Oh, here we go...
 
Ridley Scott saying SF movies are dead is as redundant as Quentin Tarantino saying gangster movies are dead, and for pretty much the same reasons.  Both ot 'em took a tired, vapid, shallow genre and gave it an extra depth - although I'd argue Tarantino did a better job - then bemoan the fact that other directors/actors/scrpitwriters didn't follow their lead.

I have always had a deep abiding love for SF (or Skiffy, as we call it here on planet Earth) because it presupposes a certain amount of intelligence on the part of the reader.  Note I said "reader", not "audience" and there is your big clue.  Skiffy in its written form is one of the most ingelligent, imaginative and well written forms of fiction you'll find in the English language.  Skiffy movies are by and large, total and utter arse biscuits.  Star Wars has a lot to answer for and IMO, is the most significant movie that happened to Skiffy in that it set the genre back by at least 20 years.  All the promise and vision that Kubrick brought to 2001 (admittedly, a lot of it was pretentious bollocks) was fucked up in an instant by the movie otherwise known as Bonanza in Space, AKA Star Wars.

Movie makers have never done a good deed by Skiffy.  Almost without exception, they have pandered to the Sun reader audience, where written Skiffy plays more to the Independent/Times/Grauniad crowd.  There are thousands of amazing, intelligent, thought provoking, visual, visceral, thrilling, funny, sexy, amazing Skiffy novels out there but until the movie and tv companies get their heads out of their arses, all we will ever see are pale imitations of great art.

So yeah, SF movies are dead.  They never were alive.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery