Some people I've talked to don't like science fiction because it isn't realistic and too fantastic, but that's exactly why I like it. SF is a way to escape from reality. A typical SF story isn't limited to being historically accurate or being particularly believable. Science fiction is limited only to the extent that the human imagination can lead us, and that's exactly why I like it. So, let's discuss science fiction in its various mediums.
"Cisco to Ops."
"Go ahead, Commander."
"The coffee machine is going haywire again, just like in the last episode."
"Oh no, it must be another alien computer virus again! Wacky hijinks abound!"
And then there came Voyager. The idea of a female captain intrigued me. I was very interested in it from the beginning, but shortly lost interest. Half of their crew dies as they are blasted to the other side of the galaxy, and they have to team up with a bunch of pirates to get home. They're in over their heads, encountering aliens they can't communicate with because they've never encountered them before, they're low on fuel, etc. Seemed exciting to me, except that the actual show was nothing like that at all and became just as bland as everything else. And then they brought in some weird alien infestation species that was making the Borg run scared, which seemed cool, but then they screwed up the whole potential by hiring a bunch of 12-year-olds to write the scripts. Stupid. And it sure seemed to be trying to appeal to 12-year-olds too, especially when they introduced the Borg chick named "36D" or whatever her name is. It seems like they've finally learned their lesson with Star Trek: Enterprise. They actually take a while to decipher unkown alien languages, and it's real cool that there's no United Federation of Planets to always have the upper hand. The episodes seem rather intelligent, although I burst out laughing in one episode where the doctor said, "Evolution is not just a theory, it's a fundamental principal of science!" That killed me. I like this show, but since I live in Japan, I haven't much of this series.
Babylon 5 completely kicked ass. This was the show that Deep Space 9 tried to emulate but failed. The first season of B5 was so-so and rather common, but it really took off from the second season. The dull Captain Sinclair was replaced by Captain Sheridan played by Bruce Boxleitner, and the show really became interesting. The war against the Shadows began, and it was really cool. I never did see any of the movies however, and I completely ignored the very last season where they brought in a female captain. They really should have ended the series by then, but they tried to prolong it past its maturity. Like an over-ripe fruit, it started to lose its solidity and its appeal. The thing I liked best about B5 was also its biggest fault: it was a continual storyline in which each episode built off of the previous one, making it difficult for a newcomer to understand what was going on.
The X-Files was a pretty cool show until they let it live past it's maturity, just like B5. When David Duchovny didn't feel like playing Mulder anymore, that should've been the main clue that it was time to end the show. I really don't believe in alien abductions and such. I think that if there are aliens who have managed to do the impossible and break the laws of physics, I think that they would have a way to prevent their technologically superior space ships from crashing into Roswell, New Mexico. If they can break space and time to come here, they probably would make their craft a bit safer than that. Nevertheless, X-Files is a really cool show. The Sci-Fi Channel is a dream come true. Being in Japan, I really miss this channel, along with Comedy Central and Cartoon Network. I completely love Farscape is a pretty cool show, especially since it features Jim Henson's Muppets. I didn't get into the show until a while after I finally received the Sci-Fi Channel when my family ditched Cox in favor of Quest digital cable. Lex is another show that I found amusing.
And I must mention Mystery Science Theater 3000 as one of my alltime favorite TV shows! My first exposure to MST3K was Mystery Science Theater 3000: The Movie. In the Phoenix, Arizona area, there was only one movie theater that was showing this movie. It playing at a movie theater across the street from Arizona State University, and my friend Galen was living in a dorm there at the time. So, the two of us walked over to the theater to see it. I haven't laughed that hard in a movie theater in my life, and I instantly fell in love with MST3K. Unfortunately, my cable provider Cox didn't carry Comedy Central on which the show aired, nor the Sci-Fi Channel where the show later moved to. It's really unfortunate that they had to end the show even though they never seemed to run out of cheesy movies to mock. I'm not even sure if it will be on the air in America anymore after this year.
Science Fiction is cool. Harrison Ford is cool. Ergo, Blade Runner is cool. If you've seen the movie and you still need me to explain what's so cool about it, then I really don't want to be your friend. As an action movie, the plot moves fairly slowly, so some people don't care for it. But that's what I like about it. It's a dark, atmospheric view of the somewhat near future and the consequences of tampering with humanity.
