeps me coming back to this one.
#1 RAGING BULL (1980)
Beyond being a great sports movie, Raging Bull is a brilliant film that stands above many others. Robert De Niro and Joe Pesci up-front and Martin Scorsese behind the camera, the cinema lessons learned from watching this classic boxing film about Jake La Motta are endless. Unfortunately, watching Scorsese’s directorial brilliance in Raging Bull now also serves as a reminder to just how horrible Shutter Island actually is. I guess you really can’t win ‘em all.
Top 5 Movies Mistaken for Sci-Fi That Aren’t
Jun 29
In literature, science fiction and fantasy are clearly defined. They are polar opposite in terms of their content: science fiction deals with things that could potentially happen, while fantasy deals with things that definitely couldn’t ever happen.
The two genres have had a tough time making the leap to the film world, a problem exacerbated by the confusion between the two genres. In most people’s minds, science fiction and fantasy are the same genre, an idea that is both confusing and alarming to fans of either genre in literature.
So this list is designed to give people a quick run-down of what science fiction is, and how to recognise it in its new habitat: the screen.
5 – Ghostbusters (1984)
Wikipedia lists the second Ghostbusters film as ‘science fiction,’ and many other websites categorise it as such as well; most people probably wouldn’t have thought of it as science fiction anyway, but it’s a good place to start, so bear with me:
Why It Isn’t Sci-Fi: It’s about ghosts. That’s about as nebulous and un-scientific as you can get.
Why Everyone Thinks It Is: Because the characters in the film treat ghosts as scientific phenomena, and pack high-tech gear to deal with the pesky paranormal poltergeists. The tech is treated as a means to an end, though; the focus of the film is obviously on humour, and the only explanations for the ghosts’ existence is mystical in nature. Ghostbusters is still a fine film, but sci-fi it ain’t.
4 – King Kong (1933)
In the 1930s, science fiction was a fledgling genre, barely a blip on the world’s consciousness. Space travel was as alien a concept to folk back then as the internet, and this, of course, was before the splitting of the atom inspired public interest in science, and before scientists like Steven Hawking, Carl Sagan and Richard Dawkins came along to popularise the field.
Nevertheless, a quick google search for “sci fi king kong” turns up dozens of sci-fi sites dealing with the film. Why?
Why It Isn’t Sci-Fi: It’s about a giant gorilla who lives on an island populated by extinct and fantastical creatures. Nothing about that synopsis mentions technology or hitherto unknown scientific phenomena.
Why Everyone Thinks It Is: Like I said above, people seem to conflate science fiction with fantasy. There’s some real-world basis to the idea of an isolated ecosystem undergoing rapid and unchecked evolution into strange and unforeseen paths, but the focus of the film isn’t on evolution, but rather, the bond between a woman and a giant monkey thing. Also screaming. So much screaming.
3 – Serenity (2005)
Joss Whedon’s acclaimed but unwatched TV show Firefly mixed elements of adventure, the Western and space opera to create a cocktail alien to TV audiences at the time; Serenity was the follow-up movie that, despite a loyal fan-base, failed to drum up spectacular profits. Serenity takes place in space, so it must be sci-fi, right? Wrong.
Why It Isn’t Sci-Fi: If you transplanted the action into some alternate-history Earth, with naval vessels replacing spacefaring ones, you’d have a fairly conventional adventure movie; future technology doesn’t impact on the story in any meaningful way (and let’s face it, River’s powers are pretty much mystical bullshit anyway).
Why Everyone Thinks It Is: Probably the space setting. As I will go on to explain later, setting your story in space does not make it science fiction. Serenity counts as an adventure, with elements of Western style; I’d probably call it a ‘space opera’ if it operated on a slightly larger scale than it does.
2 – Transformers (2007 – 2011)
Michael Bay has made a career out of making movies that people think are sci-fi. Armageddon, The Island, and now this, the crowning jewel in the crown of awfulness, Transformers. Before Bay got his hands on these projects, they probably were genuine sci-fi flicks, but Bay has this peculiar way of taking anything – anything at all – and turning it into a chase / action movie where the young white guy gets the young white girl at the end of the day.
When I tell people I like sci-fi, I usually get a triumphant “Ah-ha! But you hated Transformers!” in response. This makes me wonder why I talk to people at all, but let me clear this up once and for all:
Why It Isn’t Sci-Fi: Because the Autobots and Decepticons aren’t explained beyond their capacity for violence. How do robots reproduce? Who invented them? Why the hell do they need to change into vehicles? Why do they resemble human beings when they transform out of vehicle mode? A true science fiction project would answer (or at the very least, address) these obvious questions. Plus the Allspark is patently mystical in nature — a big no-no in true sci-fi.
Why Everyone Thinks It Is: Because it’s about robot aliens, and technology far in advance of our own. However, it doesn’t say a single thing about the state of humanity and the way technology affects us; it focuses much more on cartoonish violence, and as such should probably fall under the “action” category.
1 – Star Wars (1977 – 2005)
George Lucas’ hallowed Star Wars trilogy contains all the hallmarks of science fiction: space travel, aliens, and advanced technology. But any genre fan worth her salt knows that it isn’t science fiction; no matter what angle you tackle it from, Star Wars just isn’t science fiction.
It’s the big one, too, the one that causes the most arguments among aficionados (read: geeks) and inspires the most confusion in the innocent mainstream. Let’s clear it up together, shall we?
Why It Isn’t Sci-Fi:
- The aliens in the Star Wars universe are just there, like the different species (elf, dwarf, orc) in Tolkien-esque fantasy. Real sci-fi would’ve dealt with First Contact, represented racism between the various species in the Star Wars universe, had Luke Skywalker fall in love with a Wookiee or something, etc.
