Ridley Scott, Post '2001 -A Space Odyssey': Science Fiction is Dead!

August 31, 2007

Ridley Scott, Post '2001 -A Space Odyssey': Science Fiction is Dead!

In a speech at the Venice Film Festival at special screening of his seminal noir thriller Blade Runner, Sir Ridley Scott, the legendary director of Alien, believes that science-fiction as a genre is dead, going the way of Westerns.

Sir Ridley believes that although the flashy effects of recent block-busters, such as The Matrix, Independence Day and The War of the Worlds, may sell tickets, that none can beat Stanley Kubrick’s 1968 epic 2001: A Space Odyssey.

“There’s nothing original. We’ve seen it all before. Been there. Done it,” Scott said. Asked to pick out examples, he said: “All of them. Yes, all of them.”

Made at the height of the “space race” between the United States and the USSR, 2001 predicted a world of malevolent computers, routine space travel and . Kubrick had such a fastidious eye for detail, he employed Nasa experts in designing the spacecraft.

Sir Ridley said that 2001 was “the best of the best”, in use of lighting, special effects and atmosphere, adding that every sci-fi film since had imitated or referred to it. “There is an over reliance on special effects as well as weak storylines,” he said of modern sci-fi films.

Sir Ridley is one of Britain’s most acclaimed film-makers. His extraordinary number of box-office hits include Alien – another sci-fi classic, best remembered for the scene of an infant creature bursting through John Hurt’s chest – as well as Thelma & Louise, Gladiator and Black Hawk Down.

But it is for Blade Runner that sci-fi fans revere him most. Ridley's vision, complete with the legendary work of Syd Mead, turned Philip K. Dick's novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? into a look at a dystopian future that still influences the look and feel of science fiction films to this day.

To celebrate the 25th anniversary of its original release, Sir Ridley has produced a new cut of the film, which has its world premiere at the festival.

Apart from its stunning camera work and state-of-the art special effects, Blade Runner is a stylish, brooding film noir starring Harrison Ford as a special detective – a “blade runner” – assigned to hunt down a band of killer androids, and Rutger Hauer as the replicant leader. The film pioneered its treatment of globalization, urban decay, global warming, overpopulation and genetic engineering.

Blade Runner explores the most basic existential questions – What does it mean to be human? Can robots and computers have souls?

Scott was browbeaten by Warner Bros into altering his original vision for the film after it tested badly with preview audiences. At the behest of the studio he introduced a voiceover narration to explain the story to audiences and tacked on a happy ending.

Blade Runner has been restored and remastered a mega-multi disc version with the inclusion of new and extended scenes and improved special effects on a special five-disc DVD set that Warner Brothers will release this autumn.

Scott began his feature film directing career with The Duellists, a small but dazzling masterpiece, which brought him the Grand Jury Prize at the 1978 Cannes Film Festival. His second film was the breakthrough hit Alien, which won an Academy Award for Special Effects. This was followed by Blade Runner, now considered one of the landmark science fiction films of all time. In 2003, Scott was knighted by the Queen of England.

Posted by Casey Kazan.

Comments

Ugh. 2001 is one of the worst films ever. I've seen it three times and never walked away feeling anything but regret for the waste of precious hours of my life on what was tedious, poorly done drek worthy of any B-list film. Hideous.

Yet it is constantly praised by certain people as some monumental effort or pinnacle of the genre. Oy. I don't know, maybe I just haven't taken enough drugs to appreciate it's "artistry" or "depth" or whatever attraction it apparently holds.

Posted by: Rev. Raven Daegmorgan | August 31, 2007 at 06:55 PM

I agree with Scott that 2001 was a classic that is one of the best Sci-Fi films that has been or ever will be made. However, to say that the genre is dead now and that there is no point doing anything further is a profoundly foolish statement. His reasoning sounds like that release from the Patent Office 80 or 90 years ago that everything important had already been invented. Foolish on its face.

But lets talk about film and TV. If there is no point in doing Sci-Fi after 2001, why do Blade Runner? Wasn't that made after 2001? Was that a waste? Clearly not! It was an outstanding film based on a brilliant concept. Granted there is lots of crap Sci-Fi out there, but much of that is because film directors and TV producers didn't have the brains/imagination to do a descent job using great material. There is a lot of great Sci-Fi out there, it just hasn't been made into (good) movies yet.

People like Scott who say there is nothing out there need to shut up and start reading. What about the classics? How about a film version of Azimov's Foundation and Empire trilogy? How about a collection of shorts based on the early Clarke short stories -- among the best short stories I have ever read anywhere. What about Clarke's novels like Childhood's End, Rendezvous with Rama or Songs of Distant Earth? All fine books that could make excellent films. How about a better film version of some of Azimov's robot stories (better than I Robot which was done as a robot shoot'em-up). What about a film version of Anne McCaffrey's Dragon Flight? What a fantastic film that would make. And these are just a few of the amazing stories and authors that are out there waiting to be used.

Just looking at the amazing rework of Battlestar Galactica or Star Trek Deep Space 9 should tell you how great stories and character development can occur in the context of Science Fiction. In many ways, the best Sci-Fi isn't in the movies, it is on TV where apparently creative freedom still lives. Believe me, the body of Science Fiction literature is a very deep and rich mine for anyone in the film or TV industry who has the intellect and the patience to read and think. Anyone who tells you otherwise is either ignorant or a fool.

Posted by: Stargazer | October 26, 2007 at 02:48 AM