i.e do you prefer:

  • technically grounded and plausible science elements (e.g The Martian)

or

  • stuff so fantastical that it doesn’t even warrant trying to explain it (Dr Who, some Marvel/DC stuff, Star Wars)

Another way to look at this would be Sci-Fi versus Science Fantasy, perhaps.

  • Old-School Sci-Fi like HG Wells centers around a core scientific idea and the consequences arising from that,

whereas

  • Science Fantasy (more prevalent nowadays) only looks to science - or the impression of some science - to serve the fantasy devices it uses.

So which is better?

    • FluidBeef@quokk.auEnglish
      3·
      4 days ago

      Woke up this morning thinking about Bradbury. The Martian Chronicles is kind of an Edda for Mars, and an obvious point of inspiration for the Big Man folklore in KSR’s Mars trilogy.

    • FavouriteShapes@sh.itjust.worksOP
      1·
      3 days ago

      Honestly the only Bradbury novel I’ve read so far was Fahrenheit 451 (I loved it). That’s probably not sci fi, because tho it is set in the future, the futuristic elements which couldn’t exist today are spoke about in vague terms and it’s more a story of highlighting what’s wrong with our current society by extrapolating where it will go from here