Some commentators have dubbed Méliès's film A Trip to the Moon the first science fiction movie. Not all critics, however, agree. Tom Gunning, the author of our essay on that film, argues for the contrary view. He states, " 'Science' fiction implies a certain sobriety and serious concern with scientific and technological possibilities. . . . But Méliès cannot take his scientists seriously at all, introducing them first as wizards with pointy hats, figures out of fairy pantomime . . . (70). What do you think? While you may not be able to judge whether this is the first of its kind, you can make a judgment about whether or not it qualifies as science fiction. Compare this film with other science fiction movies you have seen. How is it the same? How is it different? Can we call it a science fiction film, a precursor of such films, or something entirely different?
I think when viewed in a vacuum and with proper historical context, this film is science fiction. It reflects what we knew of space and 'going to the moon’ at the time. I feel it's actually quite unfair to compare it to current science fiction films especially in a time of such scientific revolution. We are now tackling such complex topics as multiverses and quantum physics. Those terms would sound foreign to men like Meiles from that time period. A time period when going to the moon was a thought someone could barely even comprehend. So yes, for the time period in a vacuum it is undoubtedly a science fiction film. In terms of the 'sobriety' mentioned that comes with science fiction films, all it takes is a google of the term 'science fiction films' to realize that 'seriousness' is not an end all be all. The one that cemented this for me in the list of google-curated science fiction films is venom. A movie that was critically panned (a personal guilty pleasure for me) and is about a space goo that crashes on earth and attaches itself to the body of a photojournalist. Science goes out the window in that film and if that is considered science fiction I think without a doubt A trip to the moon deserves that title as well. If you want to discredit a trip to the moon as a science fiction film, that same energy should be held for modern-day superhero films.
ReplyDeleteThe definition of science fiction is fiction based on scientific and technological possibilities. By this definition, A Trip to the Moon is a science fiction movie. Although this film falls under the genre of science fiction, it does not look like the other movies under the genre we see today. It definitely has elements of fantasy sprinkled in, such as the scientists dressed up as wizards and the moon having a face, but it deals with a scientific development that was very popular during this time period. Space travel and exploration falls under the category of science fiction, and that’s what this whole film is about. The film imagines a way to get to the moon, and even what it would be like on the moon, including what life forms there may be. Even today’s science fiction movies include elements that are not yet possible or seem unrealistic. For his time period, Méliès was making films with these same elements. When we think of science fiction we think of movies where people can fly, or live on mars, or have special technology that allows them to transform themselves into different things. Clearly these things are not possible yet, but that’s the whole point of science fiction. Méliès focused on going to the moon in his film, which back then was seen as a scientific possibility for the future. His idea could be compared to our ideas of flying cars now. With all this considered I think we could call his film a science fiction film.
ReplyDeleteScience fiction films in today's society frequently feature elements that do not exist in our reality. Based on the genre’s definition and modern movies we watch today, science fiction incorporates new technology and scientific developments as well as imaginative notions such as time travel, parallel universes, and extraterrestrial life. Despite the fact that A Trip to the Moon seems to be a little different from recent films, it still classifies as science fiction. The plot of the film revolves around a group of professors who use a cannon to send themselves to the moon and then sleep on the moon's surface. Afterwards, they kill a bunch of aliens on the moon, splash back to Earth in the ocean, and have a parade in the city to commemorate their journey. Many special effects like the moon's bleeding eye and some aspects of humor, such as the wizards with pointy hats, are included in A Trip to the Moon, but they are minor details compared to the many components of science fiction. The scene with the aliens in one of the movie's scenes symbolizes theories of extraterrestrial life outside of the Earth and in space, which are unrealistic based on scientific evidence. Georgie Melies, the director of the film, contributed to the growth of technology in the film's scenes as well as on the set outside of the film. Melies introduced the concept of a rocket flying to the moon, which many people thought was impossible at the time. He was also one of the first filmmakers to utilize production designs and storyboards, and he would assist in the painting of new objects for his films. Melies intended to portray science fiction with the ideas of evolution for future possibilities and space exploration.
