A genre study with specific reference to science fiction and the films of Ridley Scott and Stanley Kubrick

A genre study with specific reference to science fiction and the films of Ridley Scott and Stanley Kubrick

Genre is something that is mentioned every day however as a theory it is not just a way to categorize films. Genre theory and criticism asks many questions such as what actually is a genre? Why do we need them? And how are genres formed? These questions and the contradictions within their many answers are what I will discuss. Ridley Scott and Stanley Kubrick are two directors who have produced some of the best sci-fi films of all time I will reference 2001: A Space Odyssey(Kubrick, 1968), Clockwork Orange(Kubrick, 71), Alien(Scott, 1979) and Blade Runner (Scott, 1982).

The simplest definition of sci-fi comes from the Oxford English Dictionary “fiction based on imagined future scientific or technological advances and major social or environmental changes, frequently portraying space or time travel and life on other planets.”1 This definition is not definitive, many critics have tried to define sci-fi and failed. I will for now define the sci-fi genre through a combination of its history, conventions and the “common cultural consensus”2 of what a sci-fi film is.

Like many genres sci-fi predates cinema beginning in literature in the 1800’s with Frankenstein (Mary Shelley 1818) often being called the first sci-fi novel. Shortly after the invention of the cinematograph Georges Melies began making “early science fiction films”3. Melies set up stages to film and used camera trickery to create Le Voyage dans la Lune (1902) a story of space travel, aliens and the moon. It was influenced by sci-fi literature like Jules Verne’s From Earth to the Moon (1864) and

HG Welles’ The First Men in the Moon (1901) so much so that the film features aliens with the same name as in Welles’ novel.4 It is possible that the comic and extreme stylisation is Meleis way of satirising the novels however one of sci-fi’s key themes is explored in this work, the cultural “anxieties brought about by the fast changing landscape of an increasingly industrialised society.”5 Despite Meleis shorts and many other early sci-fi works it was the mixing of horror and sci-fi that shaped the early years of the genre with monster movies and mad scientists featuring in films such as Frankenstein (dir. J. Searle Dawley 1910) and Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde (dir. Lucius Henderson 1912). Utopian futures were also popular in early sci-fi, films like Metropolis (dir. Fritz Lang 1927) made commentaries on politics through parallels with futuristic worlds. Most sci-fi dropped out of the cinema and became the subject of pulps and comics.6

The 50’s saw the sci-fi B movie flooding the market at drive-ins to regain popularity. However it was the space race in the 60’s that brought the genre back into the spotlight despite audiences seeing real science media rather than fiction. This forced the genre to focus on real science as the public were now educated. Films such as 2001: A Space Odyssey flourished as they showed magnificent realistic images of space and played off the popularity of the American moon landing. The LSD trip culture of the early 70’s began to shape the genre as it became more psychedelic and philosophical, the creativity of these films appealed to the counter culture youth audience giving the newly emerging auteur’s freedom to shape the genre. Finally the more conservative 80’s removed much of the psychedelic imagery whilst keeping some of the iconography.7 This historical context of sci-fi has created recognisable conventions including space ships, aliens, tunnels and robots, and has shaped the way we as a culture see sci-fi.

This historical approach to defining the genre is helpful but it is purely factual and does not answer many of the debateable questions about genre itself. The first question seems simple, What is a genre? Sci-fi films are identified by their conventions and conventions can be identified by looking at archetypal films however there is no way to decide what the archetypal films of a genre are without knowing the conventions. One simple solution to this “empiricist dilemma” is “genre is what we collectively believe it to be”8 This has interesting implications, it means there is an interaction between director, genre and audience. An auteur breaking a convention for example to make a point means that he must have knowledge of the genres conventions and of an audience’s expectation of the genre. For example Kubrick breaks many sci-fi conventions in A Clockwork Orange so that it is more realistic than normal sci-fi.

