Why are sci-fi films so pessimistic these days?

Why are sci-fi films so pessimistic these days?

Every film seems to revolve around us all (nearly) getting killed by robots or aliens or the 'elite' amongst ourselves who have access to some kind of powerful technology denied (for unknown reasons) to everyone else; getting marooned on some alien world and trying desperately to get back home, or trying to save the world from some catastrophe caused by our own arrogance or ignorance.

Where are the optimistic visions of the future?

Where are the films about mankind setting out into the stars and achieving great triumphs, rather than constantly struggling against all odds just to stay alive?

Where are the films about the creation of incredible new technologies which *don't* nearly get us all killed; that instead radically improve our lives?

Where are the films about the radically better, brighter future that we used to believe in?

Fear sells.

...

>Where are the optimistic visions of the future?
>Where are the films about mankind setting out into the stars and achieving great triumphs, rather than constantly struggling against all odds just to stay alive?
>Where are the films about the creation of incredible new technologies which *don't* nearly get us all killed; that instead radically improve our lives?
>Where are the films about the radically better, brighter future that we used to believe in?

In Hollywood that's not filled with self-hating luddite lefties.

It's always been like that.

Because western story telling revolves around conflict.

Maybe we will get something like Rendezvous with Rama.

Remember the movie Transcendence? Imagine if it didn't have the bullshit human war against him or the isolation he did for love. It would have been a movie about humanity advancing at breakneck speed and spreading out across the galaxy.

Because we live in a time where only fools are optimistic about the next decades

because it's realistic? duh?

I'm so old now that I've literally seen that sentence using a myriad of terms, even the polar opposite of "lefties". I don't even keep up with that shit anymore, but it changes so often that it makes me wonder why it changes so often.

When will we get a sci-fi movie set in the far future? I'm so fucking tired of all these sci-fi movies being set 20 to 100 years in the future. Where's my War 40k like movie?!

>things every generation has said

We are all descendants from people who have survived and profited from war, bloodshed and disaster

People fucking love war and destruction, they're just paying for what they want to see

ITT: OP didn't see Interstellar or Star Trek Beyond or Her or Tomorrowland

>why it changes so often

Movies change often. As do trends.

i think it's the exact opposite, only fools are cynical, they're fools in that they follow the zeitgeist and are influenced by media and dawkinsian memes.

be ur self dummy

2001 was optimistic, but neo-Sup Forums hates it because it has no explosions and laser beamz and is not "grim dark" and "gritty".

I've seen Interstellar and Her; they're both incredibly pessimistic films.

I'll look into the others.

Because conflict is exciting.

Even with films like Ender's Game, where it literally is the most justifiable reason ever to genocide an entire race, it gets turned into "EVBUL TRICKED ME :((( FUCK U I'M ADMIRAL NOW I CAN DO WUT I WANT AND IMMA TAKE THE MOTH TO ANOTHER PLANET SO THEY CAN INVADE US AGAIN!"

That isn't what I was talking about in the slightest.

well, startrek is set in like XXIII or XXIV century. Anything beyond that is just stupid as one cannot imagine what it would look like.

In the times of old scifi we were like "oh I bet space is great, I can't wait until we see what cool stuff is out there". And then we found out that what was out there was silence and distances so large they become meaningless. So we were like "man it turns out we're just going to have to be alone and deal with our own shit for basically forever", and so scifi became more oriented towards our own, human issues, which are shitty and sad. Harlan Ellison wrote a really good timeline of this effect, he might be a prick but as a scifi scholar he really knows his shit.

>Her

>AI leaves a man heartbroken
>optimistic

Interstellar was really optimistic

Because the future is apparently not about robot waifus, space exploration or industrial genius but rather about negroes being 50% of the world population and islam.

Seriously, Peter Tiel is right. We live in an era of technological stagnation. People are oblivious to it at the surface level because of the one area where actual development matches or even surpasses what people in the 50s-60s expected, which is semiconductors/electronics/computers.

