Thursday, January 22, 2015
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 lot of controversy among the question of whether or not the early film, A Trip to the Moon, can be put into the category of science fiction. While many critics believe it is the first science fiction film produced, I disagree. I have not seen many science fiction movies, but I have heard enough about them to know that while they are somewhat fictional, they also incorporate elements or principles of actual science. In A Trip to the Moon, there are no clear references to anything regarding science. This movie is basically all fictional. I say this because the scientists are dressed up like wizards, there are crazy aliens living on the moon, and the conditions of the moon itself are unrealistic. Also, while watching this film, one can notice that there are many special effects and tricks incorporated. Mélies was a magician before he started making films, which explains why he had such an interest in special effects. Using “magic” in this film makes it even less similar to a science fiction movie because it is stressing the fictional part, and not incorporating much science at all. Mélies even admitted that the plot was not important to him. He said that he only used the plot as an outline for the tricks he wanted to perform. I think that if Mélies’ main focus was to create fictional theatrical effects to please the audience, then this film cannot be considered science fiction. A science fiction film has to be able to inform the audience of some type of theory or principle of science, which the movie, A Trip to the Moon fails to do.
ReplyDeleteI believe that A Trip to the Moon should not be considered a science fiction movie. The fact that Méliés has his scientist not taking their jobs seriously is a contributing factor as to why it isn’t a science fiction movie. The scientists are dressed in their ridiculous hats and jumping and dancing around the room. There isn’t any way the scientists could be taken even remotely serious. I agree with Tom Gunning when he talks about their needing to be some type of sobriety to the film. The scientific films I have seen compare to this film in a sense of traveling to the unknown. Exploring places with unique experiences. In time in the films we see the characters trying to attempt something that has never been done before. How A Trip to the Moon is different from normal scientific films because most of the scenes are considered humorous and aren’t taken seriously. An example or two of this is when the space ship full of scientists is being loaded into the barrel before being shot out. The persons loading the barrel are all female in short shorts pushing this huge metal space ship in. Also, when the scientists blast off for the moon and when they land the moon turns into a face; which is then punctured by space ship. I believe that this film could be somewhat of a precursor to science fiction. I would not consider it completely science fiction but defiantly has some of the characteristics that will lead to better; more well-rounded science fictions films.
ReplyDeleteI would say that this film is certainly not science fiction. Although it may be about space travel like the recent Interstellar, the two films are significantly different in that A Trip to the Moon is based on speculation rather than scientific fact. In Interstellar, in a post- apocalyptic world, a group of physicist work to solve the problem of getting all of the people off of earth after it was deemed unfit for human habitation. They use a significant amount of proven scientific theory to justify their ability to accomplish many of the things that they do. But then they also do have a large amount of completely impossible operations that go on but even that is believable due to their scientific explanations. In A Trip to the Moon, however, has a large amount of completely made up aspects that are totally not based on any fact. For instance, the director chose to portray the “scientists” as wizards and had them shot to the moon out of a canon. Additionally, the moon was portrayed as having a human face as well as inhabited by lush plant life as well as an alien civilization. Whether or not the people truly believed this at the time of the film’s release remains to be seen but I have a hard time believing that scientists were out publishing that the moon was full of plants and aliens. It may have been a precursor to the science fiction industry but it is a long way off from being true science fiction.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, if you take into account that this movie was produced in 1902 and, therefore, knowledge about space travelling was if not non existent, very limited I do believe it is possible to say that it is, regardless of the sparks of humor and parody, one of the first precursors of science fiction movies. On scenes like their return from space, where they use gravity to "fall down" back to earth, it is possible to see that they still apply scientific concepts to the film and on the regard of having aliens and plant life, what makes it any different from Star Trek, Alien or any modern sci-fi movie? I think it is difficult for us sometimes not to judge the film as phony and funny, because we forget to contextualize and remember that people in the early 20th century did not have the amount of information that we do today, and most of their ideas came from their minds and imagination, like Meliés idealization of how a trip was made to the moon, through a cannon. However, as George Meliés was very focused in entertaining his audience, the movie has humor imbued and therefore does not posses the serious tone usually found in science fiction movies, which is where the thrill lies in them because it seems real, and therefore it can not be described as the first sci-fi movie.