There are two versions of this movie: the original and the director's cut. For the longest time, we only had the original until about 1992 or so when Ridley Scott released the director's cut. The original movie had a voice narration by Harrison Ford to give the movie a real private eye, Maltese Falcon kind of appeal to it. It had a happy ending in which Ford's character Deckard drives off with the Replicant Rachel in the end, who surprisingly doesn't have an "expiration date" like all other Replicants. In the director's cut, Ford's narration is removed, and you realize just how little dialogue the movie has. The prologue narration is removed as well, leaving only text. Deckard becomes a very impersonal character, and the viewer is distanced from him considerably. The happy ending is removed, and the movie ends when the elevator doors close. The only additional footage is Deckard's dream sequence of a unicorn. Usually I have to explain the connection of this scene with the origami unicorn that Deckard's assistant Gaff leaves outside his apartment's door at the end of the movie. Just like how Deckard knew Rachel's dreams and memories, apparently Gaff knew about Deckard's dreams as well. So therefore Deckard is a Replicant as well doing the dirtywork for the police! To me, this version of the movie is much more thoughtful and interesting, yet often I talk to people who prefer the original.
Don't get me wrong, I enjoy both versions of the movie and I treat them as separate entities. I just like the more artistic and intelligent director's cut better. The first version is nearly impossible to find on video tape, and it has never been released on DVD in America. However, I found the Japanese subtitled version of the first movie for only a thousand yen (ten dollars) in Kobe last month! I was very happy about that.
And, of course, there is Jar Jar. In the first three movies, R2D2 and C3PO played the role of comic relief. The re-release of Return of the Jedi featured the remake of the musical score in Jabba's Palace, which I thought was a bit corny and too cartooney. I figured that it would be an indicator of what awaited us for the next trilogy. And so, there was Jar Jar and the Gungans. I thought it was very stupid how people were blaming Lucas for being "racist" because the Gungans somehow represented African tribes or something, and that Jar Jar was degrading towards blacks. They never stopped to realize that the actor for Jar Jar, Ahmed Best, was a black fellow himself and that naturally his nature as an African-American would come across in his character. And the comedians who played the Neimoidian Trade Federation guys made their alien accents a bit strange: sometimes it sounded a little like a Japanese accent, and others like Spanish. So what? Big deal. At least it's not like Star Trek where all of the aliens, even ones who have never encountered the human race before, can speak fluent, flawless English. And in the original Star Wars trilogy, all of the Imperial officers spoke with British accents. Did they therefore portray British people as evil domineering agressors out to rule the galaxy? Did that offend everyone in England? I don't remember that. I admire Lucas's ideas for alien races, for they are far more imaginitive than Star Trek where almost all of the aliens are basically just like humans with some bumps on their heads or spots down their necks. And the Gungans proved that not all aliens are very advanced in the brains, and that some members of these alien cultures can be rather irritating. Jar Jar irritated the audiences who watched the movie, and he also irritated the characters in the movie. That was his role in the story: to be a clumsy, ADHD spaz who gets into trouble. I didn't mind him too much, and if you've seen the behind the scenes documentary included with the Phantom Menace disc 2 DVD, you may think that Jar Jar's actor probably did the best acting in the movie because he was so animated and flexible and adept at portraying such a bizarre character.
And for those people who can't imagine why Lucas would want to make prequels, I really don't care. Before much information on this movie was released, I don't know how many people thought that the next Star Wars movies would be based on Timothy Zahn's Heir to the Empire trilogy of books. So many people kept asking, "Where's Luke and Han?" Duh! It's not that hard to follow. And many people couldn't even put two and two together and realize that Senator Palpatine is Darth Sidious! Duh! I didn't think the acting was bad. People don't seem to remember that the original trilogy had some bad dialouge and flat acting as well. Leia saying "I knew I meant more to you than money!" particularly stands out for me. The thing is, Star Wars plays an important part of younger Americans' lives. People keep expecting these new movies to relive their precious childhood memories and affect them in the same way instead of treating them as separate entities, and that's stupid.
There were only two things that I really didn't like about The Phantom Menace. The first thing was Lucas's borrowing of the idea of the immaculate conception to explain the birth of Anakin. As a Christian, this came as a surprise to me that Lucas would use such a potentially controversial issue to advance the story of his movie. Of course, the concept of immaculate conception is not specific to Christianity at all; there are numerous obscure and not so obscure religions that have the idea of a savior of virgin birth. It seems that the idea of such a savior was ingrained into the minds of many people, which I do not find surprising. Nevertheless, it was a little bit too fantastic of an idea and I think that the movie could have done without it. The second thing I didn't like about the movie ties into the first one: the so-called "midi-chlorians." This was just a stupid idea to scientifically explain away the Force. I grew up with the idea of the Force of being a mystical, inexplainable thing. I suppose it still is, but the idea that there are a bunch of stupid microscopic organisms that enable people to use the Force takes all the fun out of it.
