Guest essay by Phil Salmon (“ptolemy2”)
“When science had no shame, Part 1: Why are nearly all sci-fi movies fire-and-brimstone anti-science dystopia?”
(I repeat the title since on the mobile phone WUWT page, titles of articles appear to disappear after the first click – at least on my iPhone.)
This is the first of two articles under the title “When science had no shame”, which looks at how the movie genre of SciFi has transitioned balefully from celebrating science to damning it with fire-and-brimstone dystopia. The second article under the same title will look at the remarkable nineteenth century poem “Passage to India” by American poet Walt Whitman which looks back at an era when science had no shame and it was OK to be excited by humankind’s technological progress and the prize of a connected and united world.
A new Prohibition?
Are we living in a new prohibition era? A generation of straight-laced environmental puritans have been teaching us and our children to be ashamed of science and technology. The internal combustion engine, instead of an empowering transport technology connecting the world, is a guilty emitter of a demonized CO2. We are forbidden to take pride in rockets to space, which instead of being a fulfilment of an age old dream to soar and fly to other worlds, are connected to nuclear warheads and threaten our survival. We flip-flop absurdly between favoring petrol then diesel then petrol again for vehicle fuel as the pantheon of hero pollutants sashay and process in and out of fashion. Even light bulbs have become ensnared in a morass of guilt-laden virtue signaling.
For the self-appointed guardians of our environmental rectitude, technology is the new sex, business is the new gambling and CO2 the new alcohol. All strictly finger-wagging no-no’s. An eco-puritanical army pervading the political, academic and media establishments lash themselves into unceasing moral outrage in order to drive forward an agenda outlawing all three of these new moral evils.
In the above image (right) from the recent WUWT post about the “March for Science”, the 500 women (remember that “every measurement is a model”, and the image above input into an ensemble of multiparametric crowd-counting models gave us 500 – just saying…) marched, apparently, for science. They marched bearing placards purporting to show their respect and devotion to the scientific method. Although these placards broadcast intellectual snobbery and superiority – everyone disagreeing with us is an idiot – it is on one level still refreshing to see what looks like popular support for science and technology.
But how many of these (no doubt mostly well-meaning) ladyfolk realize how profoundly anti-science the AGW movement is, that they are supporting? Marching for science and at the same time for climate change alarmism, is as profound an inconsistency, even impossibility, as the 
in one of the placards. It really doesn’t add up.
While we can have fun with images like the ones above recalling prohibition zeal, it is notable that women often play a special motivating role whatever our society’s morality-de-jour happens to be. Often this is good, of course, when one thinks about the suffragettes campaigning for the female vote and anti-slavery campaigners. However the likes of Carrie A. Nation (image right) who liked to descend on saloons and bars with a hatchet pursuing her agenda of righteous indignation against alcohol, perhaps took moral crusading a little too far. We can only hope that we do not see an equivalent rise of what today would be rightly called terrorist acts, in support of protests against oil and gas pipelines, coal and nuclear power stations and scientists holding views skeptical of climate alarmism.
Prohibition’s history shows that, no matter how persuasive the moral case behind comprehensive censure, if in practice it proves unrealistically disruptive of economy and society, it will soon be discarded. The carbon prohibition is likely to go the same way as the alcohol one.
Why is nearly all Sci-Fi dystopian?
Anyway so much for pre-amble. For me and no doubt many here at WUWT, Sci-Fi is one of my favorite film genres. For that reason I find it deeply annoying that such a large majority of SciFi movies, when special effects veneer is peeled away, are little more than anti-technology Luddite tracts. Can’t we celebrate science anymore? Has SciFi become LuddFi? The blasted dystopian future-scapes that we view with monotonous regularity through theatrical off-stage blown mist, all communicate a not-so-subtle political message: if you don’t pay attention to our endless protest movements that are anti-science, anti-technology, anti-vaccine, anti-energy, anti that atom with the atomic number of the Beast, then look at all the bad stuff that’s heading your way! Only a small minority of SciFi movies rise above the rest and actually fulfil SciFi’s purpose, that is, to inspire us with the possibilities of science and technology – while also addressing its dangers and ambiguities but in a positive and hopeful spirit.
But rather than ranting on with my own prejudices, the purpose here is to set out my own list of forty or so SciFi movies of the last half century. These are somewhat randomly chosen from memory, and I have given my own brief assessment of the movie in terms of its underlying attitude to science, whether positive, negative or ambiguous. To this end I have divided them into three categories: the dystopian, which are anti-science and imply that science is leading us to a bad place; the hopeful, which show positive idealism toward science, and those I would describe as “half-and-half” – dystopian yet ambiguously hopeful in their message about science. Perhaps I am wrong about some of these films – I have not seen all of them. I hope that this provokes a discussion about people’s views on films, ones you love and hate, the important ones I have missed, and on their philosophical messages in relation to science, technology and human curiosity.
Category 1: Dystopia (science is leading us to a bad place).