ReplyDeleteI believe Goerge Melies’s A Trip to the Moon is not the first science fiction film for several reasons that primarily lead back to the point: it is just not serious. As a society we have dubbed science fiction movies to be films that present the forefront of technological and scientific possibilities. In true science fiction movies such as Prometheus, Interstellar, and A Space Odyssey there is a general dramatic and intense feeling through-out. In these films that remain true to the genre scientific capability is demonstrated and expanded upon in a realistic fashion. Although, a movie such as Prometheus is quite far-fetched (attempting to find the creator of the human race) it is still approached in a believable way. For example they tie in historical context such as the Mayans and other ancient civilizations cave drawings. This is very different from Melies’s film. In a Trip to the Moon the scientific capabilities were not even demonstrated in a realistic way. At the time the film was made the discovery and understanding of gravity was common knowledge. However, in the film we see the characters simply fall back to earth as if they were simply just high in the atmosphere. Aside from mere scientific flaws this film lacked sophistication within the actors themselves. In true science fiction films today characters approach their roles with a strong sense of gravity. There is in no way a sense of comedy within their roles. However, in A Trip to the Moon all the characters seem to be more focused in generating a laugh from the crowd than adding a dramatic sense to the film. For these reasons George Melies’s A Trip to The Moon is not the first science fiction film.
ReplyDeleteA Trip to Moon is different in that it is both a comedy and a science fiction film. The film is a comedy because it opens up with the scientists dressed like wizards, the rocket ship being pushed into the canon by a handful of showgirls, and seeing that moon has a face. I feel Méliès put these comedic scenes in the film because truly not many people knew about space and even what was on the moon during that time period. He wanted to add comic relief to his film to make people laugh and think that learning about space would be funny, and not boring. Méliès added in scientific research by all the calculations that were done on the board, as well as depicting the moon surface to the best of his ability. He believed in aliens so he tried to portray them as his mind envisioned them. Since no one had ever been to the moon or had even gotten close to seeing it or knowing anything about it, Méliès’ picture would be pretty believable. He had to add comedy to the film, and not be totally serious since the viewer may not want to sit through someone’s hypothesis of what the moon is like without some humor. A major part that helps with the comedic aspect of the movie were the aliens. When the scientists were escaping the aliens, the way that the scientists killed them was by hitting the aliens in the head with their umbrellas which turned the aliens into smoke. This scene helped the moviegoers have a good laugh and learn what could be on the moon.
ReplyDeleteWhen put into a literal perspective, “A Trip to the Moon” could constitute as a science fiction film because of it portrays futuristic events that were not possible at the time. By definition a science fiction film is one that is ‘based on imagined future scientific or technological advances.’ The plot of the story is literally a trip to the moon, which is something that humanity has wanted to accomplish for centuries but could only be achieved in science fiction. Some may argue that Melies’ ‘scientific’ methods are entirely fictional and they lack scientific evidence. Today it is clear to us that we cannot shoot a spaceship from a cannon and expect to land on the moon. However, Melies was using his imagination and the knowledge that he had available to devise a way to land on the moon. At that time, no one actually knew how to get to the moon. Science fiction relies on imagination to construct impossibilities. If you were to believe that “A Trip to the Moon” is not a science fiction film, then you would also disqualify “Star Wars” as science fiction. I have yet to see any scientific evidence regarding the existence of Java the Hut or even space travel at that capacity. It is George Lucas’ imagination based on possible future scientific advances. We now know that little aliens do not live on the moon, but in the early 1900s it was still a possibility. In hindsight, the film appears to be completely fictional; yet this is due to the fact that it was made over 100 years ago and today’s science can prove it wrong. When you look at the film in the perspective of its era, it fits the qualifications of a science fiction film.
ReplyDeleteDespite the scientific aspects of Melies’ A Trip to the Moon, it cannot be considered science fiction or a precursor to modern science fiction. One of the most telling qualities of a science fiction film is its attempt to explain any and all events that transpire within the film world yet are considered abnormal for the world as it is known in the present. As an example of a typical science fiction film, one can look at The Matrix. The basic idea of The Matrix is that the world as we know it is simply a computer program called “the matrix” which was created by “the machines.” The machines need to keep humans oblivious to the fact that the machines are using them as an energy source. Although this may sound very complex and strange to someone who has not seen the film, it is explained very thoroughly. The film explains the creation of the matrix through a chain of logic involving the future. While certain pieces of the chain may seem improbable, the viewer does not think of them as impossible. Therefore, the film has a sense of realism to it and can be defined as science fiction. In A Trip to the Moon, there are many unusual events that are left completely unexplained. The most obvious of these events is the spaceship’s return to Earth. The spaceship travels to the moon via a gun-like contraption. Although this mode of travel is not really possible, the audience accepts it as plausible due to the knowledge that guns fire projectiles at incredible speeds. However, the spaceship returns to Earth by simply falling off of the edge of the moon. The mode of travel to the moon seemed to make a little sense, but even in the early 1900s, it was known that you cannot travel between the Earth and the moon by simply falling off of cliff. There is no explanation whatsoever as to why the spaceship could return to Earth in this manner. When certain inexplicable aspects of A Trip to the Moon are recognized, one realizes that the film is not science fiction but simply a film designed to amuse an audience through a simple tale and the fact that they are watching a story using the new invention of film.
