ERIK SOFGE: Are Hollywood science fiction movies going down the tubes?

A quick comparison: In 1982, the year’s major sci-fi releases included Blade Runner, E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, The Thing and Tron. In 2007, we saw Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem, 28 Weeks Later, I Am Legend, Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer, The Invasion, Resident Evil: Extinction, Spider-Man 3 and Transformers. In this glut of sequels, remakes and comic, cartoon and video-game adaptations, the closest thing to an original production was I Am Legend, based on a classic novel that had already been made into multiple movies. Unfortunately, the science in that movie is on par with Optimus Prime’s magic, robot-killing heart, or the completely brushed-aside explanation of the Silver Surfer’s cosmic abilities. In all of these movies—particularly the ones based on comics—technology is used to leap sudden chasms in the plot, then shoved quickly out of sight. They get away with this because we no longer expect it to make sense. After all, it’s a comic … or a video game, or a cartoon, or a live-action movie that feels like a cartoon. So it’s supposed to be stupid, right? . . .

What’s missing from Hollywood sci-fi, and what the comic adaptations continue to smother, is a celebration of smarts. The smaller movies have them—films like Sunshine and Primer. In fiction, writers like Charles Stross are pushing the limits of the genre. Maybe next year’s Star Trek reboot will make quantum physics look cool again. And if anyone can return some credibility to science-fiction movies, it’s James Cameron, whose long-gestating Avatar (about a human remote-operating a robot on a distant, alien planet) also shows up next year.

Let’s hope. They can’t all be Destination Moon, but, yeah.