There are many theories as to why we have genre, one that was popular in the 70’s concerns the mythic qualities of genre and the ritualistic relationship an audience has with film.9 An audience attends a specific movie with expectations, the popularity of genres informs Hollywood of the needs of the spectator and tells the studios what to produce for maximum profit. This reproduction of what is popular insures high income for the film industry but also allows audiences to enjoy films that they have specific expectations of because of viewings with previous films of the same genre. Stephan C Pepper calls a repeated interaction with a text “funding” which Barry Kieth Grant believes takes special significance within genre as this is what allows audiences to immediately connect with a genre film as they know what to expect.10 This makes marketing a film simple for distributors and helps audiences decide what to see. The idea that an audience immediately expects a film to play to generic conventions would, in Alien cause the audience to instantly expect a sci-fi monster movie of some kind and therefore psychologically prepare them for the horror and sci-fi themes of Alien. It could also be the reason that the bleak dystopian Blade Runner failed at the box office as sci-fi’s released around the same time showed a much more positive future and promoted family values, for example Star Wars (dir. George Lucas 1977). It is also an important tool when the suspension of disbelief is considered as when a film breaks conventions in an extreme way it may confuse audiences. This happened in Blade Runner when Deckard drifts off whilst playing the piano he dreams of a picturesque landscape and a unicorn, this short scene was so stylistically different from the rest of the film the producers removed it despite Scott’s wish to keep it in as it was of key importance to the subplot. Rick Altman views the immediate identification of films to genres in a more negative way saying that “Hollywood uses its genres to short-circuit the normal interpretive processes”.11

Altman discusses later in “A systematic/syntactic approach” the way in which Hollywood uses genre to mask its political ideologies and force audiences to believe in them.12 Both the directors I am discussing were politically active and were anti establishment, you would therefore expect their films don’t conform to Hollywood ideology. However you may say that the protagonist succeeding in Alien, Blade Runner, Clockwork Orange, and debatably succeeding in 2001 as the next step of evolution is achieved, is a Hollywood ideology suggesting that some people are better than others or promoting the American dream that you can do anything if you try hard enough. The difference between these two theories is that the ritual approach which many critics like Levi Strauss and John Cawelti believe says that Hollywood’s output is shaped by audience demands whereas the approach that concerns Hollywood ideologies suggests that it is Hollywood that manipulates the audiences into believing what Hollywood tells them.

Understanding what a genre is also relies on the understanding of how a genre is created. As I have already discussed the simple repetition of archetypes may not be correct however it should not be forgotten. Altman says genre theory should analyse both the syntax and semantics involved in genres and genre formation. The semantic approach of analysing genre is defined as “common traits, attitudes, characters, shots, locations, sets and the like” and syntactic as “certain constitutive relationships between undesignated and variable place holders”13. Therefore in simpler terms we can define semantics as signs and syntax as themes or plots, he later specifies “while each individual text clearly has a syntax of its own, the syntax implied here is that of the genre, which does not appear as the generic syntax unless it is reinforced numerous times by the syntactic patterns of numerous texts”14. Altman suggests there are two ways in which genres are formed, a set of semantic givens is developed through syntactic experimentation or a pre-existing syntax develops a new set of semantics. He himself relates this to sci-fi saying that “the genre first began borrowing the syntactic relationships previously established by the horror film”15 this can be seen within the syntax of Alien for it is mainly a horror film set in a sci-fi setting, this brings about the idea of a genre hybrid, a film with two or more genres attached to it. If we use Altman’s semantic/ syntactic approach we can say that Alien uses both horror and sci-fi semantics and both sci-fi and horror syntax which it could be argued is the same. 2001: A Space Odyssey however uses purely sci-fi semantics such as space and aliens and sci-fi syntax of evolution and technological advancement. Clockwork Orange on the other hand involves new technology used to strip Alex of his pleasures however its lack of sci-fi syntax and semantics mean it is widely regarded as a crime drama. After establishing the syntactic/ semantic development genres Altman refers back to the two contrasting views of genre study mentioned previously and says that they are linked, “most genres go through a period of accommodation during which the publics desires are fitted to Hollywood’s priorities… Because the public doesn’t want to know that it is being manipulated, the successful ritual/ ideological “fit” is almost always one that disguises Hollywood’s potential for manipulation”.16