What really cracks me up is how some critics accused Lucas of trying to make money. Oh, how dare he! And people are bashing all the kids' stuff that came out in stores, like Jar Jar coloring books. They don't remember that they had the same kind of stuff when I was a kid, and I was young enough then to appreciate stuff like that. I had coloring books, and Ewok adventure books, and silly collectibles too. Big deal. I'm reminded of my high school sophomore English teacher who said that a critic is a person who knows the way, but they can't drive a car. But I would go further to say that I think they just don't know anything. All they care about are the typical trash movies that Hollywood generates, like City of Angels or something. Movie critics are a bunch of communist perverts. Only a few like Roger Ebert can see a movie for its entertainment potential and not just its artistic potential. And they said that Phantom Menace doesn't have any character development? Well I admit it's subtle (and you see more personality each time you see the movie... I was still catching new ideas the fourth time I saw it), but the typical movie critics equate having a personality with having sex or something.
Other movies
Gattica: This movie is a disturbing prophetic look at our future, in which mankind's zeal to produce beautiful and default-free babies has made laws for people to have test-tube babies instead of the natural way, and also revoking basic human rights for those who are not born this way. The movie is about one man who was conceived naturally and has myopia, and therefore has no chance at a job greater than a janitor. The movie is about his efforts to maintain a stolen identity in order of fulfilling his dream to become an astronaut and go on a mission to Mars.
Bicentennial Man: This is a Robin Williams movie in which he plays a butler robot who eventually develops into a human being. The movie spans 200 years of his life and his fight to receive human rights. It's based on a story by Isaac Asimov, so naturally it's an intelligent movie.
A.I. is one of those movies that have affected me in a profound way. It's like a cross between Blade Runner and Pinoccio, if you can even imagine such a thing. It's about a robot boy who goes on a quest to become a real boy to win the love of his mother. I cried a lot at the end of the movie. It's funny that I always cry in movies and my wife doesn't. Isn't it usually the other way around? Anyhow, after watching A.I., I had to call my mom and tell her how much I love her. It's just one of those movies that had a deep impact on me.
12 Monkeys is a rather eccentric and depressing time travel movie. If you don't mind Bruce Willis and Brad Pitt, then I recommend watching this movie. It goes along the time-travel theory that no matter how hard you try to change the events of time, it will always be fulfilled. You'll feel depressed after watching the movie, but it is a rather intelligent S.F. movie.
The Green Mile: Although it's not technically "science fiction," I definitely recommend this Tom Hanks movie. It is kind of like an episode of The X-Files, In which Hanks plays a prison warden on death row who received a prisoner who has a special supernatural gift. I won't tell you much more of this movie, but it has you guessing whether or not this man is truly a murderer or not. It's about three hours long, but I promise you that it keeps you glued to your seat to see what happens next.
With my job as an assitant English teacher in Japan, I've had a lot of time at my desk with nothing to do but to read books. I never had enough time to read the books I wanted to while I was in college with all the boring textbooks I had to study, but now I'd say that the best thing about being an ALT is the opportunity to read so many good books. During college I mainly read non-fiction books and until this year, I haven't read many novels in a long time. After finally tackling James Clavell's 1,000+ page book Shogun, I read Idoru by William Gibson. I'd recommend this to anyone who is into Japanese pop culture but who have not yet been introduced to the cyberpunk subgenre of SF literature. I really enjoy Gibson's fast-paced writing and how his stories jump right into situations without really setting up a background to the story; the first chapter always seems like it really ought to be the second chapter of the story. His vivid descriptions of virtual reality, his knowledgeable references to Japanese pop-music and his ability to weave two vaguely related stories of two characters together into a meaningful plot really impressed me. I finished the book in a very short time. I once heard somebody describe Gibson's writing style as hitching a ride on a moving train. The train's already started moving, and you need to jump on real quick or you'll be left behind.
After that, I tackled Tolkein. While it's technically Fantasy and not SF, I'll talk about it anyway because both genres seem to go hand-in-hand. I started with The Hobbit and read through all three books of the Rings trilogy. While it was a bit dry at times, I really enjoyed this series of books. I've been intending to read these books for years, but I never got around to it. With the upcoming release of The Lord of the Rings, I was prompted to read this series before the end of the year. The only thing I didn't like about Tolkein's writing style is how he would mention historical names or artifacts without really giving a clue as to the background. For example, when the "Numenorians" were first mentioned: no background was given on such an important element to the history of Middle Earth. Many of these are references to The Silmarillion, which I've been told is a rather meticulous and difficult book to read. It's obvious by reading these books that Tolkein really has a passion for history, anthropology, and geography, but I was a bit confused at times. Especially how so many different things, people, and places were given various names in different languages.
