If only it came out in 79'

Jackalope · May 07, 2008, 05:43:45 AM

Forbidden Planet is one of the ten best Sci-Fi films ever, and it the top 50 best films of all time. Absolutely brilliant. Star Trek would not exist if not for this movie. The final battle with the invisible creature being illuminated only by the shock fields is a special effect that stands up against the best of what's being offered today, and the plot -- liberally borrowing from Shakespeare's The Tempest -- is so much smarter and high concept that most of the drek that passes for sci-fi these days.

I wouldn't call it Space Opera at all though. It's very much true Science Fiction -- with a plot driven mostly by the exploration of fantastic notion rooted in science -- in the same vein that Star Trek would later mine.

Aos · May 07, 2008, 09:56:40 AM

I wasn't using Space Opera as a pejoritive. And it does have some fuzzy super science- the Krell machines and what not. Otherwise, i agree with you completely. It is one of my personal top 10 and has been since the first time I saw it. It, imo, does Star Trek better than star trek of any incarnation ever did. I love the color. I love the space ship. I love the girl and the robot. I just dig the whole thing.

flyingmice · May 07, 2008, 10:00:55 AM

Space Opera means different things to different people. In addition, like "Hard" SF, the definition has changed over time, but people tend to carry their own definition without change, sort of like one's self image, crystalized in amber forever. People call games like Traveller or StarCluster "Hard," but they aren't at all anymore. By modern definitions, both are Space Operas.

-clash

Aos · May 07, 2008, 10:06:50 AM

I don't really have a hard and fast definition- as is probably clear from my first post on Forbidden Planet. I'm not even certain that the term has anything more than minimal useflness, really.

jeff37923 · May 07, 2008, 10:49:18 AM

Quote from: flyingmiceSpace Opera means different things to different people. In addition, like "Hard" SF, the definition has changed over time, but people tend to carry their own definition without change, sort of like one's self image, crystalized in amber forever. People call games like Traveller or StarCluster "Hard," but they aren't at all anymore. By modern definitions, both are Space Operas.

-clash

I've read the modern definitions of subgenres in science fiction and I find them flawed, based on the current definition of Space Opera, everything written over five years ago can be classified as Space Opera because it isn't based on the latest science which also changes with time. Its a constantly moving goalpost.

flyingmice · May 07, 2008, 11:17:12 AM

Quote from: jeff37923I've read the modern definitions of subgenres in science fiction and I find them flawed, based on the current definition of Space Opera, everything written over five years ago can be classified as Space Opera because it isn't based on the latest science which also changes with time. Its a constantly moving goalpost.

And I wouldn't disagree, Jeff. I'm merely pointing out the current definition is not the one most folks know and use.

-clash

Dr Rotwang! · May 07, 2008, 11:42:12 AM

I was 6 in 1980. So...distended reality, I guess. That said, I'd've loved a Star Wars RPG in '80 as much I did in '87.

'Cause I'm a dork.

arminius · May 07, 2008, 11:43:43 AM

Jeff, that sounds like Space Opera defined by sniffy hard SF fans.

I basically go by the definition and pattern established (for the most part) in the anthology edited by Brian Aldiss, Space Opera.

But based on this article, I see that both are revisionist history and part of an ongoing struggle among the SF community to define itself.

Aos · May 07, 2008, 11:52:32 AM

The further off topic this thread drifts, the more interesting it becomes.

jeff37923 · May 07, 2008, 12:04:57 PM

Quote from: flyingmiceAnd I wouldn't disagree, Jeff. I'm merely pointing out the current definition is not the one most folks know and use.

-clash

Please don't think I'm jumping on you about this, its one of my pet peeves and I may be sounding inordinately passionate because of that.

flyingmice · May 07, 2008, 12:08:25 PM

Quote from: Elliot WilenJeff, that sounds like Space Opera defined by sniffy hard SF fans.

I basically go by the definition and pattern established (for the most part) in the anthology edited by Brian Aldiss, Space Opera.

But based on this article, I see that both are revisionist history and part of an ongoing struggle among the SF community to define itself.

Bingo. I was remembering this article specifically when I posted, Elliot. Thanks!

-clash

flyingmice · May 07, 2008, 12:10:34 PM

Quote from: jeff37923Please don't think I'm jumping on you about this, its one of my pet peeves and I may be sounding inordinately passionate because of that.

No problem! I don't take internet ranting personally. I'm a writer/illustrator/publisher, and if I took even directed criticism personally, I'd be in sad shape, let alone non-directed criticism.

-clash

jeff37923 · May 07, 2008, 12:14:55 PM

Quote from: Elliot WilenJeff, that sounds like Space Opera defined by sniffy hard SF fans.

I basically go by the definition and pattern established (for the most part) in the anthology edited by Brian Aldiss, Space Opera.

But based on this article, I see that both are revisionist history and part of an ongoing struggle among the SF community to define itself.

Hmm, good article. Gives me stuff to think about before bed.

See, in the anthologies There Will Be War and A Step Farther Out, Jerry Pournelle and Larry Niven both discuss what thought processes went into The Mote in God's Eye (I think the article is entitled Building the Mote In God's Eye, I'll have to check). Its solid thinking based more upon sociology and physics than on a formulaic story designed to sell books.

Come to think about it, if I were to stretch the Space Opera theme to encompass Hard SF then the stories set in John Scalzi's Old Man's War universe fall under that category as well.

I'm going to bed and think about this some more.

Seanchai · May 07, 2008, 01:09:57 PM

Quote from: stu2000But we didn't have any expectation that roleplaying was supposed to feel like a movie.

That's okay - they still don't.

Quote from: stu2000...I'm extremely dubious that a game based on a movie would have had any more fascination for us than D&D or Traveller.

I can't speak to the thoughts of others, but I wasn't expecting Star Wars to poach D&D players. I was thinking it would turn more of the mainstream into customers or gamers than D&D did...

Seanchai

riprock · May 08, 2008, 11:10:53 AM

Quote from: Elliot Wilen3. Ultimately Traveller is for grinds who enjoy procedural flowcharts and operations research.

The operations research is really a very small part of Trav, otherwise the creator of Cyc, Doug Lenat, would have had more competition for his mighty wargame victory.

No, Traveller is for people who really, really enjoy counting in hexadecimal.