Wednesday, September 6, 2017
Birth of Science Fiction?
Some commentators have dubbed Méliès's film A Trip to the Moon the first science fiction movie. Not all critics, however, agree. Tom Gunning, the author of our essay on that film, argues for the contrary view. He states, " 'Science' fiction implies a certain sobriety and serious concern with scientific and technological possibilities. . . . But Méliès cannot take his scientists seriously at all, introducing them first as wizards with pointy hats, figures out of fairy pantomime . . . (70). What do you think? While you may not be able to judge whether this is the first of its kind, you can make a judgment about whether or not it qualifies as science fiction. Compare this film with other science fiction movies you have seen. How is it the same? How is it different? Can we call it a science fiction film, a precursor of such films, or something entirely different?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think that A Trip to the Moon is not the first science fiction film created. Although it does share some similarities with science fiction movies. The way in which it is presented is not true to the rest of the science-fiction genre. Unlike other science-fiction films, there is no focus or explanation of the science that is going on in the movie. For example, in The Martian, there is great detail about the science that goes into a movie so that it seems realistic and plausible. In A Trip to the Moon there is no attempt to make it seem like actual science is happening the scientists dressed like wizards are pushed into the cannon that shoots them to the moon. Compared with other science fiction of the time like in Jules Verne’s novel From Earth to the Moon. This movie instead of making it about science makes it about the spectacle of the movie. The colors and the special effects are what the audience came to see. The plot is really just a vehicle for Melie to show many of effects he has been able to create. This is the one place that movie is similar to science fiction movies. Often in science fiction such as star trek cutting edge, special effects are needed to make the movie more enjoyable. The same goes for A trip to the moon Melie needed the best special to make his movie as interesting as possible without good special effects science fiction movies feel like they are missing something.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Méliès's film A Trip to the Moon can be accredited to establishing several techniques that are still used today in cinema entertainment, I do not believe that is can be considered the first science fiction movie of its era. A Trip to the Moon utilized several new editing techniques such as stop motion and continuity editing to create a fairy tale esq movie involving space travel. In this film, a group of scientists travel to the moon and battle aliens, yet the scientists in this film are portrayed as wizards creating a satirical feeling in the film. Tom Gunning, the author of the article regarding A Trip to the Moon, classifies this genre of film as pantomime or fairy tale, which relates closer to movies such as Little Red Riding Hood (1901) rather than a typical science fiction movie such as Interstellar (2014). In the movie Interstellar, outer space is depicted realistically, with an emphasis on the accuracy of science and the praise of scientific knowledge, while A Trip to the Moon is the opposite. When the scientists bring the extraterrestrial back to earth in A Trip to the Moon, they exploit and torture him, similar to a conquest and colonize situation. It is clear that this films scientific characteristics draw more attention to the editing techniques used rather than the actual genre. For example, when creating the movement of the spaceship towards the moon, the moon itself moved closer the camera, eventually close enough to see facial features. We know now, and it was most likely evident back when the film was created, that the moon does not have a face, therefor it is apparent that the emphasis is not as much on the accuracy as it is on continuity of the editing and enjoyment of the audience.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Melies’s film A Trip to the Moon involves some scenes in which the setting is in on the moon in outer space and involves the concept of a rocket ship, it ultimately does not qualify as a science fiction film because it lacks realistic scientific plausibility. In order for science-fiction to truly fit the “science” classification, there must be some, albeit tenuous, connection with actual scientific laws or properties; if a film does not meet that standard, then it merely qualifies as fantasy. Indications that the film does not attempt to satisfy any scientific law is indicated from the opening scenes of the film when the “scientists” gather to discuss how they plan to reach the moon; by having the scientists wear wizard hats, Melies is either poking fun at career scientists who studied astronomy, or has no intention to portray the main characters as realistic scientists, thereby defeating their credibility to produce a plan that actually has scientific significance. Furthermore, Melies, by having the launching of the bullet-like rocket done by show-girls pushing the rocket off the earth and onto the moon, does not try to adhere to scientific plausibility that was already obvious at the time the film was produced, forfeiting science for spectacle. Even in the film 2001: A Space Odyssey, which is classified as fantasy/science fiction, makes an effort to be realistic, including modern space-ships that at least appear to be functioning according to known laws of physics. When HAL 9000, the artificial intelligence system in the film, is introduced, it is done so in a way that conveys to the audience that technology has advanced to a point where AI such as HAL’s is possible through a TV interview. Additionally, the presence of aliens that inhabit the moon pushes A Trip to the Moon further away from science-fiction and into the fantasy genre. Other major productions that feature elaborate new habitats in outer space and feature aliens or non-human characters from another planet are often found to be classified as fiction or fantasy, like Star Wars and Star Trek; A Trip to the Moon, which features an established civilization of the Selenites living on the moon, should be classified in the same way. However, although A Trip to the Moon itself should not be considered a science-fiction, it is not unreasonable to call it the precursor to other science fiction films, as Melies sets the stage for human experiences in outer space and how society responds to those experiences and offers the creative precedent for outer-space as a film setting, a commonality which most science-fiction movies share.
