- "The central character is an innocent bystander who is victimized by a technological accident or an unnatural phenomenon of another world.
- "The central character may or may not overcome the challenge of the antagonist." If he or she fails to, he or she is still a victim at the end.
- "The existence of relationships promises respite and perhaps an element of hope in light of the daunting scale of the struggle.
- "The antagonist may be a scientist or the product of science and nature. The scale of the antagonist is so great (the ants in the Naked Jungle), that the central character is reminded not only of her mortality, but also of how very human she is.
- "The outcome in the science fiction film story is often more hopeful than are the outcomes in either the film noir or the horror film.
- "There is a certain nobility that devolves to the central character based on her attempt to overcome her struggle with the supernatural (Aliens).
- "The environment can be urban or rural, earthboard or otherwordly. In any case, the environment is a benign, but necessary, host for the antagonist. The presence of earth and how the environment [earth or space] is presented reminds us of our place in the natural order.
- "The story line of the science fiction film is often plot intensive and presents a specific threat to the natural order. The plot outlines the central character's response to the threat."
Now, what I want to do for this response is to write about how each of the two films we watched last week (Planet of the Apes and Close Encounters) does or does not conform to each of the eight points written above. For each point, give examples that prove your argument. This blog response is worth 20 points and should be QUITE long (you have to write about how two different points do or do not conform to eight different points and give examples).
Then, after doing the above, write more paragraph where you answer the following questions:
- How has writing about these two movies helped you understand the Sci-fi genre better? How has it prepared you to write your Sci-fi script?
PLANET OF THE APES
ReplyDeleteThe interesting thing about Planet of the Apes is that it's basically a 2 hour version of "The Twilight Zone". Heck, Rod Serling even wrote the thing!
That being said, this film does and doesn't conform to the first section. The main character falls on an unnatural planet due to a technological failure, but at the same time, it was almost on purpose. Their mission was to travel to another planet using their technology. They did that! But they just didn't plan on what would happen once they got there.
The second point is an interesting one. You could say that this film does apply, but I don't think it does. The hero doesn't win or lose, nobody is defeated in a sense of victory. He doesn't defeat the apes, he just decides to leave them alone, and them him. But what he finds is that his entire fate was decided by the mistakes of the human race. He was defeated by people who had been dead for thousands of years! Even then, he didn't end up leaving the planet. This is a strange point.
The third point does not apply at all. There is no relationship that offers hope at all. There is just a relationship but it's not even a major point. You could do the entire film without it and still have the same effect. Point made.
The fourth point kinda applies.... The "antagonist", who by the end isn't even an "antagonist", just a religious fanatic, doesn't really remind the character of his mortality. He just reminds him that many people believe different things than he does.
The fifth point is wrong for this film. The ending isn't hopeful, it's depressing. Rod Serling is basically saying, "There is no hope. You all f***ed up."
I don't agree with the sixth point either. There is no nobility to this man. He's just a dick to everyone. But I can relate, I probably wouldn't be the nicest person if I crashed on a planet that takes my people and uses them as zoo animals. All he wants is to find out what happened to the people and find a way to escape.
I would agree, sorta, with the seventh point. I mean, the environment isn't crazy and interesting, it's just a desert. It's Earth. But it isn't there to remind us of our place in the natural order.
I disagree with the eighth point. This film is character driven.
Planet of the Apes
ReplyDeleteGeorge, the main character of Planet of the Apes, I think,in my opinion is a innocent bystander who is victimized by the apes. So this film follows that aspect on the ‘innocent bystander’ very well. He didn’t asked to be ‘tested’ on. He was just at the wrong place at the wrong time. George does overcome some of the challenges in the movie, he does find out the truth about everything in the very end, he does escape the Apes. The ending was a twist. Probably the best twist in a movie I’ve seen so far. I didn’t see it coming.
George does sort of befriend one of the apes in the story because she is the only one who actually treats him like a human or should I say ape. So that part of the movie does bring hope and light in the movie of no hope.
The outcome of Planet of the Apes could be hopeful. They finally find out where they were the entire time but it’s also depressing. I think it’s more depressing than hopeful.
Planet of the Apes did follow the usually plot of a sci-fi film. The environment of the film seemed to be depressing since nothing was alive in most areas.
I didn’t really understand the Sci-fi Genre that much before we started studying it more. I thought it was all about space and stuff like that. I think I have an idea for my screenplay for Sci-Fi but I’m still struggling to come up with a plot so hopefully watching more and more and studying more I’ll be able to figure out something.
-Koren
Close Encounters
ReplyDeleteClose Encounters I thought was an okay movie, it was a little slow though. Roy, the main character was victimized by an unnatural phenomenon. He had a close encounter with an otherworldly beings. Roy had a lot of challenges throughout the film. His family thought he was crazy, his wife left him. But in the end it seemed that he overcame all those unfortunate events.
He had a relationship with this other lady who also experienced a close encounter and understood him so she brought hope to him; that’s what I thought.
The ending of ‘Close Encounters’ I thought was hopeful. Roy knew he wasn’t crazy and he finally fully believed it.
I thought Close Encounters followed the Sci-fi plot wonderfully with the aliens and craziness. I still can’t grasp the concept of Sci-Fi and I feel that will bring writers block when I try to write the script but if I study the genre more and more and more hopefully I’ll find an idea that’s easy to write and easy to film on a low budget.
-Koren
CLOSE ENCOUNTERS.
ReplyDelete-Roy, was definitely victimized in this movie. he was put in in this crazed mental state due to the aliens that drove him mad, which led him to push away his family, and go on this wild goose chase almost had him risking his own life.
- He (in my opinion) never overcame his challenges, He was almost controlled by the aliens to accomplish these difficult tasks just for the aliens' knowledge.
CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND
ReplyDeleteThe first point does apply to this film. The central character is just this guy, out of millions of people, who begins getting visions of a giant mountain landing sight.
The second point does not apply to this. Because this is a film where, strangely enough, there is no antagonist. He leaves with the aliens at the end of the film.
The third point kind of applies to the film. He has a sort of relationship with the woman who lost her son and it does offer hope but not respite in the face of danger.
The "antagonist" in this film is the giant alien spaceship. All it does is remind the main character that we are not alone in this world.
The outcome of this film is and isn't hopeful. It is hopeful in that we weren't destroyed by aliens but not hopeful in that the guy just leaves his family. It was kind of a jerk move on his part. You can't say that he had nothing togo back to because he did. He could have gone home, gotten help, and returned to his family. In both noirs and horror films there is some sort of resolution, a happier one even. Be it a hint at a sequel or catching the killer, something is settled.
There is nothing noble about this man. He was a wimpy jerk who left his family. It would have been more noble if the message at the end of the film wasn't 'Well, that's all I guess...."
I don't agree with this next point. The location wasn't meant to teach us of our place in the natural order, but most likely because it's the first thing that Steven Spielberg though of us. You could have done this in many other locations and none of this would have affected the story.
This story is plot driven. Wether or not the main character decided to dive out there, the aliens still would have come, played music, dropped off some pilots, and left. He didn't affect the story at all. All he did was tear a family apart.