Last month I read the novelization to The Phantom Menace. It really filled in the plot holes and described the story and characters in greater detail.I just finished the second book of C.S. Lewis's space trilogy. I really enjoyed reading the Chronicles of Narnia fantasy books when I was a kid, and about four years ago I discovered that C.S. Lewis had written a series of space novels. I bought the trilogy box set years ago, and I now finally got around to reading them. The first book, Out of the Silent Planet, was rather interesting. Lewis vividly describes a truly alien, surrealistic landscape. When the main character, Dr. Ransom, makes first contact with an alien species on Mars (known as Malacandra), it is much like I would expect a first contact to be like. However, 3/4ths of the way into the second book Perelandra really started to suck. Dr. Ransom lands on Perelandra (Venus), a paradise floating on water. He meets a naked green woman, and it's quickly apparent that God has started another "Adam and Eve" project there. The "serpent" soon arrives, who is a man who has become the agent of the devil. So it's Ransom's duty to convince the woman not to follow the tempter's advice to do what has been forbidden. It was interesting until Ransom becomes weary from arguing with his tireless enemy and simply decides to just beat the shit out of him until he stops moving. From then on, the book went downhill. At the end of the book, "Adam" was talking about how they're going to build great houses with columns and arches and stuff and it really pissed me off. What's the purpose of living in houses when they can live naked in paradise free from harm??? Stupid. I expected better thinking from C.S. Lewis. Have you ever read a book that really started to suck, but you didn't want to quit because you've already invested so much time into reading it, and you hang onto the thread of a chance that the end of the book might redeem itself? It's happened to me before, and I'm always disappointed. Two examples I can think of are Robotech: The Masters' Gambit and Star Wars: Splinter of the Mind's Eye. Both truly sucked.
I'm currently reading Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card. It's rather interesting. I've read half of it before a few years back, but I had to stop reading it when summer vacation ended and my university classes resumed. Also on my "to read" list for the future are Rendezvous with Rama by Arthur C. Clarke, Dune by Frank Herbert (the Sci Fi Channel miniseries was great, but I still haven't read the actual book), and Hyperion by Dean Simmons.
"No Really! The toys are for my kids!"
In defense of Jar Jar
I happen to have liked Star Wars Episode 1: The Phantom Menace. A long time before the movie was released, I learned that the Episode 1 was going to be a whimsical adventure of youth. Therefore it would not have the dark elements that The Empire Strikes Back had. Empire is by far my favorite of all the Star Wars movies, and I know I'm not alone. I enjoyed the story and the characters of Episode 1 very much. It had many interesting elements to the story. A young slave boy who wins a chariot race to save his friends and the girl he loves, a scheming senator who manipulates some greedy officials to attack his own planet in order to advance himself, the relationship between a master and a learner, and a dark cult wanting revenge against those who nearly destroyed them. The reason why Star Wars is considered as modern mythology is because Lucas borrows many aspects from our history, myths, legends, and religions. People don't realize this.Tron
Science fiction, computers, and video games. I recently introduced my wife Mayu to Tron and she couldn't get past the dated special effects. To me, the movie is still way cooler looking than a lot of newer movies. On surface value, Tron embodied every young kid's fantasy of having onself being completely absorbed into a video game. In a deeper look, the movie showed a lot of the video gaming industry and the cutthroat business practices in the computer software industry, as well as the possible outcome of creating artificial intelligence to replace a human's job of maintaining networks and business operations and security. As far as I know, Tron was the first movie to portray hacking and other computer related crimes. Tron is probably a first in the cyberpunk world. I'm very excited about the rumored sequel, Tron 2.0.The Matrix
When I saw the trailers months before the movie ever came out, The Matrix didn't really seem that cool. But then I saw it a week after I saw The Phantom Menace and I loved it. I saw it with my dad and we were glued to our seats. After the movie, I wished somebody would shoot at me because I was in the mood to dodge bullets and I felt like I really could do it. It's just one of those movies that change you. If you haven't seen it, go rent it or something. I can't wait for the next movie in the series to come out.
While I'm not a big fan of Star Trek (even though I've seen all the movies), at least Star Wars and Star Trek are a way to escape from reality, and they present an alternate view of reality that's suitable for all ages. Unfortunately, most other SF movies really suffer from a lack of intelligence. Here are a few others that I have enjoyed recently: Science fiction in books
With the amount of crap that is out there in terms of SF movies, it is necessary to turn to novels in order to be exposed to some truly brilliant science fiction stories. Since novels generally tend to appeal to a more intelligent, mature audience, SF novels tend to rely on an intriguing plot instead of mindless action set against a futuristic backdrop. I'm talking about books by authors like Arthur C. Clarke and Isaac Asimov. 
Go on to the next chapter of Greg's Life
Go back to the "Greg's Life" Table of Contents