Friday, January 22, 2016
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)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMéliès's film A Trip to the Moon as a whole can be portrayed as a piece of science fiction. Although Tom Gunning’s opinion has substance and truthfulness to it, I disagree. I agree that the film should involve sobriety and concern, but not necessarily for what he believes. A film does not have to involve a “serious concern with scientific and technological possibilities.” Many films today are considered science fiction without incorporating any notable concern for these possibilities. An example is the movie Avatar, a widely popular science fiction film. Although one may argue that this film portrays a concern about the environment, there is no concern for what Gunning mentions, and yet, it is still science fiction. Another example is E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, made only 80 years after A Trip to the Moon. The movie does involve the serious concern of aliens at the time of the century but the plot is not exactly serious. The story of a boy and an alien embarking on a journey is not serious due to the fact that people were scared of these creatures, making their relationship unlikely. Méliès's film is both serious and not; the way he portrays the scientists/astronauts is not serious, but the plot itself is. Going to the moon, even if it is in a rocket put in place by some showgirls, is a plausible action. Although what occurs on the moon isn’t serious or realistic, the interest in the aliens from the moon is a serious aspect that the people show. Society has always been intrigued by the possibility of another life form, and always will. Since the overall plot of the film has a serious undertone, it can be considered as the first science fiction film.
ReplyDeleteWhile Tom Gunning’s argument that Melies’s film is not a science fiction film can be argued to some degree since the film does not direct its attention at educating about the fields of science, there are many aspects to this film that still support its state as a science fiction movie. Melies’s approach to life in a comical fashion is something we see throughout his career as a filmmaker. While his approach may not be serious and therefore leads many to believe that he does not take the subject seriously, science fiction films are very rarely made educate viewers on science anyways. His approach is stylistic and individualistic- mockery of the astronauts and scientists with stereotypical pointy hats does not indicate the plot itself is driven away from landing on the moon. The key factor is the overall plot itself, which is considered science fiction, not the route Melies takes to get there. Many other appreciated science fiction films such as The Avengers, The Amazing Spider-man, and Avatar also play with reality and present scientifically passed plot lines in ways that many wouldn’t consider to be the idealistic image of “science fiction”. The core of science fiction is the usage of an aspect of natural science beliefs and take a spin on this idea. According to this notion, Melies’s film does oblige to “science fiction” since the idea of landing on the moon is a scientific idea. The point of fiction is to bring forth dreamlike, unrealistic aspects to a straightforward scientific idea. While Tom Gunning is correct in saying that Melies’s approach mocks scientists, he is incorrect in saying that science fiction films must commit to a certain concern with science when producing film. The approach to a film is a freedom guaranteed in filmmaking. Films like Avatar and many of the Marvel films also use mockery and idealism in their approach to explaining a scientific idea, therefore A Trip to the Moon should be considered science fiction.
ReplyDeleteMelies's a Trip to the Moon is a historic film and hailed as the first science fiction movie ever made, yet some who have seen it, such as Tom Gunning, have claimed that this movie is not science fiction as it focuses on the story and kind of allows the science to take a backseat in importance. Yet many science fiction films do this, but why is A Trip to the Moon the only one in controversy. This movie explores the idea of science to do something that science had not yet done, which I believe is what makes a science fiction movie. The idea of science seen in a way it never had been seen before is what makes a science fiction movie, which is why a Trip to the Moon most definitely is one. Look at a movie like Avatar, this movie was critically acclaimed and earned millions of dollars, and everyone agrees that this is a science fiction movie, but there are instances of magic and the like that is unexplained by science and has logic left out, an example of this would be the "body swapping" between the humans and the alien species which was left completely unexplained; yet people still credit Avatar as science fiction. Look at Thor or Thor the Dark World, they have many aspects of science fiction such as flying spaceships and teleportation bridges, but there is no explanation of how any of it is actually science. Why can Thor's hammer shoot lightning? These are definitely aspects of magic which we accept as science fiction. In Melies's movie, a world is explored with new ideas and new adventures thanks to improvements in technology, they would have no idea how to get someone to the moon in real life, so they made one up; is that not the premise of sci-fi movies? Arthur C. Clarke sums it up best with, "Magic is just science we don't understand yet." Melies's film tries to explain his idea of how science could be used (despite not having a background in science), therefore he just allowed magic to fill the gap left in his lack of scientific knowledge. A Trip to the Moon most definitely is a science fiction movie.
