‘Science’ or ‘fiction’, which matters more? 

I’m a film critic, fervent admirer of Christopher Nolan, Steven Spielberg, and sci-fi and psychological movie fanatic. Come strike up some conversations with me!

Interstellar, Inception, Contact, The Matrix series, and Gravity, these are the works that, in my opinion, emphasize the element of ‘science’ more than ‘fiction’.

Then there are those that weigh ‘fiction’ more than ‘science’: Star Wars, Guardians of the Galaxy series, Waterworld, and Mad Max series.

To approach it more professionally, hard science fiction and soft science fiction has always been an invisible choice between many of us: which do we care about more, if we care at all?

‘Science’ - Hard Science Fiction

Science plays the key role in works classified into this category from three main aspects: space-time, extraterrestrial civilizations, and outer space.

Firstly, let's talk about space-time. For example, Interstellar strictly adheres to Einstein's theory of relativity and explores the changes in time and space inside a black hole. Inception, on the other hand, plays with the concept of ‘entropy’. According to the second law of thermodynamics, entropy always increases in our world. So, what would happen if entropy decreases? The film creates visual wonders based on this idea.

As for the exploration of extraterrestrial civilizations, Contact and The Matrix series fall into this category. I choose these two films from the many alien movies because the aliens in the two works are most likely what scientists would describe them as. According to physicist Stephen Webb's conjecture, there are only three possibilities: 1) there are no other civilizations in the universe; 2) extraterrestrial civilizations exist (or have existed), but they have not yet contacted us; 3) extraterrestrial civilizations have already come to Earth, but we are unaware. Most aliens in movies, like the ones in ET, are less realistically possible. Yet those in Contact and The Matrix series — extraterrestrial civilizations that have always existed in ways we cannot understand—are possible. At least with our current science, there is no way to refute this.

Finally, let's talk about outer space. Gravity is a very typical example. Though with some minor errors like the flames burning in a vacuum, compared to the light sabers and laser guns in Star Wars, it has done its best to recreate the real space environment. I’m still impressed by the scene where the space station is destroyed and explodes into pieces within the silent confines of space.

‘Fiction’ - Soft Science Fiction

For works under this category, science is less important compared to other aspects such as human emotions, social issues, or philosophical thinking.

The Star Wars series is the most typical example of soft science fiction. Despite featuring spaceships, aliens, and future technology, the story focuses more on personal growth, family, friendship, morality, and power struggles. The roles of ‘Jedi’, for instance, are popular not only because of their lightsabers or the Force that seem to have something to do with technology, but also the religious-like mysterious aura embraced by their audience.

Similar to Star Wars, The Guardians of the Galaxy series is also set in space and filled with fantasy elements like alien races and unknown planets. You can find many reflections of human society in it, such as the ideas of animal experimentation in the 3rd installment as well as political themes generated by Ego, the dad-planet of Star-Lord in the 2nd.

As for Waterworld, the film depicts a future world where most of the Earth is submerged in water. Although it contains future technology, such as the modification of the human body to adapt to underwater life, it focuses more on reflecting on environmental destruction and the challenges of survival in extreme environments. The core of the story is the relationship between an individual and the environment and others, as well as the exploration of human nature.

Similarly, the desert world of Mad Max is a place of violence, desolation, and scarcity of resources. The technological and mechanical elements are not the focus of the story but rather means to support conflicts and interactions between characters. It is more about the struggle between individuals for survival and freedom, as well as reflections on social order.

Which category of films do you prefer, the ‘science’ one or the ‘fiction’ one? There’s no absolute answer, of course. Personally, I like hard science fiction; I enjoy the knowledge in it. But I also appreciate the societal and cultural reflections in soft science fiction.

Finally, I want to say that the boundary between soft and hard science fiction is becoming blurred in recent films and shows. For example, the original work of Dune has a lot of descriptions of the ecological balance on the planet of Arrakis, which comes from the author's past knowledge of desert governance projects. Therefore, the original work is classified as hard science fiction by science fiction fans. But in Villeneuve's new work, these details have been greatly reduced, making the film more of a soft science fiction in comparison. The same is true with The 3-Body Problem. A lot of physics knowledge has been greatly simplified in the Netflix adaptation.

Catch you later for more movie musings!