| Soylent Green. | Trail-blazing dystopia. This 1973 classic is ahead of its time in positing fantastical CO2 global warming carnage to the environment. For the “science” story behind its blasted future-scape it plays with atmosphere and ocean like a baby playing with bricks. The moral of this story is that CO2 will turn us into cannibals. |
| James Bond | I have entered this as a single SciFi film since all the Bond movies ever made, with the exceptions of “On her majesty’s secret service” (both versions) and “Skyfall”, have one and the same story. MI6 sniffs something suspicious, Bond meets Dr Evil at a high-class social event, Bond finds and then trashes Dr Evil’s temple of doom. The Temple of doom always symbolizes high technology, perverse scientific idealism, clean efficient organization and psychopathic evil. Routine dystopia. |
| Children of Men | Routine dystopia, in an apocalyptic future becoming pregnant makes you an outlaw. |
| Avatar | Routine dystopia; brilliant future technology for space travel and mind transfer end up in the hands of corrupt corporate hacks. The protagonist returns heroically to the stone age. Corporations are bad, military is bad, technology is bad, trees are good. Fantastic effects and some decent acting but Luddite brainwashing nonetheless. |
| Minority Report | Routine dystopia; in this Tom Cruise vehicle paranormal future-seeing technology is exploited by a repressive totalitarian regime, which needless-to-say TC takes on and defeats single-handed. |
| Ex Machina | Nice movie but routine dystopia, a synthetic human kills and escapes. Mobile phone technology attacks. But at least it generates sympathy for the robot, and humans can be bad too. |
| Mad Max | Routine dystopia, a post-nuclear future, the earth turns into a ruined degenerate anarchic wild-west. |
| Gravity | Routine dystopia. Orbiting satellites and space craft destroyed in an urban-legend disintegration cascade, Hollywood racism alive and well in the 21st century as the Russians are the obligatory bad guys again. |
| Looper | Routine dystopia, future society is disintegrated, anarchic and crime dominated, the highest technology – time travel – in the hands of criminals. Cool roles by Bruce Willis and Emily Blunt and a clever time dichotomy, but reinforcing the technology-is-evil message. |
| Jurassic Park | Routine dystopia. Brilliant science rampages out of control immediately with mind-numbing predictability. |
| Transcendence | Routine dystopia and a criminally bad movie – literally. A blonde femme-fatale who murders scientists in protest against artificial consciousness becomes heroine. Advocates murder to stop technology. |
| Dr Strangelove | Routine dystopia, fountain of a generation’s technophobic one-liners. |
| Hunger Games | Routine dystopia with the added gruesome spectacle of gladiatorial fights by children. A post-nuclear dystopia in which a rural underclass is ruled by an urban elite with criminal hairstyles. Only Jennifer Lawrence can save the world. |
| Alien (all films including Prometheus series) | Dystopic with Oedipus complex. Psychopathic aliens with telescopic dentistry turn out to be the creation of an advanced race who also, it turns out, created us in the first place. Confused? I hate the unphysicality of aliens growing from the size of a prawn to the size of a cow with no apparent source of food to sustain such growth. Grrr! |
| Deja-Vu | Routine dystopia, albeit a great movie. Here the sense of technology-shame is tangible. Scientists who develop a method to loop time backwards by 4 days confess their guilty discovery under moral inquisition. Time travel technology saves the day but somehow remains the villain. |
| Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind | Routine dystopia. Zany Jim Carrey dystopia about memory editing technology, the little guy takes on the evil machine. |
| Surrogates | Routine absurd dystopia not even saved by Bruce Willis. |
| Never let me go | Routine dystopia, but artistically melancholic and good quality film-making. In a future society organs harvested from an underclass give the elite eternal life. |
| Dawn of the Planet of the Apes | Routine post-apocalyptic dystopia but great visual effects and story, newly sentient chimpanzees take on humans for world domination. |
| Arrival | Much heralded big budget SciFi turned out to be another dismal tract. Aliens show up and do nothing, but this is nowhere near the class of District 9. After a protracted quiz show about circular symbols, a bomb appears for no apparent reason. Anti-war cliché, preciously introspective, and pointless. |
| The Arrival | (Not the later “Arrival”); I had to include this as the worst ever sci-fi movie. Routine dystopia, aliens disguised as Mexicans try to heat up the world to their advantage by pumping CO2 into the atmosphere. (Yes, seriously!) |
| Brazil | Routine dystopia. The little guy against a future techno-totalitarian state flees persecution picking up leading lady en-route. |
| Empyrium | Routine dystopia. In yet another AGW-blasted future-scape, a rich elite inhabit an orbiting space station while an underclass inhabit a contaminated earth’s surface. Predictable, as bad cinematically as scientifically. |
| The 100 | OK a Netflix series not a film, but essentially the same story backdrop as Empyrium, with a similar verdict. Routine dystopia. Cinematically better but scientifically even worse; astonishing ignorance and inaccuracy about radioactivity, fallout and biological effects of radiation (“they’ve evolved to filter radiation out of their blood!”) A young cast easy on the eye but a plot of endless formulaic jumping between contrived dichotomies. |
| Event Horizon | Routine dystopia. In a bizarre mix of anti-science sci-fi and medieval religion, a spaceship approaches the event horizon only to pop unexpectedly into hell. Yes hell – complete with punishment for sin, Gothic decor and Sam Niell. |
| I am Legend | I am Will Smith. Routine dystopia. A bio scientist with posh London accent develops a cancer curing virus which turns most of the world’s population into demented killing machines. Another day in the office for Will Smith, saving the planet after technology goes disastrously out of control. |
| I, Robot | I, Will Smith. Routine dystopia. One more Will Smith ego-trip with the most clichéd anti-technology dystopian script imaginable. Robots attack, Will Smith saves the day, the end. |
| Moon | Routine dystopia; a corporation clones astronauts manning a lunar helium mine, until a heroic escape by one to earth leads to every progressive’s dream, the public damnation of the evil corporation in front of Congress. Technology bad, corporations bad, media hacks good. |
| V for Vendetta | Routine dystopia with – like transcendence – the disturbing sub-plot that terrorism is OK if the targets are “right wing”. Euro-leftist wishful thinking of an American collapse is combined with a formulaic virus apocalypse unleashed with wretched predictability by the go-to-movie-Satan USA. (Who did all this bad stuff? OMG what a total surprise it’s a secret branch of the CIA-US military!) The left are trying to get intellectually creative with this near-future right wing dictatorship under “Adam Sutler”, while in the real world the risk of dictatorship from the “progressive” left is demonstrably much greater. |
Category 2: Hopeful: SciFi positive about technology
| AI (Artificial intelligence) | A personal favorite, a powerfully refreshing break from routine sci-fi dystopia and an exception that proves the rule. Human society is failing to adapt to robots and becomes seized with violent anti-technology prejudice in a highly realistic portrayal of threatened human societies. Robots good, humans bad. A poignantly evocative role by the boy robot David and a great ending tinged with beauty and sadness. |
| Star Trek (all films) | Boldly going where no SciFi has gone before or since – wonderfully refreshingly positive and imaginative science-technology idealism, penned by the great Gene Roddenberry. |
| The Martian | An exception and great movie – realistic technology and a rarity for Hollywood, a gripping and highly believable sci-fi adventure. Based on real and good science and technology practically all accessible today. |
| District 9 | Cool movie, visiting high-tech aliens are the victims, humans doing what humans do are the bad guys. The portrayal of the MSM being swept up passively in politically driven prejudice and violent repression is noteworthy. Great twist at the end, hope there’s a sequel. |
| The Fifth Element | This Luc Besson film is a heart-warming extravaganza of exotic techno-futurism wonderfully devoid of political messages except that “love is the fifth element”. Another with Bruce Willis – his films are in all three of our categories. |
3 Half and half (dystopia but with some positivity about technology)
| 2001 a Space Odyssey | While human technical progress is apparently celebrated, with a famous musical score and inspiring visual effects, once the plot gets going technology is the villain, as Hal the computer is evil and kills people. |
| Star Wars | Classical cinematic story-telling that is great for all ages, and clever enough for the dystopia to be subversive. On one level it creates an inspiring and attractive galaxy-scape of shiny technology and an interplanetary community. But why does every Empire spaceship look so sleek and cool, while every rebel craft appears to have been make of cereal boxes and toilet rolls? The more technology, the more evil. And the repetitive kill-the-death-star endings are mere James Bond fare. |
| 12 Monkeys | Classic Bruce Willis, dystopia but with a twist. Biological warfare nearly annihilates humanity but with time travel there is a chance to save it. |
| Blade Runner | The backdrop is routine dystopia, a technology-blasted futurescape. However the film, increasingly recognized as one of the best SciFi of all time, develops another dimension in which the question emerges “are humans really any better than replicants?” In the end a very cool movie, rich in ambiguity, in which robots are treated sympathetically as they are hunted down by humans including one – Harrison Ford – who it turns out might actually be replicant. |
| Interstellar | Ambiguous. The backdrop is routine dystopia, humans killed the earth by climate change (yawn). However interstellar space-craft technology provides possible salvation. We find out that a black hole is actually a supermassive library. |
| Terminator | Routine dystopia but with a sting in the tail: Computers go self-aware and try to destroy humans but some robots (especially ones looking like Arnold Schwarznegger) change sides to help out their human friends. |
| Robocop | This Paul Verhoeven cyberpunk SciFi is set in a dystopic crime-ridden future, however the protagonist is a prosthetically recreated human – the robocop – who is portrayed sympathetically as the hero lawman who tries to reconnect with a former humanity. |
| Tomorrowland | Mix of routine dystopia with positivity and optimism about technology. An amusing introduction parodying manic dystopia and technology-phobia in teachers and society at large, probably guaranteed this film damning reviews in a climate of anti-technology puritanism. Schrödinger-like, reality flickers between a bright optimistic technological future and a darkly dystopic techno-apocalypse. With two wonderful child-teenager acted roles as well as quirky acting by George Clooney and High Laurie. |
Final Score:
Dystopia: 29
Positive: 5
Half-and-half: 8
A small point; “Arrival” is based on Ted Chiang’s short story “Story of Your Life.” And his story is everything that Science Fiction ought to be. So the problem is clearly Hollywood.
