El_Gringo_Grande

I am asking this because I just watched "The Core" and it was horrible.

Good science fiction is something I can't quite explain to myself or to others.

I can live with weak characters, shaky science and even a vision that ignores basic possibilites.

It just has to have that "something" and I can't figure out what it is.

What do you think?

CingularDuality

Shaky science? I find that this is what ruins sci-fi for me... It has to be at least somewhat believable. Fortunately, when you put a story way out in the future, the limits of believability are pretty great. Star Trek and Star Wars are good. Anything by Heinlein is good.

Weak characters? The storyteller must be a master in order for me to be able to look past weak characters.

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

Trooper

FireFly was a great TV show, then the movie serenity was an excellent close to the series.

I mis-read the title wrong thought it said what IS a good sci-fi

I think what made Firefly a great show was that fact that it wasnt over the top. It used simple story lines and great actors to really make the show seem feasable..




edit: im unable to read

__________________
that sounds like a good idea trooper.
-Vulcan

CingularDuality

But what was it that made it great?

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

leejo

Hot alien chicks.

TychoCelchuuu

You don't need anything extra special for good sci-fi compared to good anything else IMHO. It's no different from any other form of entertainment. Heinlein, Lucas, and Joss Whedon have all done non sci-fi stuff that have also been hugely successful. It's not something special you add to the setting.

__________________
|TG-Irr|TychoCelchuuu

Steel_Penguin

It kinda depends on what kind of sci-fi it is. Hard sf relies on sound science and the implications of that science on technology, culture, and society more than proper charachterization.Starship Troopers(the book not the movie), the Bean offshoot of the Ender series, and some other heinlein stuff are more in this vein. Shows like Farscape, firefly, BSG, or Stargate are more charachter driven dramas (debatable with stargate in this case) that require well rounded and interesting charachters and story arcs and use the science fiction setting as more of an interesting backdrop than the main attraction.

__________________
_____________________

Spartan25

On a separate note, David Weber writes alot of fiction that is sometimes on the outer edge of believability as far as science is concerned. He relies on soild characterizations and a very solid universe. One that may not work according to scientific thought now but very solid. Its the characters that sell his work as far as I'm concerned.

__________________


99. A smiley face is not used to mark a minefield.
100. Claymore mines are not filled with yummy candy, and it is wrong to tell new soldiers that they are.
101. I am not allowed to mount a bayonet on a crew-served weapon.

CingularDuality

Anyone read Piers Anthony's Adept series? It's an interesting blend of a "hard sci fi" world that exists in a parallel world next to a magical fantasy world. Quite entertaining!

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

Steeler

Consistent internal logic.

__________________

El_Gringo_Grande

I'll vote for that.

derdmeh

GAMERA 2: ATTACK OF LEGION

answer: plots that make you seriously reconsider your notions of identity, self, personhood. that really helps.

AKIRA

not that either of these movies made me seriously anything, but i liked them because they challenged some assumptions, like sci fi should

Tychandrus

In my opinion, a good piece of science fiction can fill any number of possible criteria to make it science fiction, yet it will still be horrible. There is however one rule I tend to base my own stuff according to:

It doesn't matter what kind of technological era we are talking about. It doesn't matter how advanced technology is, what miracles it can perform, what miracles it can't perform... Good Science fiction is characterized by one golden rule:

It is about society and the people within that society dealing with and living in this new world. Essentially: it doesn't matter how advanced your technology is. Any kind of technology can break, and any kind of technology will have bugs in it. The problem for the storyteller is accurately portraying believable characters who try to cope with the problems of their world in the future and trying to deal with those problems while learning from them.

That's one of the reasons why Frank Herbert's Dune series was so great. It was about the problems of a society that had to cope with its own political, social, and cultural problems that arose because of their dependency on certain technology which gave rise to divisions in the culture. There are elements of capitalism, elements of monarchy, elements of anarchy, whatever. It's the people that populate your science fiction world which make it believable, not the technology which fuels it. If you focus too much on the technology, your story becomes an instruction manual for how the machines work and not an actual story about the people who use the machine and how they deal with it when it breaks down.

That's just my take on it anyway.

__________________

Here is how you may call me:
Ty (Tie), or Tychus. (Tie-cuss)'. Full pronounciation: Tie-can-dur-us
-Tychandrus

freekyE

Exactly how I feel ^ Good post Ty!

QuantumDelta

Check out The Night Dawns Trilogy (Age warning, not really one for young'ns)
Best example of Sci-fi (Space Opera really) ever.
Rich, interesting story that asks questions about the nature of humanity and the universe.
Rich, involving, varied characters.
Brilliant story-telling.

Amazing author, really the best books of the decade for me (I would say last decade, but even this decade I haven't found better).