Not at all. It's proven millenials are the most depressed people ever recorded. People that had lived WWI were less cynical and depressed than us. At any point of time in recent years, 25% of the population has been under some form of antidepressants or other calming/compensating psychotropic treatment. You may say that it's because Gen X and millenials or even to some extent boomers are pussies. And you may be right. But it doesn't change the fact of the overall pessimism.

Then maybe express yourself clearly, grandpa

>2001
>movies these days

>Interstellar
>Her
>pessimistic

Oh, so you just don't actually know optimism when you see it. Gotcha.

How is interstellar pessimistic?
Even Cooper manages to deal with the loss of his family and be proud of the future he helped create

But the conflicts always always revolve around a new, incredibly bad thing (e.g. an alien invasion) rather than a real problem we already have (e.g. ageing, disease, death) and involve us very nearly being defeated by that new threat, and are resolved when we achieve an against-all-odds mission and merely return to the status quo; albeit with half our major cities in ruins and millions (or billions) of people dead.

They're not;
1. Problem
2. Hard mission
3. Success
4. Radically better, fundamentally more exciting and interesting future

They're;

1. Problem
2. Hard mission
3. 'Success'
4. Back to where we started, but with our economy destroyed, millions dead and our cities in ruins.

The latter is not terribly 'optimistic'; it's just 'with a long struggle and much sacrifice, we can recover', not 'we can achieve something radically better than we already have'.

>a utopian future means there's no such thing heartbreak and if there is it can't involve AI

u srs niqqa?

see

What are you talking about? In the 60s before Star Wars sci-fi was pessimistic as fuck

Adding to my list: The Martian.

>not 'we can achieve something radically better than we already have'.

Consider all the journalists and pundits that call the old first world the "developed world" (as opposed to a developing world that doesn't develop anything but copies stuff). This is extremely pessimistic. It implies that we are developed and as such nothing terribly radical is going to happen anymore, at least in the short-mid term, only slightly better gadgets like the latest Ishit.

But who's buying?

But that's not what interstellar is about and the main problem is the earth dying due to crops failing everywhere and ozone depletion
Aliens are never involved since even the black hole "aliens" are just humans who have basicly ascended beyond 3 dimensions

Look into a history book if you have the time, every generation born post-war was extremely believing in progress, the power of love and freedom. Look at the 60s, people thought technology would solve all problems and hippies would literally blaze it 24 hours a day. It's not until ~2000 where we got more gadgets than we can handle, the economy crashed harder than 1929 and the US started a 15 year long low intensity war with half of the world that people started to believe that maybe they aren't the golden boys of history.

I think you're a retard, in my exprience are people less deluded by media more pessimistic about the future

>before Star Wars sci-fi was pessimistic as fuck

Accurate.

That's a load of crud. We found out what space was like in the end of 60s and yet the seventies had the most optimistic sci-fi. It has far more to do with the current zeitgeist than with us being alone in the Universe.

Everyone.

More millenials are diagnosed and taking medication for antidepressants and anxiety and whatnot because that's what we do, now. Mental illness used to be considered people who eat rocks and have psychotic breaks and whatnot. Having it be more visible because it's more accepted and talked about now does not imply that it's more prevalent.

Because there has to be a conflict for people to not get bored. Elysium covers disease, but it's just "EVUL CORPS RUIN EVERYTHIG :((" in a new coat of paint.

Humans like conflict and conflict is easy to write for.

>These are the 'good guys'
>These are the 'bad guys'
>Kill the 'bad guys' and the 'good guys' win

It's simple and since the majority of these films are aimed for USA (and to a lesser extent, UK), it means it's simple for them to follow, as there is nothing worse than making people feel (rightfully so) stupid, as that makes bad reviews on social media.

So simple shit is always done.

Because there is no good ending for humans anymore

Star Trek is set 200 years in the future which isn't that far off. And imagining a setting thousands if not tens of thousands to a million years in the future isn't hard. War 40k for instance is set 38,000 years in the future and has an insanely huge amount of lore. The Foundation Series is another and spans 15 million years.