More fantasy than scifi, however, The Lord of the Rings trilogy is a screed against industrial technology.
The hippie Hobbits idyllic pastoral life is threatened by dark forces based on technology, symbolized as enslaving magic.
Saruman receives an especially bad rap despite providing industry and employment to countless Orcs who otherwise experienced discrimination by hobbits, humans, elves and dwarfs
The movies were pretty. I was seriously into the novels as a young teenager, and the somewhat artificial distinction I would make between SF and fantasy is the author in fantasy depending on a plot element he knows is impossible. Tolkien was anti-technology, but what he really rejected was genetics and evolutionary biology.
The Elves and Humans were interfertile, but much longer lived and immune to disease. In that sort of Medieval situation, one should end up with almost nothing but a mostly Elf population. Instead, it was the Men , the “Southrons” taking over. A rather racist fantasy in retrospect.
“The movies were pretty. I was seriously into the novels as a young teenager, and the somewhat artificial distinction I would make between SF and fantasy is the author in fantasy depending on a plot element he knows is impossible.”
Not only did the author know the plot element was impossible, so did this reader, and this reader doesn’t care to read about impossible plots, this reader wants to read about possible plots.
Science fiction magazines died, imo, when they started including fantasy stories, although I suppose they could have been dying before that and the addition of fantasy stories was an attempt to increase readership.
When I first started reading science fiction magazines, there were no fantasy stories in them, and I read every story with gusto. Then they started including fantasy, and I read some of it but it wasn’t my cup of tea, so instead of reading all the stories in the science fiction magazine, there would be two or three fantasy stories that I would skip, and I’m betting a lot of other people skipped them, too, and it wasn’t too long before the science fiction magazines were no more.
So many good stories in those magazines. I consider myself lucky to have grown up during that era and having these wonderful stories to inspire me and open my mind to things I had never considered before. Thanks to all those science fiction writers of old. I read you all, and got enormous value from doing so.
Hiro, Tom
I agree with your take on Tolkein. He did reject modernity and looked to a medieval utopia. Despite his meticulous construction, Middle Earth wasn’t really believable and the elves, humans, dwarves and orcs didn’t work as credible societies. The orcs were dangerously close to being a deeply racist characterisation. But the utopia aimed for by CS Lewis went even further back, to Arthurian England, as he openly revealed in “That Hideous Strength”. Sad as it is to say this (for me for I deeply liked the books of both Tolkein and Lewis) they both rejected modern technological society, allegorising it negatively. Both were reactionary escapists taking refuge in nostalgia – although brilliant story-tellers.
I think Tolkien is much more complex than that. The Elves and the men of Numenor are steeped in technology. Indeed Elvish military technology is second to none, plus all the rings of power are all Elvish technology that Sauron hi-jacked for his own purposes by creating the One Ring to control them, which from recall he learned how to do when disguised as fair and working with the Elves themselves. He was not able to create this high technology on his own. And there are other subtle themes. For instance the great emphasis on race, language and culture all changing plus branching as the eons pass is an acknowledgement of the power of evolution (a scientific fact). And the inability of the Elves (and Numenor) to hold back time and change indefinitely is a warning that the possession of high technology doesn’t halt evolution or insulate us from its effects in the long term (a truth that more explicitly, science is only just coming to grips with). Also, the Orcs are not a natural race but created (or at least perverted), and as such their characteristics are not about racism but a statement about that creation act and its consequences. Their severe lack of diversity, production line birth (especially Saruman’s Orc-men), plus the very narrow and shallow mono-culture of the ‘baddies’ generally, is a warning that in both biology and culture, narrowness spells great danger and is a very bad way to go, especially if heavily enforced (widespread cloning and heavy propaganda would be real-word equivalents).
In this context neither side could truly exist in isolation. They are deliberate distillations. I think maybe the Elves and Numenoreans represent the best of science and what it may do for us, and the Orcs and Sauron represent the worst of science and what it may do unintentionally that we really didn’t want, with *both* subject to the overwhelming power of evolution (even the Elves have to bend and change, and ultimately give up, plus the Numenoreans accept death, in the face of infinite time and change that cannot be held off, and the thing that brings down Sauron and his huge mono-culture, is that he didn’t foresee that evolution would eventually throw up the modest Hobbits, who were below his attention as they seemed inconsequential, yet were resistant to the Ring; so no power can overcome evolution). While the Hobbits seem to represent an agricultural idyll, there is again more subtlety; in the above context they are an agent for change and the erosion of dominance (of *both* sides, they spelt the end of the Elves in Middle Earth). Plus they are famously down-to-Earth, an anti-dote to drama and propaganda both. Maybe modern fairy stories like *the certainty* of imminent climate calamity would have little impact on them. Plus they are clearly on a developmental trajectory – they have forsaken armour and fancy princes and feudalism and medieval existence. Instead they have Mayors and good books and good food from what must clearly be modern (18th C at least) farming techniques, from their amazing productivity. They like good food and good books and a pint or three and quiet *suburbia*. Think of all those well-appointed Hobbit holes with silver spoons and best tea services – manufactured goods! They are perhaps the compromise here – not at the extremes of either the best or the worst of science.
