Friday, January 18, 2013
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)
There is a fine line between fantasy fiction and science fiction. On one end are wizards of Harry Potter and while on the other are the spaceships of Star Wars. What is peculiar about A Trip to the Moon is it has aspects of both; there are wizard 'scientists' in a sort of spaceship. Overall I would not call it true Science Fiction; there is not a serious approach to science, it is quite whimsical. Doctor Who, a popular modern science fiction series, is also rather whimsical; however, it still retains an overall serious scientific quality. Doctor Who and other iconic science fiction films like Star Wars and Star Trek are very serious about the material; while they are fiction, they present only an future reality or alternate, yet still plausible, situation. In A Trip to the Moon, the moon itself is a cratered human face; clearly this is not the realm of realism but rather a deliberate fantasy. Additionally, had one seen only the latter half of A Trip to the Moon, it could easily be mistaken for a group of eccentric explorers who meet a tribe of natives in a faraway, earthbound, land. That is the impression one gets of the ‘aliens;’ it is not the impression gleaned of aliens iconic to the genre, like Vulcans, Yoda, or Daleks. It may be tempting to blame some of these shortcomings on the times and the fact that the genre was only just flowering, however the famous HG Wells was a contemporary. HG Wells is considered the father of science fiction; if he can write excellent science fiction while just starting the genre, this is no excuse for A Trip to the Moon.
ReplyDeleteI am going to respectfully disagree with Justin on this one. A Trip to the Moon may seem loony by today’s standards, but it definitely is a precursor to science fiction filmmaking, if not true science fiction itself. No, the science of the film – how the rocket gets to the moon and returns, how the environment of the moon works, etc. - is never truly explained, but modern sci-fi films such as Star Wars and Star Trek do not always explain the details of how their technology works either. How does E.T.’s ship have the power to fly to and from earth? How exactly does hyperspace work? How did the machines devise The Matrix? These are unanswered questions, yet we definitely consider the movies they stem from to be science fiction. A Trip to the Moon is just based on an even more primitive understanding of science and technology, so, while rockets somehow being able to fly across the galaxy are mildly believable to modern viewers, a rocket being launched out of a cannon was perhaps the peak of reasonable believability back at the turn of the century. And, unlike in Melies’ earlier films that featured mere puffs of smoke and hand-waving, a process of putting the rocket together is briefly shown here (the work-yard scene), adding more realism to the proceedings.
ReplyDeleteAs to the planet itself, I will admit that there is little scientific thought put into its set up. The plants and inhabitants are fantastical, and the journey home absurd. However, your critique of the scenes on the moon seeming like fantasy is one that can be applied to numerous sequences in any movie set on other planets. Explorers meeting natives? If we search for other examples of this in science fiction, such films as Planet of the Apes, Aliens, Star Wars VI (and I, II, and V), and, to a lesser degree, Forbidden Planet all make the cut. The fact that it happens on the moon, a true location, and the methods of transportation are at least somewhat bound in the realm of science (it is not like they grow wings and fly up) allows the film to retain its sci-fi title. And, again, while the falling rocket idea seems silly by modern standards, it was as plausible as any idea by the standards of the time period.
Is the movie the perfect example of science fiction? No. Especially with today’s technology, the idea that A Trip to the Moon falls within the realm of scientific possibility sounds a little goofy. But, when it was made (well over half a century before mankind actually reached the moon), this was just as possible as the technology seen by audiences aboard the Enterprise decades later. With its main story consisting of a journey to another planet, taken through somewhat scientific methods, and encounters with alien life, this picture is indeed one of the first examples of science fiction in film. Along with Metropolis in the ‘20s, A Trip to the Moon should be considered the “ancestor” of the modern genre and, among other things, greatly appreciated as such.