>It's proven millenials are the most depressed people ever recorded
because the medical definition of "depressed" is watered down to sell them more meds, and they swallow it like the good goys they are

>These days

Sci-fi has always been a gloomy genre, especially in the 70's until Star Wars came about, then it became space knights and pirates

>the seventies had the most optimistic sci-fi
>Logan's Run
>Soylent Green
>Westworld
>Silent Running
>The Omega Man
>THX 1138
>A Clockwork Orange
>Solaris
>Alien
>Mad Max

>Why are sci-fi films so pessimistic these days?

false premise. if anything, the apex of "pessimistic" sci-fi was in the 80s with films like blade runner and robocop.

also, you seem to have confused "pessimism" with "bad things happen in the film". it sounds like you want something very specific from film-makers. elysium has a saccharine sweet ending where all the sick and dying children get cured and it's implied that everyone, poor and rich, lives happily ever after, it was not pessimistic.

He wants a conflict free utoptian story, and I don't even know what the fuck that would look like.

but you cannot imagine tech that would be in such times. it would end up with pure fantasy mixed with some scifi like star wars. i dont know anything about War 40k so it hard for me to comment but the only scifi set in far future i know is Time machine which is in general quite stupid and has nothing to do with scifi

>the economy crashed harder than 1929

Do you know how I know you know shit?

This is true, and irritating.

>these days

This.

Fucking, jurassic park was optimistic as all high. But without conflict you don't have a reason for a movie. Ex Machina was in the similar boat: look at what we've created. Technology. Mankind is moving forwards.

Then it all goes to shit.

I'm looking forwards to Westworld.

You don't know anything about Warhammer 40k? Why are you even on this site bro?

That's not what I'm saying at all.

I'm just arguing that sci-fi could do with at least some movies where the end result is a world that's much, much better than what's available at the start of the movie; not just a quest to return to the status quo ante. Plenty of room for conflict and struggle in that; and no need for a 'utopian' resolution.

We can have radical improvements and still have a long way to go before we get to utopia.

>the seventies had the most optimistic sci-fi.
m8 even Star Wars the feel good space opera had the used junkyard universe aesthetic about it
New Hollywood was pessimistic as fuck, not surprising given that they lived in an era of increasing crime, low faith in government and with the constant shadow of nuclear destruction

Sorry. I dont even know if its a comic book or role playing game. I heard something about the movie but havent seen it yet.

Go watch Japanese anime Girls und Panzer. It's the opposite of what you are saying.

It describes a peaceful post-scarcity society using tanks for sport. The technology never goes wrong. Nothing bad happens. The story and drama are all built up on girl friendship

Japanese are really weird.

The Elysium ringworld was a lovely place, until they let niggers fuck it all up.

>Japanese are really weird.

Pedophilia will do that to you.

I picked up on what he means.

Once upon a time, there were a bunch of screaming censorius self righteous pricks who hated everything for being too blasphemous, sexual or profane and who influenced media way too much with their whining.

Now there are a bunch of screaming censorius self righteous pricks who hate everything for being too homophobic, transphobic, sexually exploitative or cultural appropriation. Their whining has way too much influence on media production.

>a lovely place
>run by a dyke

it's the opposite. "developing world" is supposed to be optimistic compared to "third world" or "dirty shitholes" because it implies those countries are improving and will one day graduate into being developed. it's not based on technology, more economic development.

It's a board game that has numerous video games, comics, novels, and an animated movie.

Then what I said applies. Trends change and so does the thing these people whine about.

In fairness, I should probably have said 'for the past half-century'

The belief system totally inverted and yet the tone and social tactics remained identical

well your experience is shit and you're stupid

Well, little girls do seem to have the right ideas about most things.

...

Watch Tomorrowland.

>Where are the films about the radically better, brighter future that we used to believe in?
Op can you tell me that which movies in the past were about better and brighter future?

As far as I can remember sci-fi has always been horrors. Even when better future was mentioned it was always only used as a backdrop or a closing remark.

it is the news reports and documentary and infotainment shows on science and tech that are talking about brighter better future. Sci-fi movies never do that.

Difference is, the majority of those people originally had to do a lot more work to get coverage.

Now? Anybody with a Facebook Page or a Twitter can spout their shit 24/7 and influence thousands of people.