And there is yet more to unravel in Tolkein, a truly deep set of work. The Silmarils are a highly interesting conundrum – something that is amazing yet can only be made once, and not remade ever by any power. There is a message here too I think, maybe it is to do with the applicability or power of certain ideas *in their time*, which as societies evolve may still be regarded as brilliant, and yet at the same time no longer have power as scenarios change. Answers on a post card…
P.S. here is a free sci-fi and skeptical cli-fi story rolled into one. The sci-fi part is just a vehicle to see cultural edifices for what they are, in a very literal way, and in the current era one particularly stands out…
https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/273983
You may have missed my earlier comment, but the fantastic element in The Lord of the Rings was biology, not technology per se. The “dark age” theme of losing technical tools is part of the plot, but the notion of the Half-Elven declining in population is relying on early 19th Century notions of genetics, and is much more essential to the created world. If Tolkien did use modern genetics, there would have been almost nothing left but Half-Elven.
P.P.S. a characteristic of the One Ring, which is translating the wearer into an alternate reality (the spirit domain, i.e. that of cultural not physical meanings), is common to the ability acquired by the soldier in the above story.
Tom:
Sorry I did miss your comment above. I think this interpretation is too literal. The erosion of the half-elven (and indeed the full elves themselves in the sense of a population staying / breeding in Middle Earth) is likely a metaphor. I think it stands for the fact no technology (of any sort biological or otherwise) can hold off time or hold off evolutionary change, or death, as the Numenoreans once tried to do on their original island home. Any race that tries to preserve itself unchanged in form and by whatever technology no matter how powerful (including genetic skill we don’t yet possess),will eventually fall prey to evolutionary change, or diminish *relative to* the expanding outside bio-world, or both in some measure.
I’m not sure Tolkein was too concerned about real mechanisms in this metaphor. But at any rate the men of Numenor were not so much dying off as bred out by more vigorous (high fertility) races. Hence some of their characteristics would remain detectable in the wider population for long after (this is explicitly mentioned), in the same way we all have a few Neanderthal genes still in us. This has some interesting parallels with the longer lifespan yet falling birth rates in some Western nations now, and the corresponding growth dependency upon immigration. But I doubt such was a conscious consideration, especially considering the date of writing. Plus I’m not sure your theory holds. The Numenoreans were not immune to disease (and low fertility would make it harder for them to evolve around it), plus even the Elves were not – Tolkien makes the point that no-one is invulnerable – if you create apparent physical immunity the evolutionary vulnerability merely moves to the cultural domain. Another parallel that is now being examined more in the real world. The elves had severe cultural malaise, a complete obsession with past times and past glories – perhaps a metaphor for the culture of empire. If a population doesn’t breed because they don’t culturally care too, they will be overtaken big time (and indeed diminish in real terms because the Elves were constantly involved in wars – and not just against Orcs – but for many millennia between themselves and the dwarves in early Middle Earth and the times of the quarrels over the Silmarils and other feuds). Even the ‘good’ Numenoreans, after the Fall, shared a good dollop of this cultural malaise, this was ultimately the cause of the weakness and suicide of the Steward of Gondor, Faramir and Boromir’s father. Suicide is not good for maintaining a population either 😉
Tolkien’s middle earth stories are quests where the hero goes on a mission and has to defeat or overcome numerous challenges. Classic tales of good versus evil. The Hobbits, the least warlike, most gentle race had to overcome their weaknesses and fears to succeed.
I think Tolkien was a great storyteller, but he did use a rather racist story line. Of course, I would expect that of a Brit born in the 19th Century. Not being a racist would have been truly remarkable for someone of his backround.
Yes Tolkien like anyone is a product of his times, but his work is complex and with many balances and tensions. Sweeping generalizations turn out not always to be well-founded. The work has enormous scope and has folded in both racist and anti-racist elements. An example of the latter is the attempt by the Numenoreans to maintain racial purity, which is unambiguously portrayed as a very negative thing that ends up severely undermining them.The hero of the kingship kin-strife at the peak of this affair is the half-Numenorean Eldacar, while the villain is the pure-blooded Castamir.
http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Racism_in_Tolkien%27s_Works
Tolkien flatly stated the Lord of the Rings series was not a metaphor for anything. Whatever one reads into it is their own interpretation, not his intent.
Tolkien denied the LotR story as a whole was allegorical, and some specific allegories such as WWII and Nazism. That doesn’t rule out many metaphorical devices and symbolism and some real-word parallels within (both consciously and unconsciously framed). Tolkien himself says in a letter that the Ring symbolized “the will to mere power”. In other letters he stressed the role of the Valar as representing environmental stewards (a real-world concern he has), and of course various metaphorical devices (especially in the invented creation myth, The Silmarillion) are shared with real creation myths such as light = good / truth, dark = bad / untruth. Christopher Tolkien also relates that his father said the ring represented ‘the ultimate machine’. In a letter to Milton Waldman, Tolkien says: ‘The Lord of the Rings’ is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision. That is why I have not put in, or have cut out, practically all references to anything like ‘religion’, to cults or practices, in the imaginary world. For the religious element is absorbed into the story and the symbolism.’ (see wikiquote). But of course there is always much interpretation too of a work so wide in scope, and also no author can know the true origin of all that he / she creates.
What Tolkien d@nied in 1961 was that LotR was an anti-communist parable, in which Sauron was Stalin.
IMO Tollien was not a racialist, as the term was in his day. Quite the opposite. I don’t know that he ever expressed an opinion on non-Europeans, but he was horrified by the treatment of “coloured” people in South Africa, by which I supposed he meant Cape Coloureds (Afrikaans speakers of mixed European, African and Asian ancestry), “Bushmen” and Bantus alike, but presumably not Asians.
Some have tried to read racialist thought into his early work, which isn’t surprising given the prevalence of such ideology in pre-Great War Britain, and indeed even during the interwar years, as exemplified by N@zi sympathizers such as King Edward VIII.
I saw “Forbidden Planet” in the movie theatre, first run, and I’ve been a sci-fi fan ever since. I suffer, however, from a disability to suspend disbelief, so I sit there nit-picking movies and books. It’s a curse.
I do the same thing. But only with movies that are consciously trying to be “accurate”. It’s ironic- the harder they try, the more nit-picky I am.
