3

I'm specifically asking about the film, not the comics.

| |
  • 1
    Why should it be, why shouldn't it be? – SQB Jan 1 '15 at 22:39
  • @SQB - Don't know enough either way, but it wasn't marketed as SciFi. – DVK-on-Ahch-To Jan 1 '15 at 22:50
  • What is the context of the question? I wonder if it would make a difference if you were asking a question specifically about the sci-fi aspects of the comics or not. – Zoredache Jan 2 '15 at 20:42
  • @Zoredache - I specifically narrowed it down to the film, not the comics – DVK-on-Ahch-To Jan 2 '15 at 20:46
  • Right but I am thinking it may matter if you were asking about the science/technology versus asking about the politics or something else. – Zoredache Jan 2 '15 at 20:53
6

Yes, absolutely. The film is set in 2038 in a post-apocalyptic future. The titular character's origin story suggests that he has been the victim of genetic experimentation and the (albeit largely unseen) "fate" computer is clearly a work of immense technical sophistication.

Any one of these features would be sufficient to render it on-topic.

| |
  • 1
    Taking place in the future or being post-apocalyptic doesn't make it on-topic. – Kevin Jan 1 '15 at 22:44
  • @Kevin - I don't recall any discussion on that topic. Posted: meta.scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/5351/… – DVK-on-Ahch-To Jan 1 '15 at 22:52
  • @DVK It was broached briefly, but not in the context of whether post-apocalyptic scenarios are off-topic: meta.scifi.stackexchange.com/q/122/3567 – alexwlchan Jan 1 '15 at 23:03
  • In addition, the main character is enhanced via genetic experimentation and possibly technology - he definitely falls somewhat into the "superhuman" category. – Omegacron Mar 17 '15 at 19:28
3

I've never watched the movie or read the comics, but I don't see anything on IMDB or Wikipedia that suggests the movie as a whole would be on-topic, so I'd say no (unless it's specifically about a piece of future technology that happens to be in the movie). Any fictional technology is just movie flashiness and not enough to make it sci-fi.

Our current guidelines:

  1. If it's marketed as SF, it's on-topic.

IMDB says "Action | Drama | Thriller," Wikipedia says "Political Thriller." Nope

  1. If magic, futuristic science or technology, alternate history, or other sf-nal concept is an important part of the overall plot, it's on-topic. (Alice in Wonderland, Clockwork Orange, etc.)

If the plot summary doesn't mention any future tech, it's clearly not integral to the plot.

  1. If the question is specifically about an sf-nal element, even if it's only a minor part of the work, it's on-topic.

As I said, if the question is about a specific scifi piece of the movie, OK.

  1. If it's set in an on-topic universe, it's on-topic.

Nope

  1. If you're not sure it's SF but you think a good case can be made for it, it's on-topic.

I don't see anyone making a good case for it.

  1. If there is a minor supernatural element (e.g. a fortune teller's prediction comes true, or someone sees a ghost, or a story for children involving anthropomorphic animals) but it's just a throwaway plot element that's not particularly relevant to the question, it's off-topic.

https://scifi.meta.stackexchange.com/a/344/3267

| |
  • re: Point #5. Was my case (above) not good enough for you? * sniff * – Valorum Jan 2 '15 at 20:51
  • @Richard No, it wasn't. Setting alone doesn't make a movie scifi. If I added the words "Computer, end program" to the end of To Kill a Mockingbird, would that make absolutely any question on the book on-topic here? That would be absurd. – Kevin Jan 2 '15 at 20:57
  • If a movie is really scifi, the setting will be integrated enough with the plot that it's not a "throwaway plot element." – Kevin Jan 2 '15 at 20:58

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .