SF genre(?) is making a come back(?)
USA Today: Science Fiction Gets Real
And SF Signal’s take on whether it’s SF or not.
What worries me is the people who are named in relation to these projects. Not the authors. Obviously, Ray Bradbury and HG Wells have some SF street cred. But John Davis? Not a lot of great SF on his production resume. I’d say Predator 2 is about the highlight there. (I consider Predator 2 a fairly decent movie.) I haven’t seen I, Robot but I have read Asimov’s stories. I’ve also read the very good Harlan Ellison screenplay of I, Robot that will probably never get made. My understanding is that the movie has little to do with the source material. J.J. Abrams? Seriously, do people consider Alias genre? Or Lost? Russell Schwartz is a marketing guy. Of course he’s going to say this product is good and give several good reasons why. Jon Turteltaub isn’t an SF guy either with National Treasure 2 in the hopper. Marc Abrahams is more known for horror (Slither, End of Days) than any other genre. So why are *these guys* saying that SF is making a come-back?
And why are these guys saying that SF is making a *come-back*? No SF was put out last year? i guess nothing at all… War of the Worlds, The Island, Aeon Flux, “The Dead Zone,” “Doctor Who,” “Invasion,” “The 4400,” “Stargate SG-1,” “Surface,” “Threshhold,” Descent, Robots, Serenity… And that’s a quick search…
Five Favorite Writing/Publishing Blogs is up at Associated Content. We’ll see if payment follows. Wouldn’t that be nice?
It’s raining today. It’s lovely and kind of strange for a summer day. An evening, yes, I’d believe that. But daytime? Naw. I should go for a run, or do laundry. Or hey, maybe write something. Been thinking about Divine Fire and how it should be different from Trials of Fire. Very different setting really, more like A Soldier’s Dowry really. Religious. Repressed? Don’t know about that. Poor, yes. Caste conscious, yes. But morally. I don’t know, don’t know. I don’t have a good framework, I feel. And it’s Marie and Neltiar that
I’m hungry, but for nothing I have on hand. Maybe I’ll make a pizza.
For Eric’s reading pleasure:
Ice-cold Watermelon is Less Nutritious
Finished Mary Roach’s Spook. For me, it wasn’t as good as Stiff because the subject matter wasn’t as compelling. Yes, I suppose I prefer the corpse to the soul. The book is subtitled “Science Tackles the Afterlife.” My problem is that there is very little science to be had in the book. Of course, when dealing with proving that there is an afterlife and therefore a soul, not much real science has been done. And that’s a point that Roach makes point in a sideways kind of way. Still, a firm two or three paragraphs about scientific method would have been nice. Roach comes to no definitive answers, and neither has ‘science,’ but she does provide a nice history of mediumship, NDEs, and technology’s involvement in detecting the soul. All told in Roach’s light, witty style. It’s due to Roach that I even picked up this book. So book #17 in the bag.