• Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!

Fantasy and Sci-Fi Cross Boundaries

Mindfire

Istar
What a crappy Chosen One he turned out to be. Trinity dies then everybody gets wiped out in the reset. What was the point of the whole trilogy?

Sci-Fi Chosen Ones suck.
Really? I thought he broke the cycle and the humans and machines coexistence peacefully afterwards? But to know for sure I'd have to watch the Matrix sequels and I'm not interested in that.

The Matrix is an odd case though because it's sci-fi on paper, it's fantasy thematically, but it feels like neither of those. It's... weird. Like everything the Wachowskis do. Everything they touch turns to weird.
 
Last edited:

L M Rush

Scribe
I don't think I could voluntarily re-watch the sequels to the Matrix. Hell, they put me off so much I've not even re-watched the Matrix since those two were vomited out. I don't think it helped that the first movie was so awesome. Meh, maybe it's because I'm not naturally drawn to Sci-fi that I couldn't appreciate the sequels.
 

Legendary Sidekick

The HAM'ster
Moderator
@LM Rush, I'm the exact same way. The first was awesome, then the way the third ended ruined the whole trilogy for me including the first one.

I don't have a problem with a tragic ending, but there's a difference between a tragic end and one so tragic it renders the whole story meaningless.

In the anime world, two well-known tragic endings from the 90s are those of Cowboy Bebop and Akira. Cowboy Bebop was tragic, but I still felt like Spike accomplished something which is why he died with a smile on his face. Maybe more like a smirk.

In Akira, the main character and a couple friends lived, but I just didn't care. So they were spared by an overpowered demon who killed millions of people. I just wanted those two hours of my life back. It was a meaningless story to me… oh, how do they stop this seemingly unstoppable monstrosity? Oh, they don't. So I guess the monstrosity seemed unstoppable because it was. Huh.

Same with the Matrix. Neo stopped the suits. Yay! Trinity died! Nooooo! But not for nothing, right, movie? So what to do about the depressing world that creates humans and uses them as a power source? Oh. Nothing. So the world remains a metaphorical toilet. People dream in pink goo and are really a lot better off if no one wakes up and rebels and forces the system to kill everyone and replace them with a new batch of clones. Well, you could've told me that two movies ago. Akira owes me two hours and Matrix owes me six.
 

Legendary Sidekick

The HAM'ster
Moderator
And I will raise you:
4116980-7028576445-7b0ec.gif
 

A'elie

Acolyte
The interesting thing is that in this schema, genre is determined by ethos, not setting. So you could have a medieval sci-fi or a space fantasy. *cough*Star Wars*cough* This framework also explains why I tend to lean fantasy. Sci-fi's baked-in skepticism and materialism makes it harder for me to map my Christian values onto it.

Now I'm not saying this classification system is perfect, there will be outliers and anomalies. For example, I'm not sure where to put C.S. Lewis's Space Trilogy on this scale.

Star Trek is a nice series but its materialistic and humanist propaganda annoys me.
 

Mindfire

Istar
Star Trek is a nice series but its materialistic and humanist propaganda annoys me.
TRUTH. That's part of why I like the NuTrek films more than what came before. There's none of that, but they kept the space adventure.

And since I've brought up Mass Effect, it's an interesting example. Because while it has all the trappings and feel of a sci-fi story, it's humanistic without any heavy-handed materialism. It even includes positive examples of spirituality (something that you either don't see or is outright mocked in most sci-fi), and I find it far more enjoyable than most sci-fi because of it.
 

A'elie

Acolyte
TRUTH. That's part of why I like the NuTrek films more than what came before. There's none of that, but they kept the space adventure.

And since I've brought up Mass Effect, it's an interesting example. Because while it has all the trappings and feel of a sci-fi story, it's humanistic without any heavy-handed materialism. It even includes positive examples of spirituality (something that you either don't see or is outright mocked in most sci-fi), and I find it far more enjoyable than most sci-fi because of it.

The problem is a lot of writers don't want to have spirituality in the Sci-Fi because the genre is generally seen as a means to rail against Protestant America culture. A lot of sci-fi books in the 50s for example, hold science in high regard. After the 70s, science fiction became more cynical but it still believed strongly in scientism.