- The space travel in Star Wars is never explained, beyond the magic of hyperspace. A handy guide to differentiating sci-fi from fantasy is the AM/FM rule: AM stands for Actual Machine; FM stands for Fucking Magic. Star Wars falls firmly into the latter category.
- The Force. Nothing in this universe suggests some kind of intergalactic consciousness at a subatomic level; the Force is one of the fundamental cornerstones of the Star Wars mythos, and immediately flags Star Wars as being physically impossible. Magic is a prominent feature of fantasy literature, however.
Why Everyone Thinks It Is: Because it takes place in outer space.
I don’t know quite what it is that makes people assume “outer space” = “science fiction.” It’s probably got something to do with the fact that 2001: A Space Odyssey takes place (mostly) in space. But if you look at E.T., Close Encounters Of The Third Kind, Contact, The Abyss, Back To The Future, and a hefty chunk of sci-fi literature, most sci-fi takes place right here, on planet Earth. That helps to anchor sci-fi in some recognisable semblance of reality. But right from the start (A long, long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away), Star Wars clearly sets itself up as a fantasy film. Is that so hard to comprehend?
The take-home message of this particularly geeky list is a two-parter: part 1 is that, as I’ve lamented previously, genre labels are genuinely useless and not to be trusted; part 2 is that science fiction is a serious and mature, but not entirely humourless genre, and deserves a lot more recognition than being confused with tripe like Transformers and shallow pulp like Star Wars.
That’s not to say any of the movies on this list aren’t good movies (except, of course, for Transformers) — they just aren’t science fiction movies. And for some reason, I found it very important to explain that to you.
The top 5 female film protagonists
Jun 05
Sometimes, white-male-dominated Hollywood freaks out and breaks the rules and accidentally makes a movie with a woman instead of a man in the lead role. Sometimes, these movies don’t even objectify or ogle their subjects, they just treat them like regular people. Sometimes, these movies are even good.
In the wake of the culturally disastrous Sex And The City 2, I felt it was prudent — nay, necessary – to look to some more promising leading ladies in order to a) wash my brain out, b) remind myself that the XX-chromosomed world isn’t all glitter, high-heels, and awful one-liners, and c) remind myself of those rare good movies that accidentally swapped their male protag for a woman at some point in development.
So without further ado, here’s a list of my five favourite female protagonists from the past few decades:
5 – Sarah Connor (The Terminator & Terminator 2, 1984 & 1991)
I liked Sarah Connor better when she was just a regular gal, in The Terminator, than I liked her as the verging-on-insane mother-on-a-mission she became in Terminator 2, but either way, she makes a compelling protagonist. Plucked seemingly at random from a phonebook by a creepy Austrian bodybuilder — isn’t that everyone’s worst nightmare? — she carried herself well through all the crazy time travel bullshit, and came out at the end of it still resembling a realistic — if damaged — human being. Shame she suddenly and inexplicably succumbed to leukemia in time for the third one, though.
4 – Rosemary Woodhouse (Rosemary’s Baby, 1968)
Before I watched Roman Polanski’s classic horror film, I hadn’t really understood just how scary men could be — even regular blokes, like husbands, friends, and fathers. But as Rosemary’s paranoia escalated, I empathised with her every single step of the way, sampling a mere inkling of the constant fear some women are forced to live in. The fact that Roman Polanski is a convicted rapist only adds to the horror.
3 – Maggie Fitzgerald (Million Dollar Baby, 2004)
The realm of boxing biffo in film is one usually reserved exclusively for men, but with Million Dollar Baby Clint Eastwood and Hilary Swank showed us that it can be equally compelling to watch a couple of women knocking the stuffing out of each other as it is a pair of blokes. On top of this refreshing gender-swap, Million Dollar Baby isn’t your garden variety underdog sports film, either: it’s a gripping narrative and a rollercoaster of emotions, with a whole raft of memorable characters. Swank deserves every gram of that little gold statue she won for her performance here. God only knows why she went on to do crap like The Reaping, PS I Love You and Amelia.
2 – Ellen Ripley (Alien franchise, 1979 – 1997)
Before James Cameron got to the character and morphed her into some warrior-goddess-mother caricature, Ellen Ripley was just another member of a non-descript space crew. She may have been near (or at) the bottom of the pecking order aboard the Nostromo, but she was the only crewman with the balls to go toe-to-toe with the xenomorph… and live to brag about it. Ripley was still a strong woman in the sequels, but it was her quiet determination in 1979′s Alien that really set her apart.
1 – Ellie Arroway (Contact, 1997)
Being the first human ever to make contact with extra-terrestrial intelligence is kind of a big deal, but the obstacles Ellie had to go through just to say “G’day” to our interstellar neighbours — institutionalised misogyny, religious fanaticism, and terrorist attacks — only serves to make her an even bigger deal. Ellie’s passion, love and sheer unadulterated enthusiasm for science and the unknown is inspirational. It’s rare to see a woman in movies so passionate about something that isn’t shoes, so Ellie easily swipes my number 1 spot.
The fact that I struggled to put together five different female characters for this list is troubling. Browsing lists of the most commercially and critically successful movies, very few of them are driven by women. Fifty percent of the people on this planet are of the double-X variety; you’d think that would show up in our culture and our art, wouldn’t you?
I hope this has been as cleansing an experience for you as it has been for me. Why, I’ve nearly forgotten just how bad Sex And The City 2 was! Nearly…
Any suggestions for who you’d include in the list, or who you’d exclude? The first person to mention Angelina Jolie as Lara Croft wins a box full of sarcasm.
OPINIONS COUNT