It’s not a curse, we just have very high standards. In addition to the technical nit-picking, I also remember what each overpaid asshole onscreen said during the last election. I really don’t want to enrich most of them, so I just wait for them to get to television. If something really interesting (story-wise) comes out there is always the internet.
“Forbidden Planet” was inspired by Shakespeare’s “The Tempest”, which in turn was inspired by the 1609 hurricane which stranded colonists headed to Jamestown, Virginia on Bermuda. The shipwrecked passengers included my ancestor John Rolfe, who, with the help of his wife Matoaka “Pocahontas” Powhatan, saved Virginia by inflecting tobacco on the English, much to the disgust of King James I.
Most stories are inspired by someone else’s story. Same goes for music. Same goes for science…..nothing new there.
That “inspired by Shakespeare’s Tempest” theme keeps popping up. I think it must have been originated by someone only superficially acquainted with both.
The similarities are that a father and daughter in an isolated place are visited by a ship. That’s it.
Why they are in this isolated place and the why and who of the ship are completely different.
Mike,
There’s a lot more to it than that. It’s not a controversial connection among Shakespeare scholars, except for Muir (see below).
The “visitors” are ship-wrecked, as were the well-publicized “Sea Venture” survivors, as the fact of a storm in the play’s title ought to have tipped you off. The subsequent conflict between Sir Thomas Gates and Sir George Somers also is reflected in the play. That the New World was in WS’s mind is suggested by one of the most famous passages from “The Tempest” (Act V, Scene I, ll. 203–206):
“O wonder!
How many goodly creatures are there here!
How beauteous mankind is! O brave new world,
That has such people in’t.”
A recent paper on the topic:
William Strachey’s “True Reportory” and Shakespeare: A Closer Look at the Evidence
http://muse.jhu.edu/article/248174
William Strachey’s “A True Reportory of the Wracke and Redemption of Sir Thomas Gates, Knight”, is an eyewitness account of the real-life shipwreck of “Sea Venture” in 1609 on Bermuda while sailing towards Virginia. It is considered by most critics to be one of Shakespeare’s primary sources because of certain verbal, plot and thematic similarities. Although not published until 1625, Strachey’s report, one of several describing the incident, is dated 15 July 1610, and critics say that Shakespeare must have seen it in manuscript sometime during that year.
E.K. Chambers (1866-1954) identified the “True Reportory” as Shakespeare’s “main authority” for “The Tempest”, and the modern Arden editors say Shakespeare “surely drew” on Strachey (and Montaigne) for specific passages in the play.
There has been, however, some skepticism about the alleged influence of Strachey in the play, notably from Kenneth Muir (1907-96). But another “Sea Venture” survivor, Sylvester Jourdain, also published a report likely to have been read by WS. Edmond Malone (1741-1812) argued for the 1610–11 date due to Jourdain’s “A Discovery of The Barmudas”, dated 13 October 1610, and to the Virginia Council of London’s “A True Declaration of the Estate of the Colonie in Virginia”, dated 8 November 1610.
But then again, it’s possible that your opinion is better informed than that of 250 years worth of majority Shakespeare scholarship. Based upon your comment, however, which overlooks so many similarities, I’m inclined to conclude not.
Not to mention Caliban, so close to Carib and cannibal, the word derived from that tribe.
Granted, Bermuda isn’t in the Caribbean, but natives of the New World were known to be cannibals in 1610 Europe.
A number of WS’ plays were written to cash in on current events, such as MacBeth for the accession of James I and VI of Scotland, and Julius Caesar reflecting concern over Elizabeth’s then lack of a designated successor.
Chimp, et al.
Thanks for all the info on The Tempest. Here’s some on Forbidden Planet.
Morbius was on Altair 4 because he wanted to be there, not because he was unjustly exiled. He was alone with his daughter (who was born on Altair 4, not exiled with him) because a strange presence on the planet frightened the other colonists, who tried to leave on their ship, the Bellerophon. The ship was destroyed, likely unwittingly by Morbius due to his contact with the Krell technology as the colony’s philologist.
The C-57D rescue ship was not populated by evil-doers who had done Morbius harm, but by a military crew sent to evaluate the colony and rescue anyone who might need it. Morbius was not a magician who lured the ship to land, but instead warned them away from the planet. Nor did Morbius encourage a match between his daughter and one of the C-57D crew.
All the human motivations in the two stories run opposite to each other. The only “spirit” on the planet is the Krell technology that has latched onto Morbius, and his id, as the only directing force it can find. The technology has the power of creation, witness the tiger (that J.J. Adams vaporizes) and a monkey (not in the movie) that don’t have any internal organs.
The Tempest/Forbidden Planet linkage is weak, but like so many bad connections these days, very persistent.
Mike, regarding the Tempest/Forbidden Planet comparison:
Morbius isn’t evil, just as Prospero isn’t evil. In the Tempest, the Island has become Prospero’s domain, because of his magic powers. In FP, the planet has become Morbius’ domain, because of his seemingly magic-like control over pieces of the Krell Technology. (Remember Clarke’s dictum – any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic)
The Tempest has a demon who can be summoned by Prospero, and who works evil that Prospero doesn’t wish – Caliban. FP has a demon who is summoned by Morbius who works evil that Morbius doesn’t wish – the Monster from the ID. Prospero also has good and faithful magical servants, who do wonderful things for him. Morbius has good and faithful technological servants, who do wonderful things for him. (Robbie the Robot)
At the end of the Tempest, Prospero lays down his magic powers and passes away. (death is not specified, but assumed) At the end of FP, Morbius renounces his control of the Krell Tech and accepts his own death.
And of course, a father/daughter relationship, with an awakening daughter finding that she is ready to break away from a controlling father, being the central dramatic element to the story.
It’s not that surprising to see one as inspired by the other.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors,
As I foretold you, were all spirits, and
Are melted into air, into thin air:
And like the baseless fabric of this vision,
The cloud-capp’d tow’rs, the gorgeous palaces,
The solemn temples, the great globe itself,
Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve,
And, like this insubstantial pageant faded,
Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff
As dreams are made on; and our little life
Is rounded with a sleep.
As was STTOS’s episode “Requiem for Methuselah.”
Mike McMillan May 12, 2017 at 9:32 pm
Sorry, but I’m with WWS on this one. That the ultimate messages might differ doesn’t mean that the screenwriters weren’t inspired by (or copied from) The Tempest.
https://falconmovies.wordpress.com/2014/05/13/forbidden-planet-1956-is-really-the-tempest-by-shakespeare/
On science and magic, quoting Arthur C. Clarke’s famous quip.
http://www.123helpme.com/view.asp?id=17255
Scholarly study:
http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1214&context=clcweb
The screenwriter’s bio also IMO suggests the connection:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_Hume
“Hume was a graduate of Yale University, where he edited campus humor magazine The Yale Record. He was an editor of the collection The Yale Record Book of Verse: 1872-1922 (1922).”