ReplyDeleteAlthough there are some unrealistic qualities A Trip to the Moon, the overall sentiment of a journey into space and the action it entails, contains all the features of a science fiction movie today. When this movie was filmed in 1902, no one knew what the moon or space was like. In fact, the aspect of a trip to the moon was fantastical, hence the scientist’s attire. The creativity involved in the construction and launch of the rocket defines the creativity that must be used in any science fiction movie. Most science fiction movies involve going somewhere that we don’t know anything about or something that is fictional. In the movie Avatar, they had to create the race of people and the planet they lived on. In A Trip to the Moon, Méliès and his crew needed to create the setting of the moon, and its inhabitants. This creativity is what defines a science fiction movie in my mind. For those who argue that it’s unrealistic, it’s because this movie was the first of its kind. It literally defined what a science fiction movie was. I’m sure that many filmmakers later took inspiration from this early film in order to create some great science fiction movies today. However, they decided to take only certain aspects. They didn’t agree with the fantastical portrayals, and decided to go for a more realistic approach. As time changes, people change with what they see as realistic. In 1902, when A Trip to the Moon came out, the wizards and cannon rocket could have seemed perfectly viable. Nowadays, people won’t be convinced unless the movie is as scientifically accurate as possible. All in all, the fact that this movie was so early and such a pioneer of the style, makes it the first science fiction of its time.
ReplyDeleteA Trip to the Moon by Melies is sometimes referred to as the beginning of the science fiction genre. Although it is not consistent with many science fiction movies today, I think it deserves this title because it was the first film to have a fictitious plot in the future that shows scientific “possibilities.” Although we now perceive the “science” in the movie to be absurd, it was not necessarily that unthinkable when Melies made the movie. In 1902, knowledge of space travel and projectiles was very limited and many in the scientific community thought that a cannon launch was the most likely possibility for getting to space. Cannons were the most effective launching devices of large objects in 1902, so naturally, Melies chose to use that method in his film. Although many aspects of the film are more fantasy-like than scientific, this does not mean we can’t classify the film as science-fiction. Melies uses people and dancers to show the moon and stars, and his astronauts are dressed in wizard-like costumes. Our current view of typical astronaut attire is shaped by years of scientific research and discovery that simply didn’t exist in 1902. Melies had no idea what scientists would look in the future when science actually achieved such a magical, fantastical feat as space travel. Wizard costumes were certainly not the most basic option, but Melies’ imaginative choice was not necessarily un-scientific. There was no science at the time to support any reason why the people would have to wear different outfits. Additionally, the scenery on the moon itself would have been completely imagined by Melies because we obviously did not have any images of the moon. Overall, A Trip to the Moon is science fiction Melies made artistic decisions that aligned with the scientific knowledge available when he made the film and he left the unexplored aspects of space to his imagination.