ReplyDeleteI think A Trip to the Moon is the first science fiction film created. It is an unfair comparison to take the modern idea of science fiction and compare it to A Trip to the Moon. To say that its depictions of scientists is too fantastical to be science fiction, or to say that the explanation of the science is not in-depth enough to be science fiction is ridiculous. First off, to depict scientist as wizards does not mean the movie is not a science fiction movie. A movie is never limited to one genre, and to say that because it has elements of fantasy it is discredited as a science fiction film makes no sense. Even today, we have science fiction and fantasy films combined as one. The Avengers for example, has both science fiction and fantasy. There is Iron-man and The Hulk, both of which we would consider characters created by science fiction, but fighting alongside them is Thor, Norse god of thunder, obviously taken straight from fantasy. This does not make The Avengers any less of a science fiction movie it just adds to the movie in general. Keep in mind that before Méliès, the only science fiction around was in books, the subject had yet to be touched in the newborn film industry. When given context it makes sense that Méliès would heavily rely on what was familiar to him whilst he delved into a genre not yet explored cinematically. Secondly, the remark that the film does not go in-depth enough or the science is not believable is also not a reason that the movie should not count as science fiction. The movie is silent like all movies were at the time, so it is not as if Méliès could have one of the characters explain what was going on. In addition, if he were to focus more on the story and explain the science the only way he could do that is by inserting film that had writing on it which would take away from the fluidity of the movie. There for the movie had one simple theme instead of a full out story; the theme was going to the moon which at that time seemed as if it were science fiction. When seen from the context of period and the restraints of his filming capabilities I think it is safe to say that Méliès actually did end up producing the first science fiction film.
ReplyDelete“Fiction based on imagined future scientific or technological advances and major social or environmental changes, frequently portraying space or time travel and life on other planets” as stated by Google Dictionary science fiction does not revolve around what the scientists are wearing, rather it is the environment the scientists are in that makes it a science fiction film. Therefore, what the actors wear does not depict the seriousness or sobriety of the film. A Trip to the Moon does take the invention of the spaceship seriously. At the beginning, they show the thought process and all the theories the wizards have about making the spaceship, then the film continues to show the constructed spaceship, boarding of it and blasting off to the moon. When this particular film was created, going to the moon was absurd and had never been done before, but the imagined technological advances made the viewers believe the dream could be achieved; that going to another planet is possible. As we also see in the film, they invade a different social environment for they run into “aliens” portraying life on other planets, therefore creating more imagined science fiction. Consider the movie Avatar. The movie has a serious nature to it. Despite the actors being blue, the viewers take what is happening in the movie seriously. The environment or setting of the film is what creates the tone of the movie. We have never seen blue creatures, nor been in a capsule with our minds transferred to a different body, but that does not deter the viewer from understanding the concept of the film. It is all science fiction due to having all the components of a science fiction film.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.google.com/search?q=science+fiction+definition&rlz=1C1GGRV_enUS757US757&oq=science+fiction+def&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j0l4.2714j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
I truly believe that A Trip to the Moon should be considered a film in the science fiction genre. With the most popular of traditional science fiction films being George Lucas’ Star Wars saga and James Cameron’s Avatar, when I think of the features of what makes something science fiction or not, I think of the aspect of realism that is involved in the film, book, or other form of art. The first film that I can think of in that category is Steven Spielberg’s E.T. which has the obvious science fiction aspect with the involvements of aliens along with realistic elements of everyday present life as the setting. A Trip to the Moon has realistic aspects such as scientists working on a difficult problem and engineering the travel to space but some abstract elements with the Selenites and the depiction of the scientist/wizard characters. What really makes this film a science fiction film is that incorporation of fantasy with reality that Melies does with this classic. The different techniques between the two legendary directors, animatronics in E.T. and the introduction to stop motion film making with A Trip to the Moon are what make these films stand out from the rest in the science fiction genre. Therefore, I believe it is fair to call Georges Melies’ A Trip to the Moon a science fiction film, not a precursor to the genre but a beginning to using unique elements to increase the quality of filmmaking and movie watching in today’s modern world.
ReplyDeleteI believe that one could not call A Trip to the Moon a science fiction film because there is no actual science in it at all. I completely agree with Tom Gunning when he said, " 'Science' fiction implies a certain sobriety and serious concern with scientific and technological possibilities. . . . But Méliès cannot take his scientists seriously at all, introducing them first as wizards with pointy hats, figures out of fairy pantomime” (70). A Trip to the Moon is no more of a science fiction than any Harry Potter movies as there is no actual science in those movies as well. A good example of a science fiction movie would be The Martian. While the content in that movie is incredibly unlikely and borderline impossible, everything that takes place in the film was based on actual science. However, the same could not be said about A Trip to the Moon. Not once in the film can one find an actual scientific fact or even a formula. The ‘scientists’ are dressed as wizards, and it seems as though their ‘science’ for their rocket was just a diagram of their rocket. While I am not claiming that A Trip to the Moon is a bad film and was not groundbreaking in its time, I am claiming that it would be unfair to real science fiction films, such as The Martian, to put this movie in the same genre as theirs.
ReplyDelete