Some commentators have dubbed Méliès's film A Trip to the Moon the first science fiction movie. Not all critics, however, agree. Tom Gunning, the author of our essay on that film, argues for the contrary view. He states, " 'Science' fiction implies a certain sobriety and serious concern with scientific and technological possibilities. . . . But Méliès cannot take his scientists seriously at all, introducing them first as wizards with pointy hats, figures out of fairy pantomime . . . (70). What do you think? While you may not be able to judge whether this is the first of its kind, you can make a judgment about whether or not it qualifies as science fiction. Compare this film with other science fiction movies you have seen. How is it the same? How is it different? Can we call it a science fiction film, a precursor of such films, or something entirely different?
Based on the experiences I have had with sci-fi movies, like Gunning, I cannot call "A Trip to the Moon" the first sci-fi movie because of its lack of scientific inclusion and obsession with fantasy. The film rarely includes real elements of scientific accuracy, with the only element being the rocket launch but even that looks similar to a carnival show cannon. Also, similar to Gunning's quote, science is clearly looked down upon as the scientists are portrayed as wizards and all of the stars and planets have faces on them. An example of today's sci-fi could be "Don't Look Up," which is a movie about 2 scientists trying to tell the world that a large meteor is going to hit Earth but no one listens. The movie does have a comical aspect that involves making fun of how today's society handles things, but the film captures the seriousness of science and how it is completely possible that a meteor could be a danger to Earth. Unlike "A Trip to the Moon," "Don't Look Up," doesn't portray scientists as wizards, they are portrayed as professionals who have done the appropriate calculations. In most sci-fi movies, scientists are portrayed as people who have all of the answers, people that can be trusted when the fate of the planet is at stake or something similar. "A Trip to the Moon," clearly does not follow that thought pattern. Based on the actions that happened in the film such as the fight against the moon kingdom and the wizards, I'd be inclined to call it fantasy since there are whimsical aspects in the film that provide the entertainment that Melies was looking for.
ReplyDeleteAs for many Sci-Fi pieces, “Trip to the Moon” explores the future of space travel and delightfully humors us with a fantasy world of alien creatures. “Trip to the Moon” is the first science fiction movie because of its predictions for the future based on the information they had on hand. As for many science fiction movies, they try to predict the future and what the future will look like. While they are not always right, they use the presently available technology to make an educated guess. In “Trip to the Moon”, they predict the first space travel will be through a cannon launching a bullet-shaped capsule straight at the moon. Although their prediction was not completely right, it wasn't far off. At the time cannons were cutting-edge military technology. By the time the first rocket was sent to the moon, Missiles and Rockets were the new form of combat. This shows that for this piece's time, its prediction was strikingly close. They knew cannons fired objects at absurdly high speeds, and therefore they predicted this might be enough speed to get to the moon. This isn't where their predictions stop. This is the first movie to spotlight aliens. Most modern Sci-Fi movies include some type of alien to progress plot, and this movie is no different. It uses a kingdom of aliens as a twist to keep the suspense. These aliens used spears and shields, which were now passed technology, as their means of defense. This movie was predicting civilization to be technologically not as advanced as ours. In the end, if you take into consideration how old this movie is, it should be considered the first Sci-Fi movie because of its strikingly close predictions of the future.
ReplyDeleteGeorges Méliès' film "A Trip to the Moon" is definitely a science fiction movie. LIke many science fiction movies, and Tom Gunning's (professional?) statement, it becomes clear that many movies contains some "sobriety and serious concern with scientific and technological possibilites". However, it does not really matter how obnoxious or humorous the movie is - take Back to the Future for example. Most would consider this movie a science fiction - it observes some ... questionable ... scientific possibilities that could change humanities' way of life all together: the plot of the movie, after all, is a new novel scientific idea being used to change society. Let's juxtapose that with "A Trip to the Moon" - both films have novel scientific ideas, albeit humorous, and both use them to change society. If Back to the Future can win a Best Science Fiction Film from the SATURN AWARDS, I am sure "A Trip to the Moon", both with its obnoxious science and questionable physics, can be considered sci-fi.