>Why are sci-fi films so pessimistic these days?
the western hemisphere especially America is in decadence now, you know like when animals know they are about to die and leave the group? the western culture "knows" that it is on its last days

>Why are sci-fi films so pessimistic these days?
Why the fuck do you think?

Corporations are more powerful than nations. The USA, Russia and China are engaged in cyberwarfare with each other, as well as surveillance on their own populace. And we have just seen the first auction of cyberweapons. Meanwhile, Europe is hit by crisis after crisis. Nationalism is rising anew. Elsewhere, dictatorships are either toppling and giving rise to anarchy and chaos, or cementing their power. The democratic process is being subverted by shady international dealings. Economic inequality is increasing for the first time in decades.

And that's WITHOUT mentioning anything about the environment.

Because the first world isn't doing anything. We're not going to space. We're not applying new technologies on a large scale. We're not developing the rest of the world. We're not improving life in the first world. Because doing any of these things would either put corporate entities out of business rendering obsolete or have no return on investment. Thus, most people in the first world get off on fantasies of the future sucking and then being destroyed. Because the present sucks and everyone wants to die.

But we're the carrot on the stick that exists to keep the rest of the world struggling in vain to improve their lives. Except islam, so they need to be exterminated.

watch this kino for a better understanding of this situation

interstellar is pretty damn optimistic m8

take your utopistic star trek bullshit elsewhere

>Anything beyond that is just stupid as one cannot imagine what it would look like.

>The Time Machine in general is quite stupid

Elysium was only pessimistic because the shitskins took over the medical robots without even thinking what free really good healthcare for all would do to their population and eventual resources. The entire movie can be summed up as: browns and poor people can't think about consequences

kek

>interstellar
>optimistic

>we're all going to die unless magic aliens save us
>then only most of us are going to die

you're fucking stupid.

First of, these third world countries don't develop shit, they copy things. Even if they manage that, what are they going to do then? Just sit back and get bored with no grand hope like westerners. Look at Japan. They ran out of things to copy (and it is actually the only no western country that developed a few things).

But even that is secondary. There is definitively an element of "end of history" or "late sage development" or even more ridiculous expression in the current discourse. It is not at all optimistic. It kind of assumes we have hit a wall and have to be content with minor improvements from now on.

>magic aliens
It was us

>magic aliens
>calls people stupid
kek

Nah, wormhole was magic aliens. "We" just did all the other stuff.

it ended on a high note, everyone survives.

Don't forget terrorist organizations are now comic book villains IRL.

You fucking retard they literally say in the movie the "aliens" were humans from the future.

>everyone

notice how coop's son wasn't there? Only NASA survived.

Star Trek is pessimistic.

I think you need to rewatch the movie, because it was humans from the future who put up the wormhole.

These buildings looks absolutely shit.
Being in the future is no excuse for ugliness.

Movie requires two timelines to function. One without cooper on the mission, where catwoman goes straight to edmund and they repopulate mars and find out its a one way trip and everyone on earth dies. They rebuild humanity on edmund's planet, figure out the space gravity magic, but too late to help earth. Second timeline has them organize a way to give earth the space gravity magic so they can get off earth.

Wormhole has to be present in both scenarios, so, the wormhole was placed there by a third party.

You're a retard or baiting

early science-fiction includes stories like the war of the worlds (earth is colonized by aliens, humans are helpless and forced to hide until the invaders are defeated by nature) and the time machine (humanity degenerates into a race of cannibalistic cavemen and useless children, who degrade further into mindless animals and eventually die out as the earth becomes an inhospitable desert).

SciFi lends itself to pessimism because it's a reflection of contemporary fears and anxiety. Basically all movies these days are pessimistic because we live in pessimistic times. Popcorn movies are essentially all centered around some kind of catastrophic even.

Yea, I'm not the one who's saying that future humans who would have died on earth without the wormhole somehow went back in time and put a wormhole next to saturn.

And don't forget that the US created them by bombing a region's infrastructure to shit and then noping outta there.

>Why are sci-fi films so pessimistic these days?
Maybe you should see the historical roots of sci-fi