ME is probably the result of a Science-Fiction that has being more influenced by SW than by the older styles of Sci-Fi. Making the two genres cross boundaries is very important, I think, in order to keep both genres interesting and give them the ability to talk about new ideas from different angles.

I don't why people say that Sci-Fi heroes have to suck(not really a right the word to use).
 

Legendary Sidekick

The HAM'ster
Moderator
I don't why people say that Sci-Fi heroes have to suck(not really a right the word to use).
I have nothing against sci-fi heroes. Neo was used as an example of a sci-fi Chosen One, and he's awesome if you've only seen the first Matrix. If you've seen the whole trilogy, he's less awesome due to his epic failure—which isn't actually Neo's fault so much as he faced an enemy that was unaffected by his awesomeness.

It would be like if Frodo used the ring to become an invisible orc-slayer, not realizing that by using the fullness of the ring's power he allows the evil force behind the ring to use him as a vessel. This ultimately results in his own demise along with the annihilation of every other hobbit, every human, every elf, every dwarf, and every dues ex eagle in the world. This failure Frodo wouldn't make me think all fantasy heroes are bad… just that he's a lousy Chosen One for doing something that ultimately kills everyone he meant to save plus billions of total strangers.
 

Mindfire

Istar
The problem is a lot of writers don't want to have spirituality in the Sci-Fi because the genre is generally seen as a means to rail against Protestant American culture. A lot of sci-fi books in the 50s for example, hold science in high regard. After the 70s, science fiction became more cynical but it still believed strongly in scientism.

ME is probably the result of a Science-Fiction that has being more influenced by SW than by the older styles of Sci-Fi. Making the two genres cross boundaries is very important, I think, in order to keep both genres interesting and give them the ability to talk about new ideas from different angles.

I don't why people say that Sci-Fi heroes have to suck(not really a right the word to use).

Good points. Incidentally, I think the themes of Mass Effect are also (intentionally or not) a giant middle finger to (virulent racist and uber-atheist) H.P. Lovecraft. "Not only can we beat Cthulhu, but we're gonna do it through the power of racial diversity and cooperation, dammit!"

As for sci-fi heroes, an interesting trend is that they're usually not as "special" as fantasy heroes are. Fantasy heroes are (stereo)typically extraordinary people of great power and destiny who only appear to be average joes, whereas sci-fi heroes will actually be average joes. Or, failing that, they'll be people made special through training, education, or technology that could just as easily have been attained by someone else rather than any inherent qualities or powers that only they can access. Only Luke can bring balance to the Force, but anybody can join Starfleet. Just don't become a redshirt.
 
Last edited:

Mindfire

Istar
I have nothing against sci-fi heroes. Neo was used as an example of a sci-fi Chosen One, and he's awesome if you've only seen the first Matrix. If you've seen the whole trilogy, he's less awesome due to his epic failure—which isn't actually Neo's fault so much as he faced an enemy that was unaffected by his awesomeness.

It would be like if Frodo used the ring to become an invisible orc-slayer, not realizing that by using the fullness of the ring's power he allows the evil force behind the ring to use him as a vessel. This ultimately results in his own demise along with the annihilation of every other hobbit, every human, every elf, every dwarf, and every dues ex eagle in the world. This failure Frodo wouldn't make me think all fantasy heroes are bad… just that he's a lousy Chosen One for doing something that ultimately kills everyone he meant to save plus billions of total strangers.

Still gnawing away at that bone, are we? xD
 

Legendary Sidekick

The HAM'ster
Moderator
As for sci-fi heroes, an interesting trend is that they're usually not as "special" as fantasy heroes are. Fantasy heroes are (stereo)typically extraordinary people of great power and destiny who only appear to be average joes, whereas sci-fi heroes will actually be average joes. Or, failing that, they'll be people made special through training, education, or technology that could just as easily have been attained by someone else rather than any inherent qualities or powers that only they can access.
Interesting… and also odd that I never thought of this considering that, in my WIP, I'm sort of poking fun at the cliche that fantasy heroes are so much more extraordinary than 99+% of the population.

