I’ve always been kind of a future junkie so I created a new page on wikipedia: List of films depicting the future. I’ve seen all those films except one or two I haven’t gotten around to yet.
My favorite of them is unquestionably “2001.” It never ceases to amaze me. Although it’s hard to discount “Metropolis” when you consider how groundbreaking it was. Back to the Future II’s 2015 suburb is still the most fun to watch though. Flying cars, hoverboards, and electronic Nikes are just plain cool. But. we’ll probably see Cafe 80s before any of that stuff.
There’s still a lot of great literature about the future waiting for big screen treatment. I for one would love to see Heinlein’s “Stranger in A Strange Land” adapted. Better yet, Vernor Vinge’s “A Fire Upon the Deep” or “A Deepness in the Sky.” Either of which would be a monumental task.
We are all interested in the future, for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives. Remember, future events will affect us in the future.
Seriously, the future is cool. Robots, space things, interstellar travel, what’s not to love? There’s a reason Disney switched its outdated Tomorrowland view of the future for a Buck Rogers-style “future that never will be”- it’s the thing we immediately think of when we think of “the future.”
I must protest. The future is when we hope to afford that new boat, or the time when our high-yield bonds mature. The future is not particularly fun. It’s just like now, except later.
Robots, spaceships, flying cars… these things are not to be found in the future. They are found in… The Future!
Italicization is optional. Capitalization and exclamation point are mandatory.
You might notice I didn’t include the Star Wars films on my list. My reasoning was that because they take place in the past (“a long time time ago”) they don’t qualify even though they bear all the hallmarks of a futuristic film. So does Lucas’s little conceit invalidate the series as films depicting the future?
Sure. I used to haunt the library for issues of the Futurist and love talking about and reading the many, many different things that smart people and articulate writers (and sometimes both in one package!) believe we have in store for us.
“A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away…” is the Lucasfilm equivalent of “once upon a time.” The Star Wars stories were created as fairy tales, not as science fiction or futuristic fiction.
Nevertheless, I see your point. In some ways, they do seem much more like future fiction than a fairy tale; some of the inventions in Star Wars (and various related movies) seem like things we’ll see eventually.
Am I the only one who ever interpreted “A long long time ago…” to mean that the events were actually supposed to take place in the future, but were being looked upon in the past by future generations (if that made sense)?
“Advancement in maths, e-science and other modes of enquiry will enable us to better analyse human behaviour, allowing us to realise great strides in social organisation and labour-saving technology-- in Future!”
“On the Beach” was released in 1959 but set in 1964, following a devastating nuclear war.
“The Jetsons” was made into a theatrical movie very closely based on the TV series in 1990.
I suspect, although I cannot cite, that there have been thousands of films at least partially set in the future that aren’t on that list.
Brave New World- the 1980 one was faithful to Huxley’s book in setting it 600 years in the future, the 1990’s one seems to be set about 50-100 years from now.
Re 1984- the 1956 BBC Peter Cushing production is now up on Youtube!
“Things to Come” - the post-disaster Earth is rescued and ruled by the pilots and aerospace engineers, out of sheer benevolence and superior talents. :D:D:D
To make it even farther in the past, not only was it a long time ago, but it was in a galaxy far, far away. So, if we’re talking several million light-years away, you can add that time to however long ago the actual events happened to finally be transmitted to George Lucas’ typewriter.
So, I agree… not only is it more of a fantasy, than sci-fi – it’s an historical account that took place in earth’s past, perhaps when dinos were roaming around. And, it’s fiction. :dubious:
I was just rewatching Demolition Man today, and was struck again by the extent to which all the memorable parts of the movie have to do with its satirical and frequently hilarious take on the future (most particularly, the enigmatic “three seashells”), while the action scenes with Stallone and Snipes are basically forgettable. I wonder whether the director/screenwriter more or less intended that, that is, really wanted to make a futuristic satire with a big budget, knew that no studio would fund that, so sold it as a sci fi action pic instead.
(Actually, there’s another very memorable thing about that movie, namely, young Sandra Bullock. But I digress…)