ReplyDeleteHowever, let's approach this also in a science format. At the time of the 1900s, hundreds of rockets were being tested, although the first one would take around another decade or 2 to accomplish, the idea of using a aerodynamic vessel to launch at high speeds an object into orbit was not that crazy of an idea! And to address the point of scientists being slandered, at that time, many scientists were not trusted, as different ideals, especially those related to gods or God, were still the pillars of social value - even now, many radical Christians refused to take the Covid-19 vaccine as they thought that doctors (basically scientists) were the devil and the "jab" was evil. This shows how basically, although comical and possibly even outrageous, the science technically shows allignment to the sciences of the current standards, and that "A Trip to the Moon" can truly be considered a sci-fi film.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMéliès's film, A Trip to the Moon, is often referred to as the first science fiction movie, however, I would disagree and argue that it does not fit the genre due to its lack of scientific accuracy and seriousness. The film portrays a group of scientists who travel to the moon in a rocket, with little to no scientific understanding demonstrated throughout the film. In addition, the scientists are portrayed as wizards with pointed hats, which does not accurately illustrate scientists and science fiction. This depiction fails to meet the definition of science fiction, as defined by literaryfiction.net: "Science fiction, often called “sci-fi,” is a genre of fiction literature whose content is imaginative, but based in science. It relies heavily on scientific facts, theories, and principles as support for its settings, characters, themes, and plot lines, which is what makes it different from fantasy." (https://literaryterms.net/science-fiction/) Furthermore, the film does not have any scientific themes commonly seen today, such as the use of new technology and scientific advancements. To illustrate this point, modern-day science fiction films such as E.T. and Jurassic Park much better fit the definition of science fiction movies due to their scientific accuracy and use of special effects to create a more realistic representation of these science fiction elements mentioned previously. For example, E.T. depicts realistic-looking aliens and Jurassic Park features dinosaurs produced through cloning technology. Both of these movies also make more of an attempt to put scientific aspects into the film. In Jurrasic park, they use technology to bring back the dinosaurs, and in E.T., a scientific advancement is shown when the scientists are about to study the alien. In comparison, A Trip to the Moon only contains a few inaccurate elements that would today be considered science fiction. At the time of its release, A Trip to the Moon would have been considered science fiction, but after many years, this film lacks accuracy and only has the fictional parts of science fiction. While the film's special effects deserve to be appreciated, it should be remembered as a fantasy film rather than science fiction.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Méliès's 1902 film A Trip to the Moon may not follow all traditional aspects of a science fiction movie, it should still be regarded as the origin of science fiction in cinema, as it introduces themes of monsters, magic, outer space, and new unchartered lands which have been carried since forth into the genre. The film follows the story of astronomers/magicians who constructs a cannon in order to propel a rocket to the moon. Once on the moon’s surface, many adventures occur, in which they have a confrontation with the Moon’s inhabitants. It’s well renowned for the innovative use of special effects and the iconic image of the rocket lodged into the Moon’s eye. Although it’s held in high regard and considered a classic of early cinema, many take controversy to it being labeled as the “first science fiction film.” Primary critiques include the use of comical magicians rather than scientists, the inaccuracy of space travel via a cannon, assistant scientists being young women in sailors' outfits, and several other scientific flaws. The scientific inaccuracies found in the film should not exclude it from the science fiction genre, as knowledge of space travel was unavailable to the director in 1902. It’s unrealistic to expect a sound scientific method of space exploration from the early 20th century. The cannon is often emphasized when discrediting the movie as it mimics a circus canon, however, this same depiction of a spacecraft was derived from well-known science fiction authors, Jules Verne and H. G. Wells. H.G. Wells, known as the “father of science fiction,” included this idea in his 1897 book, The War of the Worlds, which Méliès took inspiration from. Many believe the exaggerations of the film are ‘too much,’ however, exaggeration is a key part of the sci-fi genre. The magicians with pointy hats that act as scientists in the film are often recalled as going ‘too far,’ however, we see similar depictions of scientists in well-known science fiction films. Robert Zemeckis’ 1985 Back to the Future, is a fantastic example of a science fiction movie. Dr. Emmet Brown, who plays a mad scientist in the film, wears a white suit, yellow gloves, goggles, and dawns a wild frizzy haircut. Both dramatizations of scientists can be found in A Trip to the Moon and Back to the Future, however, this is only used to oppose A Trip to the Moon. Furthermore, this is the first sci-fi movie, meaning all the current criteria for this sect of film might not be met. The category has grown overtime, just as any subject does, but this shouldn’t undermine the achievements and strides A Trip to the Moon made for the science fiction genre.The film shouldn’t be judged as harshly as it’s the origin of science fiction films and was made in a time with incredibly less technological advancement.s
ReplyDeleteI don't believe that this film can be considered science fiction. I agree with Gunning’s point that science fiction needs some sobriety or seriousness to be considered “science” fiction. This movie does not express any of that. Once the characters reach the moon, they travel through many different biomes. They travel through mushroom forests, sleep in cratered-filled plains and venture through a kingdom of creatures from the moon. None of the events in this film have any theoretical or actual evidence to justify these choices and make them somewhat plausible. The characters, “scientists,” are depicted as wizards, they sleep and walk through the moon's atmosphere with no protection, and the spaceship returns to earth by falling off of a cliff. The events in this film are absurd and not plausible. It is simply a piece of fiction. The science fiction genre at this time had already been established in books, so this movie was not creating the genre. The movie may have been the first example of the genre in film, but by the definition of science fiction today, it does not qualify. Today's science fiction movies, for example, those based on space travel, contain much theoretical information intertwined within the story. The actions that take place in the movie may not have ever happened in real life, but they are plausible and CAN happen. We do not see this in Méliès's film A Trip to the Moon. The film is just purely fictional, but it was incredibly influential nonetheless.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteI do not find A Trip to the Moon to be Science-Fiction for three main reasons, it’s satirical treatment of science, it’s utter inaccuracy, and it’s true message/theme.