I have already mentioned the possibility through semantics and syntax that the four films I have chosen are genre hybrids, this is certainly the case for Blade Runner a clear mixture of sci-fi dystopias and classic noir thrillers. It can be argued that Alien is pure sci-fi as sci-fi now includes many elements of horror, however the underlying point of the film is to scare the audience classifying it as much a horror as a sci-fi. Clockwork Orange as I have said is more of a rime drama with sci-fi elements. 2001; A Space Odyssey is an interestingly pure sci-fi, it breaks many Hollywood conventions by having little plot, no continuous characters and an experimental ending to say the least however it sticks to many sci-fi conventions and even creates them. Kubrick’s idea in the specifically unusual ending was for the audience to engage with the text hence the specifically vague and imaginatively colourful tunnel sequence that despite a narrative explanation has many different interpretations by all audiences including the LSD culture of the 70’s.17 The idea of a film making the audience active rather than passive is something that Kubrick instilled in many of his works. It is possible the subject of perception, pleasure and voyeurism within Clockwork Orange is a comment on voyeurism. Barry Keith Grant discusses the idea of an active audience in Experience and Meaning with specific reference to John Dewey who defines a “work of art” as something that “takes place when a human being cooperates with the product so that the outcome is an experience that is enjoyed because of its liberating and ordered properties.”18 If we take Blade Runner as the product the audience enjoys the experience because they identify with characters and the film conforms to the narrative conventions of something “ordered” that they recognise, either sci-fi or noir, but it also adds different plot elements that are “liberating” such as the then unique overcapitalised view of a dystopian techno oriental future. Grant ends his essay on the audience in relation to genre with a quote from Christian Metz “I am at the cinema, attending a film, ATTENDING. Like a midwife who attends at a birth…. I help it to live, I help it to be born”19. This quote summarises the importance of audience interaction, whether in a ritualistic way, an active way, a way in which audience is submissive and takes in Hollywood ideologies or in a way which combines these, as Altman suggests, it is clear audience are important to genre theory.

I believe all of these theories shed light on the idea of genre and all are valuable when attempting to theorise why people consume media of a specific type, what they feel the need to categorize and how these categories are made. My chosen films are all sci-fi however this essay shows that they are not just sci-fi and that the classification of sci-fi itself has interesting implications about expectations and audience manipulation. Genre it seems is less a classification and more a tool used by Hollywood writers and directors to get an audience to react and enjoy a “work of art” and a tool for audience to communicate their preferences. All of my chosen films show this interaction with audience expectations and it is this that I believe is at the heart of the genre debate.






1. Oxford Dictionaries (2012) [online] Last Accessed 02/01/2012 at http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/science%2Bfiction?q=science+fiction

2. Tudor Andrew, Genre in Film Genre reader III Edited by Grant Barry Kieth (Austin, University of Texas 2005) p5

3. Cornea Christine, Science Fiction Cinema Between Fantasy and Reality (Edinburgh University Press 2007) p12

4. Cornea Christine, Science Fiction Cinema Between Fantasy and Reality (Edinburgh University Press 2007) p12

5. Cornea Christine, Science Fiction Cinema Between Fantasy and Reality (Edinburgh University Press 2007) p13

6. Cornea Christine, Science Fiction Cinema Between Fantasy and Reality (Edinburgh University Press 2007) p20

7. Cornea Christine, Science Fiction Cinema Between Fantasy and Reality (Edinburgh University Press 2007) p32

8. Tudor Andrew, Genre in Film Genre reader III Edited by Grant Barry Kieth (Austin, University of Texas 2005) p7

9. Altman Rick, A Semantic/Syntactic Approach in Film Genre Reader III Edited by Grant Barry Kieth (Austin, University of Texas, 2005) p30

10. Grant Barry Kieth, Experience and Meaning in Film Genre Reader III Edited by Grant Barry Kieth (Austin, University of Texas) p127

11. Altman Rick, A Semantic/Syntactic Approach in Film Genre Reader III Edited by Grant Barry Kieth (Austin, University of Texas, 2005) p29

12. Altman Rick, A Semantic/Syntactic Approach in Film Genre Reader III Edited by Grant Barry Kieth (Austin, University of Texas, 2005) p30

13. Altman Rick, A Semantic/Syntactic Approach in Film Genre Reader III Edited by Grant Barry Kieth (Austin, University of Texas, 2005) p31

14. Altman Rick, A Semantic/Syntactic Approach in Film Genre Reader III Edited by Grant Barry Kieth (Austin, University of Texas, 2005) p39

15. Altman Rick, A Semantic/Syntactic Approach in Film Genre Reader III Edited by Grant Barry Kieth (Austin, University of Texas, 2005) p36

16. Altman Rick, A Semantic/Syntactic Approach in Film Genre Reader III Edited by Grant Barry Kieth (Austin, University of Texas, 2005) p37

17. Cornea Christine, Science Fiction Cinema Between Fantasy and Reality (Edinburgh University Press 2007) p 83

18. Grant Barry Kieth, Experience and Meaning in Film Genre Reader III Edited by Grant Barry Kieth (Austin, University of Texas) p118

19. Metz Christian, History/Discourse: A Note on Two Voyeurisms in Film Genre Reader III Edited by Grant Barry Kieth (Austin, University of Texas) p128