ReplyDeleteA Trip to the Moon is by no means a science fiction movie, but rather a comedy with a science based plot. I have seen a lot of science fiction movies in my days, from Terminator to Avatar to Jurassic Park; such movies take current scientific knowledge –ranging from time travel to modification of DNA- seriously and apply it to narratives of human experiences. Even if by 1902 people didn’t have a great understanding of space travel, surely they would realize that it is impossible to shoot scientists into space using a cannon, and a 19th century astronomers would have already been able to determine that the moon did not in fact have a face. Unlike true science fiction, Méliès’ film uses comedic effects. For example the scientists appear to be magicians, wearing robes and wizard hats, defining the films distance from sci-fi in general. Additionally, women in shorts load the cannon giving the film an atmosphere of theatre. To me, science fiction movies have a plot that is somewhat believable and made even more believable by scientific principles. Méliès arguably laid the ground work for sci-fi movies by loosely dealing with the idea of space travel. A Trip to the Moon had me laughing instead of thinking about the possibilities of reaching the moon. To audiences of its time, not only must it have been funny but the technical aspects of its cinematography must have been fascinating. Méliès film was a precursor to imaginative plots and the use of special effects, but not specifically science fiction.
ReplyDeleteMany people have argued weather Melies’s Film, A Trip to the moon, should be considered a science fiction film. Some people say that it should due to the fact that the scientists in the movie who travel to the moon and back are portrayed as wizards, with pointy hats and robes. Also many critics say that the aliens who live on the moon which capture the wizard scientists are a classic sign of a science fiction movie. This being said many other critics say that A trip to the Moon is not a science fiction film. The Biggest argument for this is that no point of the movie is serious. The wizards are corky and fool around and the science behind the entire movie is completely ridiculous. To get to the moon they were shot out of cannon and to get back to earth they simply jump of the side of the moon. In comparison to the Star Wars movies I say that it isn’t a science fiction movie. The Star Wars film are very serious and deal with a real issue, while A trip to the Moon, was more of a comedy in most of terms of a comedy. Also most other science fiction movies have some aspect of real science to them, A trip to the Moon has none of these aspect and therefore should not be considered a true science fiction movie.
ReplyDeleteUnlike many critics, I believe that A Trip to the Moon should not be considered the first science fiction film. When I think of a science fiction film, I think of a movie that all though may not seem entirely logical or realistic, it does involve clear acts of science or scientific principles. In the opening scene of A Trip to the Moon, the scientists are depicted as wizards, wearing pointy hats and robes. From first impression, it appears that Melies is not taking the scientific aspect of the movie seriously. Although the scientists do make a trip to the moon and while on the moon they run into aliens, something that is commonly associated with science fiction, it lacks a serious element or tone. While the scientist are preparing to make their escape from the moon there is a humorous scene where one of the scientists can be seen killing the aliens with a cane. Also lacking in what I believe to be science fiction is the element of reality. When the scientists take off to go to the moon, you see the spaceship approaching a moon with a face. In reality it is apparent that the moon does not have a face, and in my opinion, giving the moon a face adds a comedic element to the film that doesn’t register with science fiction. I think that A Trip to the Moon could possibly have been a precursor to the science fiction films we know today, due to the presence of aliens and outer space. However, it has a very prominent comedic element that detracts from the scientific element of the movie.