I loved Ripley in Aliens, and who was she? An ordinary woman suffering from PTSD (they didn't call it that because 80s) due to her past encounter with the aliens. She didn't want to go back but stay at the space station and try to pay her debt leading an ordinary life, and when she did decide to go, she didn't expect to be in the fray with space marines. A very ordinary character, and a relatable one. I believe you're right that this is typical of a sci-fi hero.

(But by this definition, Neo is a fantasy hero… sort of.)
 

Legendary Sidekick

The HAM'ster
Moderator
Still gnawing away at that bone, are we? xD
I was called out on saying sci-fi heroes suck. I just needed to clarify my comment was aimed at Neo's chosen-one-ness, not all heroes from an entire genre.

I think my comments on Ripley do a better job of that, since I am clearly under the opinion that Ripley rocks.

EDIT - Also, that Frodo analogy is pretty accurate. I was going to have him become a Peeping Tom with the ring, then I thought, "no… Neo didn't do anything stupid. He just used his powers as any butt-kicking hero would've if in his position." I would totally be a cheap invisible killer if I were Frodo. And boy would I have made a crappy Chosen One in Middle Earth!

EDIT 2 - Oh, uh………… spoiler alert?
 
Last edited:

Mindfire

Istar
I loved Ripley in Aliens, and who was she? An ordinary woman suffering from PTSD (they didn't call it that because 80s) due to her past encounter with the aliens. She didn't want to go back but stay at the space station and try to pay her debt leading an ordinary life, and when she did decide to go, she didn't expect to be in the fray with space marines. A very ordinary character, and a relatable one. I believe you're right that this is typical of a sci-fi hero.
Sarah Connor, Alex Murphy, and Katniss Everdeen also fit this pattern, along with many others. In fact, Katniss is the preeminent modern incarnation of this type of hero. There's nothing particularly special about her, she has strong emotional reactions to trauma and loss, and yet by chance she's become the super-important figurehead of a rebellion and is trying to do the best she can. A fantasy-style Chosen One would've taken it all in stride, stormed the gates of the Capitol with a small squad of elite sidekicks, and shot President Snow in the face by now.

(But by this definition, Neo is a fantasy hero… sort of.)
Yeah... Like I said, Neo is weird. Just like everything the Wachowskis do.

I was called out on saying sci-fi heroes suck. I just needed to clarify my comment was aimed at Neo's chosen-one-ness, not all heroes from an entire genre.
I just think it's funny that the end of the Matrix Trilogy made you hate Neo so much. xD
 
Last edited:

Mindfire

Istar
Oh, and going back to Mass Effect, this means that Commander Shepard straddles the line between fantasy and sci-fi hero. Shepard doesn't have any particularly extraordinary powers in the context of his/her universe. There are plenty of other biotics, soldiers, and techies, and the specialists on Shepard's squad are more often than not better than Shepard is at their chosen fields. But the game still portrays Shepard as exceptional and Shepard's feats as things that only Shepard could have done. Though in this case the inherent traits Shepard possesses are ingenuity, leadership, inspirational ability, and determination rather than magic or destiny. Just about anybody in the wrong place at the right time could have done what Katniss has done, but only Shepard could be Shepard.
 

Legendary Sidekick

The HAM'ster
Moderator
I just think it's funny that the end of the Matrix Trilogy made you hate Neo so much. xD
I don't hate him. It's just that, y'know, he got everybody in the world killed by being so awesome the whole system needed to be reset. If he had just taken the blue pill, the rebellion would've quietly died off and everyone else would go on living a comfortable lie. I'm just saying that Chosen Ones aren't supposed to get everybody killed. He's just not a good Chosen One.

If Neo had a resume, he'd probably put "Chosen One" on his resume and—like a CEO who ran a company into bankruptcy—he'd hope the interviewer would just base his salary and position on his impressive title and not ask him to specify his accomplishments. It would be hard for him not to get defensive when pressed. "My greatest weakness, huh? Mine's that system reset itself because it was the only way to beat me! Is that really a weakness? Being too strong? That's like turning off your Nintendo when you're up against Mike Tyson and declaring victory. My greatest weakness. Pfft. There is no weakness."
 
Top