Of course, the inspiration for the movie is a separate issue from Shakespeare’s inspiration by the actual hurricane and shipwreck, which IMO is strongly supported.
Perhaps you should stick to non-fiction!
Having said that, a lot of what’s written on this site is fiction. And I’m not talking about AGW.
AGW is indeed fictitious, since there is no evidence in its favor. While it might still be theoretically possible, the actual climate system is too complex for it to be measurable, if it exist.
Since I nit-pick, let me do so on some of the list.
Avatar – Immediate turn-off when I see some soldiers sneering at a vet in a wheelchair. That would Never happen, only in the mind of a Hollywood lefty who thinks nothing is worth putting your life on the line for, and thinks even less of those who have done so.
Giovanni Ribisi explaining the anti-grav properties of Upsydaisyum to people who mine it for a living. That’s up there with Bryant explaining to Deckard what Replicants are.
And then there’s the brilliant tactics used in the “bombing mission.” Fly low, fly slow, so guys on dragons can mess you up.
Ex Machina – Loved the transparency fx. Sloow film, even for a psychological thriller. The most notable thing is that the good guy (Domhnall Gleeson) and bad guy (Oscar Isaac) swap places for their roles in the Star Wars “The Force Awakens” movie.
Dr Strangelove – Great film, but a B-52 with only two nukes on board? What a waste of JP-4. And anyone who scribbled “Hi There” on a nuke would be in Ft Leavenworth forever, along with some of his chain of command, and the rest would be out of work.
The interior of the B-52 wasn’t right, but it was dead perfect in conveying the feel of one. And was that last “We’ll meet again” scene inspirational, or what!?
Cameron forgot his own dictum: “Nuke it from orbit, it’s the only way to be sure.”
The paralyzed vet in “Avatar” is a Marine. Even worse. Cameron is universally despised among Marines.
As for “Strangelove”, on such a long-range mission, with a low attack profile, the B-52 might well have carried only two bombs. The BUFF which crashed on NC in 1961 had two Mark 39 bombs on board.
You’re right about the interior scenes, which still are great however for using source lighting. The dialogue is also made up. But it’s easy to see why Kubrick couldn’t have found retired USAF personnel to help him achieve verisimilitude.
Yowee – those old crones – would frighen the dead!
Now, if Temperancettes looked like Pamela Tiffin and Lee Remick in “Hallelujah Trail”, the message might get some response.
http://snarkymoviereviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/The-Hallelujah-Trail-19654-300×220.jpg
Yes another tough day in the office for John Wayne!
The lucky leading man in that epic was Burt Lancaster. But point taken.
;The Duke preferred Latinas.
I stand corrected!
And Wayne wasn’t really in to girls off film.
Patrick,
That would have come as a surprise to his many wives, mistresses, girlfriends and children. His second wife (all three of whom were Latinas, as were some of his GFs) tried to kill him over his on-set affair with Gail Russell.
His Spanish was excellent. For him, it was the language of love.
As it was for Buzz Lightyear
Just commenting on a picture. The first time I saw that picture – “Lips that touch liquor shall not touch ours,” the first thought that crossed my mind was who would be desperate enough to want to, and went and mixed a stiff drink.
A definite catch 22.
They might look better after a few drinks …
What about The Forbin Project?
Top dystopia plot development initially masked as technology saves the day. Superb stuff.
D.F. Jones wrote three books: “Colossus,” “The Fall of Colossus,” and “Colossus and the Crab.” (I haven’t read the final volume in the trilogy yet.) I guess the movie didn’t do well enough for the usual sequels.
Jim
“Open the pod bay doors please HAL”….
For me, “Fail Safe” is one of the finest technology dystopia movies ever made.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Nzij8x-604
I like Stanley Kubrick’s version of that movie much, much better!.
“We’ll meet again some sunny day!”
Hahahahahaha…..Aye, General Jack D. Ripper……
Best line from “Strangelove,” when the Russian is explaining how they built their Doomsday Device in response to the ones the Americans were secretly building. When the President protests that the US was doing no such thing, the Russian replies, “We read about it in the New York Times.”
James, hahahahaha….aye…it’s up there among many others.
This is the best line.
“GENTLEMEN’!…You can’t fight in here, this is the War Room!”.
That might be my fav, too, although will admit to being partial to, “A fella could have hisself a good time in Vegas”. But maybe that’s cuz I happen to have known Slim Pickens.
Slim once went hunting CO. Before leaving the state, he stopped off at a store selling hunting licenses. He asked for a camel license. The clerk told him there weren’t any camels in CO. Slim replied that there weren’t any elk either, but that didn’t stop them from selling licenses to hunt them.
Henry Fonda’s resolution of the problem was one of the stupidest ideas ever to come from a Hollywood script writer. He could have chosen the O’bama solution and just surrendered.
Lol….. An additional fun fact with Fail Safe is it also involves evil rooskie cyber interference. Just to make it topical and Putin was only an infant when this was made…Wattaguy!
Only the packaging seems to change.
People who write screenplays are English majors or otherwise think like English majors, and believe in intuitive reasoning (I think it, therefore it is true). Good science, business, engineering, etc. is deductive (based upon observed facts) rather then intuitive.
A couple of candidates
“Armageddon” where technology and Bruce Willis save the Earth. Definitely a positive.
John Carpenters “Dark Star” a half and half as a bomb achieves self realisation as being a bomb it has to explode.
Armageddon would indeed be another one in the positive-about-technology category. And the meteors could never be portrayed as anthropogenic.
Oh the mind boggles as to anthropogenic heavenly bodies. As the asteroid Anastasia and the Kuiper Kristiana ( being a pairing of Danish and Swedish speaking detective rocks) foil the attempt of Carlos the Comet to assassinate the French President. They are gravity assisted by the trans-planet Pluto and the strong feminist Selene ( the Moon) avoiding the inhibiting patriachal dominance of the solar wind.
Have I ticked enough boxes to be socially acceptable?
“And the meteors could never be portrayed as anthropogenic.”
Don’t bet on that.
I was reading an astronomy article today about galaxies and you should see the anthropogenic attributes the writer gives to galaxies. You would think galaxies were sentient beings, reading this magazine.
Treating inanimate objects as if they have human traits and thoughts is a real irritation to me. I don’t know why astronomers do this, but they do, and they should stop doing it, imo. 🙂 You can describe a galaxy without using all the human hyperbole.
I’m surprised no one has mentioned Stargate SG-1. One episode was a rip-off of “Armageddon,” and they used the ship’s hyperdrive to jump the asteroid safely “through” the Earth.