Firstly, the film seems to make fun of science, which inheritly contradicts the idea of a Sci-Fi film. As quoted in the prompt, "'Science' fiction implies a certain sobriety and serious concern with scientific and technological possibilities. . . . But Méliès cannot take his scientists seriously at all, introducing them first as wizards with pointy hats, figures out of fairy pantomime” (Gunning 70). This is absolutely correct, but it goes deeper than just the introduction of the scientists. The film itself also mocks science as a show for the masses through the use of “show girls”. During the launch of the space craft, the focus isn’t really on science of liftoff, but on the girls who are up on the stage with them. This directly shifts the focus from the science of space travel to one of sexual nature. This disqualifies the film as science fiction because it essenially mocks it the whole time.
Second, the film is massivly inaccurate, and in order to be science fiction, not only must there be reverence shown for science, but some aspect of scientific accuracy. Ignoring the aliens and lack of oxygen, the simple physics are plainly wrong. Legend has it that Isaac Newton formulated gravitational theory in 1665 or 1666 after watching an apple fall, well before the film was made. But being on another planet, they are able to walk and talk just fine, inside the gravitational field of the moon. But when they go to escape, they just fall off the moon, and float down to earth. They are left unharmed and unscathed. This is not only scientificallt inaccurate, but logically impossible. Therefore, its inaccuracy is to absurd to consider it science fiction.
Third, the theme and message of the movie are separate from science fiction. Realistically, this movie is a fantasy tale. The movie is led not by scientists, but by wizards. They go to a far away land on a quest for discovery, and find strange creatures that act differently than people. These all point towards fantasy. But it also gives an important theme, colonialism. The wizards in this case are the colonials, going to a land they think is empty, and meeting a culture they dont understand. The film portrays the “moon aliens” as barbaric, disorganized, and lesser than the wizards. This is a direct parallel to what has been seen with Euopean colonialism in North and South America.
Ultimately, because of the mockery of science, lack of accuracy, and opposing themes, A Trip to the Moon is not a Science Fiction film.
Georges Méliès' "A Trip to the Moon" is a revolutionary piece marking the beginning of true "classical" film, and it can also be considered a science fiction movie due to its themes of unexplored technology, aliens, and outer space. While the movie often does not take itself seriously, it touches on multiple facets of science fiction, so it does not seem to fall into any other genre. For example, at approximately 10:00, the "astronauts" exploring the moon encounter a "primitive" alien race that invokes symbols of imperialism and colonization. While this scene is comedic, it clearly explores ideas of caution towards the possible dangers of space exploration. Critics of this claim might point out that the movie does not follow many science fiction tropes, specifically the fear of new science that one might find in other classic science fiction movies such as "2001: A Space Odyssey". However, it is important to note that movies and genres are constantly evolving, so it is unlikely that in any genre a newer film will be different than the first movies of that genre. The film also does not seem to fall into any other genre, so most movie critics do agree that it falls into the category of science fiction. The elements of science that "A Trip to the Moon" discusses, despite at times making fun of these things, makes the film undoubtedly a science fiction movie.
ReplyDeleteA Trip to the Moon by Georges Méliès is a science fiction movie that uses creative imagery and techniques to create a story about space travel, the moon, and aliens. Although the movie pokes fun at science - by doing things such as portraying scientists as wizards – it still contains aspects of science fiction. The movie uses the knowledge of space and science at the time – which wasn’t too much compared to now – to show the moon as a place full of interesting but dangerous plants and aliens. A rocket launch also took place, and although the way it happened wouldn’t really be possible, it wasn’t an entirely absurd idea and was still sort of logical with the knowledge of rocket sicence at the time. The scientists used force to propel the shuttle into space and to the moon (which had a face). The film warps the then-known laws of science and physics – such as falling from the moon down to the Earth as if the moon is just some island in the sky, or making the moon have an animated face – but the overall story still has to do with exploration, space, and science. It also sends a message of the danger that comes with exploration and discovery by putting hostile aliens on the moon. The movie may not be similar to other, newer science fiction films such as Interstellar, but it is still science fiction.
ReplyDelete