Your thoughts on new science fiction?

[zorcarepublic]

Well? What do you make of all the 'new' science fiction we are seeing on our screens/in books/on the silver screen nowadays? Do you think it is better, worse or just different?

 

[Leto]

Define "new" science-fiction ? what difference do you make exactly ?

 

[zorcarepublic]

Any science fiction from the 90's onwards. Old SF would be classed as belonging to the 'Golden Age' of SF, including the period between 1970 and 1989, to give you an idea...


I remembered as I was posting that I didn't give a clue as to what I meant, sorry!

 

[Space Monkey]

I love some of the classics, but to be honest its often just for nostalgia's sake.
Invaders from Mars (Little Cathy wilson's place!) is great, but it can't compare with the Matrix trilogy and the Chronicles of Riddick etc.

Writing evolves like everything; remember the days when Beastmaster and Starman used to be cool? Have you watched them lately?

 

[Leto]

Which leads to another question.
Zorca are you talking about books, movies, comics or all type of media ?

Bookwise I can't tell you, most US writers of the 90s have yet to be translate here. And for the one I pick in english, either they started their work long before the 90s (as Silverberg for example) or I buy them in second hand bookstores and never look for the date of the writing. But for the French authors, there's a welcomed revival.

On movies, it's on par. I was disappointed (to say the least) by Matrix 2. But I've loved Final fantasy the movie and Event Horizon. Basically, there's the same ratio of great movies and complete waste of film now than before.

Starman, yes I love it.

Comicswise, on the whole it's better.
What impressed me more is the evolution of science fiction in video games.

 

[zorcarepublic]

All types of media, because in this day and age, something always seems to influence each other. TV series will have books written for them, some books will have films made (Dune, for example), and so forth.

 

[Circus Cranium]

I have to say I like the books better now; I have a book of classic scifi stories from way back, and it's a ton of fun, but the writing just seems clunky in places. As for films, hey, I'm always thrilled to see ANY scifi come to the big screen. There isn't enough of it. Even though some of it stinks.


And I agree about Matrix 2.

 

[The Master™]

i've read both new and old... and there are good and bad examples... but i don't think that the time when it was written has any bearing on the quality, just the ideas posed by the world we live in...

 

[David Stewart]

Old SF would be classed as belonging to the 'Golden Age' of SF, including the period between 1970 and 1989, to give you an idea...

The Golden Age of Science Fiction is generally considered to date from Summer 1939, specifically the publication of the June issue of Astounding, to the end of 1950 and the publication of rival SF mags such as Galaxy and Fantasy & Science Fiction.

Of course there are others who say that the Golden Age of Science Fiction is 12.

David Stewart

 

[Leto]

The Golden Age of Science Fiction is generally considered to date from Summer 1939, specifically the publication of the June issue of Astounding, to the end of 1950 and the publication of rival SF mags such as Galaxy and Fantasy & Science Fiction.

Of course there are others who say that the Golden Age of Science Fiction is 12.

David Stewart

Personnally, I would say fron 10 till death.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Lol! Welcome to the chronicles network, David Stewart.

 

[zorcarepublic]

Yep, welcome David Stewart

 

[Foxbat]

Everything evolves - including our ideas of how the future will look.

I'm a fan of Golden Age SF but that doesn't make it better or worse - just different from the newer stuff. Certainly, I believe that characters nowadays have a greater depth than when the early pioneers of the genre started filling the pulp mags - but that could be an effect of the medium rather than skill (pulp mag against fully fledged novel).

We should just be grateful that there is so much choice out there. Me? I intend to enjoy all the SF (old and new) I can get my grubby little hands on

 

[Michael]

I'm throwing in my hat with Foxbat on this one.

 

[Jayaprakash Satyamurthy]

Ken MacLeod and Adam Roberts, 2 of my favourite sf writers are both brand squeking new. On the other hand, I love sf from the various ages as well. So I'm with Foxbat and Michael too.

 

[Rane Longfox]

Both have their strengths. I find more modern sci-fi authors that I like to read, but thats mostly because only the classics from the past are availiable any more, whereas there is a vast range of modern sci-fi availiable.

I don't know that I'd class the likes of E.E. Doc Smith in the same ranks as Al Reynolds, or Pater F. Hamilton, but the Lensman series is just as enjoyable as say, the Night's Dawn Trilogy. Different though. Very different though. I guess the main difference between modern and older sci-fi is that we now know more about a lot of the issues involved, and are more willing to interperet them in what might be a realistic fashion.

 

[erickad71]

It seems to me you can read a good or bad book no matter what year it was written.

 

[Quest]

I lean towards the older science fiction. I do watch a lot of modern SF, but it's the older shows which hold my heart.

 

[Princess Ivy]

It seems to me you can read a good or bad book no matter what year it was written.

I agree completely erica. so long as its well written and gripping, i don't really care who wrote it or when

 

[guthrie]

There is obviously good and bad SF in all ages of writing of it. However, what I think tends to happen is that the worst of the older SF gets forgotten about, thus painting an unduly rosy picture of the past because the best of the past ends up being compared to the average of the present.
On the other hand, my thoughts on current SF are that it is unduly magic based. I.E. too much use of nanotech without an decent explanation. Then theres the thinking machines, FTL travel, wormholes, etc etc, that appear in so much space opera. In fact I'm having trouble finding much SF these days that isnt akin to space opera. No doubt that will change, but in the mean time I'll keep reading older stuff.