Jim
“London247 May 12, 2017 at 1:59 pm
John Carpenters “Dark Star” a half and half as a bomb achieves self realisation as being a bomb it has to explode.”
I believe that scene has a more religious/God connotation. Where the bomb, who speaks with an Irish accent, determines it is a bomb and must explode, but before doing so it says “Let there be light!”
while The 100 is ON netflix its not a netflix series, its a CW series.
Phil, interesting post, so thanks for that. You might like to check out the Socionomics Institute, particularly the History’s Hidden Engine Documentary under the Basics tab. Your commentary fits their hypothesis quite nicely.
I think the dystopian SF movies says more about what the movie producers think is possible to make. than the general quality of the available SF stories to utilise. The Vast majority of SF books are good and positive. but has until recently been very difficult to visualise. I think AVATAR proved that any story can now be made into a movie. using enough computer power to render images. I would like to see Lazarus Long , Honor Harrington, Dominic Flandry, Miles Vorkosigan and Hari Seldon on the Big screen.
“I think AVATAR proved that any story can now be made into a movie. using enough computer power to render images. I would like to see Lazarus Long , Honor Harrington, Dominic Flandry, Miles Vorkosigan and Hari Seldon on the Big screen.”
Someone who knew what they were doing could make a lot of money making good science fiction movies. There are thousands of good science fiction stories that could be adapted to the screen. But that would take someone who knew what they were doing.
“AVATAR” should have been named “Dances with Smurfs”.
And one of the worst parts is that the entire idea of their ridiculous, defying the laws of physics world is that it was ripped off from one of my old Yes album covers. Yeah, that’s what passes for “deep thought” in the Avatar Universe.
Sadly, if “Ringworld” were made today, someone would call it a “Halo” ripoff…
The trouble with good Sci-Fi is that it is too much itself. For example, how would you go about casting Miles Vorkosigan? He’s not quite five feet tall and subtly deformed due to his brittle-bone disease, and that’s a huge part of his character. A movie version of him would effectively have to ditch all that as requiring too much make up, special effects, and above all, exposition, and replace it with something else. Immediately you have a totally different story.
Movies are actually a very clumsy medium. In every case you mention, our memories of the book are going to overshadow the film – or worse, the film is going to contaminate our memories.
All the same, I’d love to see movie adaptations of Bester’s The Stars My Destination and the Demolished Man! (If we can just keep Vin Diesel from playing Gully Foyle…)
As long as they do not do an “I, Robot” number on the Foundation series.
Minority Report is not paranormal technology exploited by totalitarian regime- it is regular US government exploited by high official. Tom Cruise doesn’t really change everything by himself rather he sets politics in motion to overrule science.
V for Vendetta was not a Science Fiction movie. It was set in an alternate history but it can more accurately be called a dystopian political thriller. The USA is mentioned in the movie but had nothing to do with most of the sub plot which involved the British government using a deadly virus against its own citizens to gain control and subvert its people. The USA is held up by the corrupt government as an example of failure but the stories that the British people are told are mostly lies and propaganda. A lot like what North Koreans are told about the USA. Did you even see the movie?
District 9 is strongly anti-tech- aliens come with advanced technology and basically hopeless in every way unable to look after themselves or on Earth-they skip right over the expected normal response to first contact- it would be a media firestorm if public as shown and every media agent in the world would want to “help” the aliens or if private- held by military then they’d at least in a decent government building. They would not be in slum in South Africa rather in a 5 five hotel.
The aliens in District 9 were slaves on an automated transport that malfunctioned and landed on earth. They were helpless.
District 9 is sci-fi doing what H.G. Wells always wanted it to do – using futuristic story lines to examine real social problems in our world today.
There’s a reason District 9 is set in South Africa – and its the same reason that the aliens are portrayed as having been deprived of all of their natural leaders, and are now just herded into camps and treated like animals. It’s not very hard to figure out.
I think District 9 is really about South Africa and apartheid. Distric 6 was an area of Cape Town occupied by a racially mixed population, mainly ‘Cape Coloureds’, and cleared for new (white) housing.
http://tvo.org/video/programs/the-agenda-with-steve-paikin/cli-fi
I think Serenity and its preceding Firefly series was excellent and not dystopian. I also think there’s an interesting comparison between its Alliance and the original Star Trek’s Federation. One was good and the other not-so-good for independent thinkers.
Error in your description of V for Vendetta.
The virus was NOT unleashed by the Americans. It was released by Sutler and his band of cronies, as both a way to take America out of the picture and as a false flag so they could blame the Americans for their own local (British) release of the virus.
Sheesh.
Any opinions on The Thing (1982) and The Thing From Another World (1951); both based on a John Campbell story I believe?
I believe it was the story “Who Goes There?”
Yes, and it was written in 1938 and set in Antarctica. The loneliness and isolation of that place at that time must have been tremendous, and Campbell nailed it in his short story. It was almost as if they were on another planet.
Some dystopian sci fi is not anti-tech per se, but is anti-tech when it is in the wrong hands, as judged by the author. This might either be anti-coporation or anti-government. In today’s movies it tends to be anti-capitalist. Star Trek is the best example of pro-tech and pro-government. I suppose Heinlein would be the best example of pro-tech, anti-government, as in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, for example. Green ideology tends to be anti-tech and pro-government, and since this seems to be the dominant ideology of film makers today, that is what we get. I myself love Star Trek more than any other big sci fi franchise, even though I am a libertarian and think most of its portrayals of economics and government are unrealistic, even for a sci fi universe.
>>
I myself love Star Trek more than any other big sci fi franchise, even though I am a libertarian and think most of its portrayals of economics and government are unrealistic, even for a sci fi universe.
<<
Not to mention the unlikely possibility of various aliens from different planets being able to mate and produce fertile offspring. I do think a NG episode tried to address that problem.
Jim
“The Chase” – season 6, episode 20. Where they find an ancient race seeded many of the planets in the quadrant with its own DNA.
Star Trek is supposed to take place in an economy of abundance, brought on by nearly free energy. As opposed to our real world economy of scarcity.
As such, it’s not valid to compare its “economics” to your economics, since they were intended to literally have no common basis. You’re trying to judge apple quality with a measuring device designed for oranges.
There are lots of things to criticize in the Star Trek “universe”, but that is probably not one of them.
