Friday, March 24, 2017

Firefly: Scifi or not?

          So Firefly definitely takes place in a world that has somewhat different technology than we currently have, but I'm not sure that makes it science fiction.
          I think that, mainly, science fiction needs to have more of a difference in technology than Firefly has. When we look at other "classic" works of science fiction they have a huge technology gap. For example in Frankenstein they had enough technology to create life in the story while in reality they had nothing even close to that. And in Star Wars not only did they have to advanced ships, but they also had advanced weapons and medical devices. Whereas in Firefly we only see a leap in technology in the ships, and it could even be argued that their weapons and cars were less advanced than what we currently have. I think that the lack of a large gap in technology doesn't allow us to be as amazed. With large gaps we can look at the technology and be stunned as to how it could work and how cool it is and have real discussions over it (like the Star Trek teleporter), but in Firefly were so close to having the technology that it doesn't give us that same opportunity.
          I also think they they technology should affect the characters and plot more in a science fiction story. Looking back at Star Trek again most of the episodes heavily relied on a fictional piece of technology or creature, for example the Holodeck played a big part in at least part of the story when it got infected and everybody and t work to figure out what happened. I think the Firefly could easily be the same story if it were on Earth in the west. They don't rely on the ship or its technology as much as they could, it could easily be replaced by a boat or a car and it wouldn't change the story at all.
         That all being said I still really enjoyed the story. I thought that it was really well put together and a good plot line. The characters also seems to have more development and connections in the two episodes we watched than in any other movie/show we've seen so far. Thats is definitely close to, if not at, the top of my list (not quite sure it beats Red Dwarf) in terms of best things we've read or watched this year.

2 comments:

  1. Interesting! Would you be in favor of restricting "science fiction" to ONLY works in which heavily speculative science plays a main role? If that science is in the background, present but unmentioned, is it still sci fi?

    I am so confused about whether you love Red Dwarf or whether that's sarcasm!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it is less of like heavily speculative that is important to me and more that the science (even if there isn't a ton of it) plays a bigger role in the story itself. And 100% not sarcasm :)

      Delete