ReplyDeleteI think that A Trip to the Moon was ahead of its time and should be a part of the science fiction genre. Currently there are a lot of genres that are being merged with Comedies. Pure comedies are starting to fade and the movie industry is starting to merge comedies with other genres. For example, there are now Romantic Comedies, Dark Comedies and now sci-fi comedies. There has been a new wave of Sci-Fi comedies that have started to leak into the movie industry. This started with Space Balls, which is a parody of Star Wars but a Sci-Fi comedy if you had to put a genre on it. Space Balls makes fun of start wars by having flying RV’s in space instead of complex space crafts. Similar to the way that Méliés pokes fun of scientists by having them wear wizard hats, Space Balls is doing this in a modern way. A Trip to the Moon should be considered a Sci-Fi movie but it should be acknowledged that it’s also trying to be a comedy. It should be considered a Sci-Fi movie because of the general plot of the film. There are many Aliens and a story of going to the moon, which at the time is about as crazy as time travel. The thought of Aliens has been involved in many Sci-Fi films and is a re-occurring topic in Sci-Fi films. I believe that A Trip to the Moon should be considered a Sci-Fi film because of the Aliens and the over all plot considering the time period when the movie was made. Critics shouldn't worry about the comedy aspect of the film because of how movie genres are starting to combine.
ReplyDeleteI believe A Trip To The Moon should qualify as the first science fiction movie. Reference.com defines science fiction as “a form of fiction that draws imaginatively on scientific knowledge and speculation in its plot, setting, theme, etc.” The key words in this definition are imaginatively and speculation. A Trip To The Moon is depicts what is imagined and speculated to be life on the moon. At the time of the film’s creation, there was not much known about life on the moon. In order to create the movie, the director and writers needed to speculate on what they believed was on the moon. That being said, I think this film is also a comedy. Some people will discredit this film being science fiction as they think it is more of a comedy. I don’t believe that whether a film is serious or not should define whether or not it is science fiction. There are plenty of films such as Back To The Future, Ghostbusters, and Men In Black that are considered science fiction but are also comedies. A Trip To The Moon should be no different. The scene where the rocket launches to the moon reminds me of the time travel scene in Back To The Future. Both films tackle the idea of something very real (time travel and space travel), but do so in a comedic way that shouldn’t be taken too seriously by audiences. There is no reason why A Trip To The Moon cannot be science fiction and funny at the same time.
ReplyDeleteI believe that "A Trip to the Moon" was a very early and primitive form of science fiction. It is no surprise that film has evolved since the time of a trip to the moon (1902) to today (2015). I believe that the human imagination has dulled down to more factual thinking. In the past everything was possible and we had no idea how to reach the moon. At the time a large gun being pointed at the moon could be a very plausible way of reaching it. If one compared this film to a more recent film such as "Interstellar". "Interstellar" is a very sophisticated science based film that in some aspects is a total guess. As the main astronaut Cooper enters the black-hole he enters a 4-dimensional world which is basically impossible for humans to comprehend let alone project onto a screen. It made for a good story and was seen as a science fiction film. "A trip to the Moon" was following the same type of story line as "interstellar". It was a group of astronauts exploring the unknown, finding many advances in scientific study and returning to earth to share their knowledge. In the end I believe that if you compare the times of the movie a trip to the moon was a very plausible idea. But since there have been so many advances the ideas have become more clear what is out in space so today it may seem silly and impossible.
ReplyDeleteAlthough many people can present different arguments for the classification of the film as “Science Fiction” or simply “Fiction”, I find it difficult to conclude either side without admitting the validity of the opposite claim. Personally, I’d like to think that “A Trip to the Moon” was not itself a science fiction film, but initiated the plethora of science fiction that came after it. I can see how someone could think that the film should fall into the Sci-Fi genre, given the “futuristic and imaginative” nature of the plot, but the grandest claim against this would be the disregard for scientific knowledge at the time, rather than its application in the storyline. One basic criterion required to be considered a Science Fiction film is to draw from current scientific knowledge to make assumptions and predictions of advancements in the future, and the artist (admittedly) made no attempt to do so, but rather just had fun with the concept of space, and enjoyed a comedic plot without concerning himself with any scientific details. This is by no means a criticism of the film, and I don’t mean to make the claim that it did not spark advancements in editing, story-writing, and cinematography in the film industry; the reason for this disclaimer being that I noticed many people interestingly come to the defense of the film when others claim it is not a Science Fiction, as if belonging to a different genre is somehow an insult to it. Many aspects of “A Trip to the Moon” strongly suggest the author’s lack of interest in scientific realism, but the most notable would be the fact that the scientists involved in the voyage wore wizard robes and hats, which is a very blatant statement that the “science” involved in the film was, in all aspects, more “magic” than actual science; this would place the film in the Fiction Genre almost by definition.
ReplyDelete