Deep Space Nine took a few shots at how the Federation was seen by other species. This is a good example: Jake Sisko wants to bid on an autographed baseball for his Dad, but how to do so in a moneyless culture? Answer (try to) borrow money from a culture that does!
https://youtu.be/Wx5I7uEEEYo
Babylon 5 showed a (mostly) positive outcome. Not particularly dystopian. It was the best (IMHO) depiction of a very large interstellar war, multiple species, and the aftermath. Cheers –
Except that in interstellar war, the opponents are unlikely to be well-matched species. The more technologically advanced species is liable to be as far removed from its opponent as humans are from ants. Not that ants aren’t formidable in their own way. They might have evolved biological or chemical warfare, too.
But that’s not how interstellar war is portrayed in Babylon 5.
Wars between technologically unmatched species aren’t very fun to watch. Nobody pays to watch the Terminex man chase the termites.
True.
The bugs in Starship Troopers can fight back.
A very underrated series of tv programs & films, a real Space Opera.
Arrival is far more sensible than District 9. Aliens would far more likely to Earth and do nothing because they don’t understand us and we don’t understand them- that theme is brought the plot.
Two more movies would be “The Blob” and the original “Time Machine” movie.
Both movies were exciting and scary to me. Of course, I was pretty young then, so was easily impressed. 🙂
Anyone else wonder if a person in a time machine going into the future would just look like a person sitting very still for a very long time?
I enjoyed the Blob too.
And “Klatu barada nikto!
There’s an amazing amount of information packed into those three words:
“grab the girl and put her in ship,” “find Klatu,” “get Klatu,” “restore Klatu’s life,” and “don’t let anyone see you–except the girl.”
If the three-word code was prearranged, why didn’t they prearrange the response without needing the girl? Why wasn’t the giant, slow-walking robot not seen? Why didn’t the robot use the much faster and readily available space ship to get Klatu?
Jim
Well, you gotta remember that Gort was the master of the situation and Klaatu was just along for his humanoid appearance (not really covered in the movie, but Klaatu does explain at the end that the robots have power of life and death over his civilization). “Klaatu barada nikto” might have just meant “Klaatu’s been captured,” and the robot would just deal with it in his own style.
I don’t know but I always remembered those words, just in case. 🙂
Btw, I consider the original “The Day the Earth Stood Still” movie was the best one, although the more modern version wasn’t too bad, either.
Remember that Gort is an autonomous AI, usually operating independently. It must therefore be highly intelligent. Given that, if the three words mean identifier(name or rank)- rescue/recover- take no hostile action, then all of Gort’s subsequent actions follow logically. The girl could only have learned the phrases from Klattu, therefore she may have more information or could be an ally, so should be kept safe until time permits a full debriefing, if necessary. Avoiding hostile action basically means avoiding a confrontation, probably by employing stealth, possibly using technology we never saw (get it?) and precluding using the ship which glows in the dark and makes a loud humming noise. After recovering Klattu’s body using the resuscitation procedure would be SOP. In fact Klattu need not have used his name in the message, because who else could have generated the message and needed Gort’s help?
I like your comment Jeff (I may steal it for future comments). So let’s take this scenario: peaceful emissary takes irrevocable AI, Gort, on mission to tell Earthlings to watch out. Earthlings shoot peaceful, unarmed emissary after landing and Gort starts his irrevocable action–except Klatu stops him. Then later, Earthlings kill peaceful, unarmed emissary and again Gort starts his irrevocable action–except another Earthling gives him the secret code to stop his irrevocable actions.
Just how revocable are these irrevocable actions? I know, this is a special mission where the emissary can control the robot. That means there’s a back-door into this irrevocable business–which means an unscrupulous entity could gain access and keep all the Gorts from acting. Klatu’s foolproof system isn’t all that foolproof.
Jim
We’re dealing with a hypothetical situation but we still have to be careful with our assumptions. If Gort is a true AI with independent discretion to perform it’s mission, can we _assume_ that any of it’s decisions/actions are irrevocable? An intelligent enough system would be able to alter it’s responses to a situation according to changes in the status of variables. Gort may even be self-aware, and familiar with the concept of phenomenology- how we know what we know. It could then assess the reliability of any commands, or more likely requests, it receives and decide whether they are valid. Gort could then decide for itself that a communication is an attempt at “hacking” it’s system and take punitive action. I wouldn’t want to be the one to try it. Remember the robots are usually the ones with ultimate authority.
. A “first contact” situation is a special case- the contactees do not yet know their new status in the galaxy, ie; have not yet been Mirandised. Until they are, they may not be subject to the jurisdiction of the Gorts. It also seems that, as advanced as the Gorts are, they are still not quite advanced enough (or are to terrifying) to conduct first contact missions on their own. This explains the need for an organic envoy, preferably from the species being contacted- “See? We’re just like you, only smarter and less violent. Now behave, or else.”
It’s also probably a good idea to try to interpret the film from the view of possible futures they had at the time. Back then they may not have been able to conceive of a Gort made of nanobots or a T-800 or 1000, and a hacker was someone who plays golf.
>>
We’re dealing with a hypothetical situation but we still have to be careful with our assumptions.
<<
Yes, always.
You got me thinking, Jeff. I re-watched “The Day the Earth Stood Still” (the 1951 version). I also researched the original short story by Harry Bates (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farewell_to_the_Master). In the Bates story, the POV character wants the robot, Gnut, to “tell its masters that Klaatu’s death was an accident.” Gnut replies, “You misunderstand, I am the master.” The Bates story is about technology getting out of hand. The 1951 story is typical cold-war fare: “Please aliens, save us from ourselves!” And the 2008 reboot is: “Please aliens, save our planet’s environment from us!”
In the 1951 version, Klaatu’s trip (I’m spelling Klaatu’s name correctly now) took 5 five months, and he traveled 250 million miles. That would be a typical Hohmann transfer orbit from Mars–nothing super fancy.
The movie doctors say Klaatu’s body indicates an Earth type atmosphere and gravity. So where did Klaatu come from? Earth? Was he an abductee or a descendant from abductees? Did the Martians make him? Is he from Venus?
Your idea of a “First Contact” scenario is interesting, but I get the impression when Klaatu talks about “we of the other planets” he means only planets in our solar system (at that time, sci-fi authors thought Venus could support life). How many “First Contacts” would they expect?
Nothing in the movie gives the impression that anyone can override Gort’s power and authority, but Klaatu and Helen Benson are able to override that authority. I think it’s just typical Hollywood goofs and inconsistent plot devices.
Look at how Stanley Kubrick messed up Arthur C. Clarke’s “2001.” Clarke explained the monoliths better, his “Discovery One” ship went to Saturn–not Jupiter, Dave’s argument with Hal resulted in Hal opening the airlocks (fighting a rapidly depressurizing ship is more plausible than facing a 100% vacuum), and Clarke’s explanation of the space-warp travel made sense–Kubrick’s version was just a long, long, confusing (and silly) light show.
Jim