ReplyDeleteThe movie is clearly fiction with a plethora of scenes that completely defy the laws of physics, however, there are some scenes that border the "science" realm. I believe the movie is mainly fiction with scientific ideas. Tom Gunning is correct in his idea that "Science' fiction implies a certain sobriety and serious concern with scientific and technological possibilities.", but the depiction of the scientists of A Trip to the Moon, completely denotes any scientific aspect in that idea. Magic and science are two completely different things. This movie compared to other movies lacks the scientific aspect of things. In other science fiction films there is some theoretical and scientific basing with the film decisions made. I feel like the film can be called something completely different than a scientific movie. I believe it is purely a fictional movie because the 'scientific' ideas stray so far from reality. An example of the movie straying from physical reality was when the astronauts left the moon to come back to earth by falling off the side of the planet. This practically denounces any scientific theory in this movie and is completely fictional, seeing that you cannot fall of the moon. So in conclusion, this movie is completely different than other science fiction movies I've seen, however it is similar to other fictional movies in the aspect that it doesn’t make any physical sense.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Melies’s A Trip to The Moon is not what modern movie-watchers would consider the epitome of a science fiction film, I disagree with the argument of Tom Gunning that it does not indeed qualify as one. He states that in order to be considered a true science fiction movie the short film must include “serious concern” with scientific and technological possibilities; however this is a statement that I also disagree with. In my opinion, to be considered a science-fiction film, a movie just has to focus on something that deals with futuristic elements or ideas that are a part of the science or future science world. Because Melies’s film does in fact deal with aliens and outer space, I believe that it should be allowed to be known as the first of its kind. It truly is a science-fiction because of what it is based on, not how accurate or how much concern Melies showed towards depicting the true world of science. Modern movies today that are considered science-fiction are equally as inaccurate or bizarre as the wizard-like scientists or strange aliens that Melies portrays through this film; however, none of them are in question of not being considered a part of this genre because of their inaccuracy. For example, one of the most famous sci-fi films of all time, Star Wars, is all based on a fantasy world in which most of the characters are not even human. It does not show concern to scientific or technological possibilities, as the chances that the creatures in Star Wars will ever exist is quite impossible. Although these movies make more sense in terms of physical laws and such over those included in Melies’s film, taking into consideration scientific advancements during this century, these differences do not change the fact that A Trip to the Moon is still and should be known by all people as the first science-fiction film.
ReplyDeleteTom Gunning’s opinion may have reputable support however my opinion does not coincide with his. Though I understand that Méliès's film A Trip to the Moon may not be seen as a science fiction film due to the personification of inanimate objects, the comical interpretation of the scientists, and the impossibility of some of the scenes, however these reasons aren’t enough to say that the film is not a science fiction film. The story and plot of this film are very possible and in fact the mission to the moon was completed in 1969. A film series that is very similar due to its impossibility and fictional characters however is considered one of the greatest science fiction films of all time, Star Wars. Based on Gunning’s argument Star Wars would never be considered a science fiction film and along with countless other films. Gunning may have a point, however, with respect to the impossibility of the women pushing the rocket into a gigantic canon that shoots to the moon. The comical aspects of the film do give more of a vibe as a spoof rather than a science fiction film. All in all I believe the film A Trip to the Moon to be considered a science fiction film no matter how comical the director chooses to create the film.
ReplyDeleteI think that ultimately, categorizing A Trip To The Moon is a matter of opinion, but in my own, I’d classify it as a science fiction film. A science fiction film should combine elements of science with a sense of fantasy and wonder, and implying that the genre should maintain “a certain sobriety and serious concern with scientific and technological possibilities” is contrary to the entire fascination with the unknown - the fantasies with very little base in “scientific and technological possibilities” which define the genre. Because of their imaginative nature. Do we have any scientific evidence that aliens will look anything like ET? And years and years from now, if we’ve had encounters with extraterrestrials and they don’t look like ET, should we dismiss one of the most iconic sci-fi movies of all times as folly simply because we didn’t know what we were talking about at the time?
ReplyDeleteMelies’ A Trip to the Moon was released well before man ever set foot on the moon - 67 years prior to be exact. And at the time, the concept of a rocket being launched from a cannon wasn’t an entirely laughable concept. At the time, without any base of real knowledge regarding feasible techniques and technologies which would one day plant a human on the moon, much less an idea of what the surface of the moon would look like, this precisely leaves open the room for imagination for Melies to cast his fantasy, and this is precisely what should qualify it as a science fiction film.