I don’t why people complain that aliens have one monolithic culture; I mean there is no scientific reason diverse cultures are needed for a species to advance technologically. It’s actually quite possible humans could be unique among intelligent species when it come to religious and cultural diversity. I think a lot of people need to get rid of this Earth-centric attitude that what happens here on Earth is automatically applicable to how extraterrestrial life evolves elsewhere.
When I see a planet of one culture in science fiction, I generally assume that they’re actually about as diverse as we are, but for political reasons one culture has ended up being dominant, and so that’s what we mostly see meeting the humans. Which is pretty much like it would be here. And maybe they have racial differences, too, but the traits which they consider to be of supreme importance go completely unnoticed to humans.
In this case I would consider it more “earth-centric” for them to be a planet of hats: like I say, that’s what practically possible for us to film, and also plays into certain human cognitive biases (e.g. tribalism).
That said, in a sense I do expect if we encounter aliens they will seem the same to us, because, assuming they come here, the chances are that they will be unimaginably more advanced than us. If they differ, the ways in which they differ will likely be beyond our comprehension.
But if we have aliens that are at a similar technological level as humans, and we see individual personalities in their interactions, then yeah I’d expect they probably have different cultures, since the small sampling we’re seeing is demonstrating microcultures.
Yeah, I started watching that Netflix conspiracy movie about Kurt Cobain (“Something Something Bleach”), and was completely taken out of it when, in the opening scene set in 1994, the detective (or whoever he was) got into his car … and the license plate had the *current *number format, which wasn’t introduced until about 18 years after Cobain’s death. (Current WA license format for passenger cars is ABC1234. In 1994 it was still 123 ABC.)
To the subject of the OP:
Maybe it’s just because I read constantly, but for me the most important element of a movie is the story. If the story is good, to my taste, and it entertains me, I don’t give a flying fuck if the director is a hack, the acting is stiff, or the CGI is “obvious”. I read those critiques, and always wonder if the writer went to see a movie, or if they went to the theater to look at acting and scenery.
Yes, I enjoy Nic Cage and Adam Sandler movies.
Four words: “30 minute toy commercial!”
It’s getting close to four decades since I first heard that phrase, and I still do not have the slightest idea why I ever should have given a crap. No one forced anybody to buy those toys. Hell, I watched hundreds of hours of Transformers, G.I. Joe, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, and Ghostbusters in my more wasteful years and never spent a penny on that stuff, nor did I beg my parents to buy any. If you have a problem with crass consumerism, teach your kids about crass consumerism, don’t blame the messenger. I found actual toy commercials infinitely more obnoxious than any cartoon.
I don’t judge cartoons on whether they’re toy commercials. I judge them on how cool the toys are. That’s my problem with the Michael Bay Transformers movies: In the original cartoons, they looked like robots that turned into vehicles, because that’s what they were. In the Bay movies, they look like robots assembled out of vehicle parts from a junkyard, arranged in no particular way. You can’t make a toy transformer that works like the ones in the movies.
Lego, of course, is a very cool toy indeed, and the Lego Movie did a very good job of capturing that coolness, so Everything is Awesome there.
“All Klingons look the same to me!”
But he’s white on the right side!