1) 2012 (2009): Neutrinos from a solar flare heat up the Earth's core, setting off the end of life as we know it. The plot conveniently ignores the fact that neutrinos pass straight through matter—even us—without doing much of anything.
2) The Core (2003): The Earth's core has stopped rotating and scientists have to drill into it to start it back up. The moviemakers go nuts with basic geology, ending up with something the New York Times called “monumentally dumb.”
3) Armageddon (1998): A team of drillers is sent to an asteroid on its way to strike Earth to split it into two parts they say will fly safely past the planet, completely ignoring Newton's First Law of Motion ("an object will remain at rest or in uniform motion in a straight line unless acted upon by an external force"), which says that all they did was make two asteroids that would hit the Earth.
4) Volcano (1997): Los Angeles is destroyed by a volcano that springs up in the city. Bad science mingling with cheesy dialogue and effects.
5) Chain Reaction (1996): Keanu Reeves. Bubble fusion. A government plot to prevent the spread of the technology. The perfect recipe for bad.
6) The 6th Day (2000): Arnold Schwarzenegger is cloned. Because one of him just wasn't enough?
7) What the #$*! Do We Know? (2004): Read the synopsis on Wikipedia. It'll make your head hurt.
Ok nope can’t not comment.
the reason that they selected those particular movies as the best science fiction movies isn’t just because of the science used is sound. It’s also the premise of those movies.
All of the movies above are asking a what if question. For the selected worst the question they ask is not scientifically sound, no theories or real science used. It’s really just heroes try and save the world premise not a science fiction one, and yet they’re categorized as sci-fi because they have science like things in them.
They are not true sci-fi in my opinion.
The movies on the good list, on the other hand, did their research and asked thought provoking questions. Take note of the top of the list: Gattaca. It asks what if in the future your genetic code determines your life and career.
Then it asks follow up questions: How would you be treated if your code wasn’t perfect, how far would you go to cover your “imperfect” genes, how far can you get in a system designed to keep those with unfavorable genes separated from the ones with the good? I can keep going.
everyone of the movies nasa chose as their best picks ask those kinds of questions then they back it up with relatively sound scientific research.
Out of the seven top I haven’t seen numbers 5 and 6. Each of them are great examples of science fiction. Go watch them somewhere.
Out of the bottom I’ve seen the core and Armageddon great action flicks but not what I’d consider science fiction. And yet because they have science and space in them they’re categorized as sci-fi.
go be enlightened
“The moment when a kiss ends—it was like awakening reluctantly from sleep, struggling drowsily against the glare of the morning sun as it struck their eyelids, as they yearned to hold on to the fragment of unconsciousness left to them. That is the moment when sleep is sweetest.”
— Yukio Mishima, Spring Snow (trans. Michael Gallagher)
On the one hand, I want to write complex, richly crafted characters and explore their psyches and what makes them tick.
On the other hand, I want giant set piece encounters where two people whack at each other with swords five hundred feet in the air, and just when it looks like one of them has won, the other guy pulls out an even bigger sword.
annaxmalina
blakekathryn
baratheonpilled
yousharknotpass
romaincrisis
2087