ReplyDeleteI think that Méliès's film, A Trip to the Moon, should most definitely be considered science fiction. I think that is does clearly have many differences from what we now know as science fiction, though the standards we hold for science fiction came after the film was created. From a technical standpoint, this film contains the requirements for being science fiction, with the general story of the film being to travel to the moon. I think the film is more cartoonish than most other films we consider science fiction, but A Trip to the Moon, didn’t have the same baseline to work with that other films did. The film compared to other films at the time would most definitely be considered science fiction as it illustrated a sense of scientific achievement that seemed unreal for its time. In that aspect, I believe that A Trip to the Moon is just like other more recent science fiction films. I acknowledge that other science fiction has a different sort of tone, generally more serious and at least acts as though the scientific achievement in the film isn’t really magic. I think that A Trip to the Moon didn’t have any other films for reference, so I think that lead it to seem more magical in comparison. If we compare films of that time to more current films in their genres, I’m sure that we would find major differences between those films, though the older films would still fit that genre. I think that film was vastly different when A Trip to the Moon was made, thus the style and details of it seem quite out of place when compared to more current science fiction films.
ReplyDeleteThe Science fiction genera is directly linked to possibilities of the future, and exploring their implications on the world. Méliès's film A Trip to the Moon treats their scientists as magicians, clearly portraying their lack of belief in the film’s feasibility. The film gives explanation of how the rocket works, depicting a model and the characters planning it out. If the only scenes of the film were the exploration of that technology, than it could be argued that the film is in the realm of science, as scaling up a gun to shoot to the moon seems like a possibility the future might hold. However, just because there is an instance of reason, doesn’t mean the whole thing is scientifically plausible. There are many more cases where the magicians perform magic tricks, without any hint of reason or reality displayed. For example, even in the scene where the magicians are talking about the giant gun-rocket, they magically transform scrolls into chairs to sit on. Scrolls are another common trope of magic, further confirming the film’s portrayal of its own impossibility. Later in the film, when the magicians are shooting towards the moon, a face suddenly appears on it, and when they crash on the moon, the face starts bleeding. It is hard to believe that people of the scientific community would actually think the moon could be alive. Then, after crashing onto the moon, all of the magicians go to sleep and dream the same dream. Again, they are all woken up at the same time as the dream, adding another supernatural phenomenon to the film. Shortly after, yet another example, one of the characters randomly transforms their umbrella into a mushroom. If the film itself doesn’t think what’s happening is possible, why should we categorize it as anything but just fiction?
ReplyDeleteGeorge Méliès Trip to the moon is the first science fiction movie. I feel like its unfair to assess the movie with todays standard for a science fiction movie. In the early 1900’s, when Trip to the Moon was created scientific knowledge and the common perspective of science where less developed than today. We can’t expect a serious attitude about science of people in the 1900’s because of what we know today. If we were to analyze science fiction movies from the fifties we would be able to see that the Trip to the Moon is more legitimate as a Sci-Fi film. Méliès film featured aspects that carried on to some of the most well-known science fiction content. The costumes of the moon peoples in Trip to the Moon costumes are very similar to those worn by actors in Star Trek. The female assistant characters whom help the astronauts on earth have similarities to the female protagonists and supporting characters in fifties Science fiction movies. Trip to the moon falls into the trend that all of the Sci-Fi movies follow, and it was the first to do it. The film addressed and tried to rationalize and visualize the unknown. Space exploration is the most common trope in Science Fiction films. For example, Star Wars, Star Trek, and even some marvel films venture in to space too. Even though marvel films don’t do the best job of trying to rationalize the science behind the powers that their super heroes have. Ultimately, I think that Trip to the Moon isn’t the most science-rich film, but I think that it was a real trend setter.
ReplyDeleteIn many ways, George Méliès's film A Trip to the Moon can and should be considered the first Sci-Fi film. Although Tom Gunning argues for science fiction films to have a "certain sobriety", Méliès's film captures the essence of science fiction itself when he uses the film to attempt to show an exploration of an idea far beyond anything possible at the time - going to the moon. Although Méliès does decide to dress his scientists as "wizards with pointy hats", the plot of his film still revolves around traveling to the moon. Like many science fiction films of today's age, the film includes extraterrestrial life, in the form of people that attack the scientists after they land on the moon. Granted, Méliès does take some creative liberties when he shows the girls readying the ship for launch or the scientists making the moon-people disappear in puffs of smoke, but that is no different from modern-age films that might use CGI or other special effects to keep the viewer entertained and interested in the film. Even with his creative choices, Méliès still makes sure that he shows the scientists planning their trip, the actual launch, and their (slightly comical) return to the Earth. Additionally, even the main characters and focus of the film are the scientists, doing what they're supposed to - science. Overall, A Trip to Moon should definitely be considered a science fiction film, as the plot, subject, and other aspects of the film certainly fulfill the basic requirements for being considered a science fiction film. Although Méliè's idea of launching scientists to the moon with a cannon may seem trivial to us now, it would most certainly have been groundbreaking for its time.
ReplyDelete