I'm not really saying that, but I see how you take the implication. Maybe the Japanese author never heard of Groundhog Day. Maybe when they wrote the screenplay, no one ever made the connection to Groundhog Day (fat chance, but whatever). So, maybe they didn't just totally rip-off the idea; maybe they didn't say Let's make Groundhog Day but with action. But even if they didn't, it's still essentially the same story, which goes well beyond just the hook of repeating the same day over and over. (And, if the Japanese novel has basically the same story as the movie, than I suppose the same is true of it.)
Let's see! Spoiler Time travel, check. Aliens invade Earth, check. Aliens use unknown technology against mankind, check. Alien activity is similar to insects, check. These are all classic science fiction plot devices found within countless science fiction novels, going back many decades. Honestly, how can someone seriously argue that this is not science fiction? Heck, I'm probably forgetting other markers. With all due respect, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, and flies like a duck, the odds are at least decent that the damned thing is a duck.
Science Fiction: moral implications of manufacturing Replicants. Political ramification when they attempt to thrive, demand equal rights. Exploration of their thoughts, desires and feelings. How similar are they to humans? Star Trek reboot: Khan and his manufactured "race" are bad because they just are. He only wants revenge because he is bad, and revenge. BIG FIGHT AT THE END! I'm not talking about window dressing. Aliens that we need to fight because they are bad and want to kill us vs District 9 aliens. I like action movies and SciFi. IMO I just see this as more of an action movie.
saw the movie last night - like with others I thought it was actually pretty damn good. From the trailers I was a bit skeptical - I wasnt a huge fan of Oblivion and wasnt sure if I could handle another Cruise sci-fi film. but it was really good - the ending was a bit confusing but for me it would have been great if: Spoiler I would have really wished if by killing the Omega - the omega had one last self-defense mechanism that would let it reset it to whatever point it wanted. If Cage woke up and landed only to see the same thing again and realize that there was no way out - that the Mimics would control time until they get the outcome they want. That would have been a great 'twilight zone' esque moment to see the shock of horror on his face as everything closed out. as for the current ending Spoiler I took it as a reward for killing the Omega Cage was allowed to reset again but logically had to go to a point where the invasion did not exist yet - so that was 2 days prior instead of the previous day. The ending seemed to be a bit cliched in the sense that everything was now ok but it wasn't the worst ending. It was the clear weak link though in what is otherwise a really good movie I didn't see the movie in 3D though - would it be worth to do so?
Spoiler The ending is a bit illogical but it is a happy ending. I think many of us want to see that. A movie where the main characters/ good guys die just leaves you with an empty feeling somehow. I for one, want to see the movie again but I would not want to feel depressed at the end.
Since Avatar I have not been impressed with 3D movies until this one. I watched it in IMax 3D though so I am not sure it was the IMax or the 3D that makes it look good.
So in order for a movie to be a SciFi film it needs to have political ramifications. I think you are struggling with something here. SciFi Drama: A science fiction film built around drama SciFi Horror: A science fiction film built around horror SciFi Action: A science fiction film built around action Also, being better movies, or more in depth movies does not change the genre. Star Wars Episode IV and Star Wars Episode I (if it existed) are both sci fi films (in a horrible universe where the prequels happened.) That IV is better than the hypothetical films that never happened doesn't mean those imagined movies aren't also sci-fi. You go ask someone who doesn't like "sci fi crap" if they want to go see a film about time travel and alien invasions and future tech weapons. When they tell you no, good luck convincing them that it isn't sci fi!
If you think it is a remake of Ground hog day then every movie with a Cowboy and Indian is a remake of the 1st one. Every cop movie is the same ....
The same person might think Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is a period piece. The setting of the film and the type of film are different.
Not the same thing at all. A period piece is attempting to honestly recreate the time period it is portraying.
I guess you missed the point. If Die Hard took place in the future but everything else is the same it would still be action. If Hans was an alien, it would still be an action movie.
There's no point in arguing with someone who essentially believes that all science fiction has to be boring.
Because it does things other sci-fi movies do, it's sci-fi? That's a pretty low bar. It has a love interest and some funny, light-hearted moments; why isn't it a romantic comedy? Weird. I was not impressed with the 3D here. I mostly forgot it was in 3D. Avatar was the only movie that really impressed me with the 3D, though there's been a couple of others that I thought did okay with it (Hobbit and Gravity come to mind). Maybe it's only because it was new (or new again) with Avatar and now I'm desensitized to it. But, anyway, I didn't think the 3D was worth it. Not remotely comparable. Cowboys & Indians and cop movies are sub-genres unto themselves with all manner of possible plots, characters, character development arcs, etc. Groundhog Day and Edge of Tomorrow aren't even in the same genre, they just share all the same plot points. You're better off likening it to saying any movie with a love interest is just a remake of Romeo and Juliet (though that'd be wrong too).
Good point. Funny, light hearted moments are about as big a part of the movie as aliens/time travel/futuristic weapons. Life is Beautiful was social commentary so it was Sci-Fi.
Science Fiction: "a form of fiction that draws imaginatively on scientific knowledge and speculation in its plot, setting, theme, etc." I'll stick with that. And didn't Bruce Willis do a Die Hard in the future? I think it was called The Fifth Element..and it was sci-fi.
The Definition sci·ence fic·tion noun fiction based on imagined future scientific or technological advances and major social or environmental changes, frequently portraying space or time travel Seems like it is pretty close to Sci-Fi..... technological advances: Yes Major social or environmental changes: Yes Space or Time Travel: Technically you could argue yes there is time travel and it did have aliens attacking us
