Sci-Fi films - Why are they so timeless?

I find that science fiction movies are the most timeless movies. Even if they are decades old they have the ability to transport my imagination to a future time and place. Do you have the same experience? Why do you think a film like Kubrick’s 2001:A Space Odyssey is so timeless even though it was made decades ago? When I watch it I don’t feel like I’m watching a really old movie. I feel like I could be watching a movie set in the future.

 

I’m not saying that other genres are not timeless. I just find that Sci-Fi films hold up really well over time. It could be the mystery of the unknown. Like space movies. It could also be the futuristic sounding music in the films.

 

Sci-fi films may seem more "timeless" because they're not set in the era during which they were made. You watch a movie from 1979 that's set in 1979 and obviously it'll seem dated in a lot of ways.

Of course, this also means that period films should seem "timeless", but they're also pinned to specific dates that've already happened, not some nebulous future.

I don't think sci-fi movies are timeless at all, though. Some are but most remind us of the eras in which they were shot.

Look at "Logan's Run", for instance. It might take place in 2274, but everything about it screams 1976!

 

I think timeless is linked to period costume films and sci-fi not overwhelmed by cheezy special effects.

 

it's all fantasy and fantasy never ages...: )

 

SciFi movies do not have period references aside from haircuts. Farrah’s hair in Logan’s Run brought the movie back to the 70’s.

 

I can't say that I agree with the premise of the OP. He cited 2001 as an example and with that one I would agree. But there are countless old scifi flicks which look horribly dated. Evan a classic such as Forbidden Planet is terribly dated when viewed today, to say nothing of the 50s/60s B-grade stuff.

The things that date old scifi (and all) movies other than 'future' tech designs and haircuts, are cultural, manifested through dialog, cultural mores and norms, interaction between the sexes, etc. Also within the genre, the lack of scientific and astrophysical knowledge which leads to real clangers in dialog.

 

I think films like this work because while the example screams 70's, it isn't quite because of all the crazy looks. So it stands as kind of an alternate future that never happened. That is the timeless aspect to me.

 

Not sure I agree sci-fi is any more timeless than anything else. Well, maybe breakdancing movies. But there is an awful lot of dated sci-fi. We just don't remember most of them unless Tom Servo and Croooooow are taking them down.

 

I like them as well.
One thing that irritates me though is why do most sci fi film genre mostly date the year not that distant in the future ie; film is made in 2000, sci fi period date is 2050 showing flying cars for example, its 2018 now..can't see flying cars in thirty years.

 

Flying cars are just a bad idea, period, regardless of year. It's really not a question of technology, but of public safety. If flying cars were a thing, you'd basically have millions of flying potential bombs that could wreak havoc from above (to say nothing of intentional targeting or hacked pilotless drone vehicles). It's just a bad idea all around.

 

Well it was just a example.

 

Yep, the only smart guy was John Boorman who set "Zardoz" in 2293.

 

Yep. Still liked diapers in 300 years time though. But ...I know what you mean, set in way in the future.

 

when I was a kid I thought we'd have them by the year 2001...: )

 

Never wanted a flying CAR.

 

Jetpack!
first seen for me on Lost In Space...

 

Born to late to experience The Jetsons. Or Son Of Flubber.

 

I wouldn’t say all sci-fi ages well; I can’t think of anything that predates 2001: A Space Odyssey that has aged particularly well, and there are plenty that have come out since that have aged poorly. That being said, I do kind of see what the OP is getting at.

I think it’s partially a matter of cream rising to the top, which applies to all genres of film, but sci-fi especially. This is because the films that are considered classics but still seem dated come from mostly before the 70’s, which happens to be around the same time that sci-fi came into its own as a genre, meaning a lot of the very dated sci-fi films released prior to 1968 or so have been forgotten because they just weren’t that good.

It’s also because a lot of the futuristic stylings of sci-fi films im the post-2001 have stood the test of time visually. Even when some once-futuristic styles become dated (think the photo-editing scene from Blade Runner) it becomes retrofuturism, which is something a lot people find cool in its own right. When the futuristic stylings don’t stand the test of time is usually a) the film came from an era when sci-fi was essentially a B-movie genre (think 50’s sci-fi horror), or b) the movie was low-budget and/or campy and wouldn’t have stood the test of time anyway (think 80’s Star Wars knockoffs).

Another thing that elevates a lot of sci-fi films is their themes. A lot of science fiction employs existential or allegorical themes that are timeless (2001) or are interesting even if explicitly tied to their era (Invasion of the Bodysnatchers). Even a lot of politically-charged sci-fi still feels relevant in spite of being based on or inspired by contemporary events (A Clockwork Orange).

One final reason that I think science fiction films often age well is that they can just be so much fun. A lot of sci-fi borders on fantasy, allowing infinite possibilities if the minds behind it are imaginative enough. Incredibly interesting and original characters and worlds can be built around archetypes in a way not possible in a lot of other genres. Films like Star Wars, ET, and Back to The Future derive their enduring appeal from their amazing characters and universes, all while having very warm and archetypal themes, and never losing a sense of fun.

 

Was dressing an aging Sean Connery like some sort of bandido stripper in a mankini a smart move, though? Really?

 

Actors seemed to be very hairy in the seventies, including women.

 

Saturn 3 ...springs to mind.
In the future earth is crowded.A space station Saturn 3 intervenes to help feed earths populace. Anyway a dangerous psycho robot runs amok leaving the two trapped scientists played by Kirk Douglas and Farrah Fawcet Majors. The kinky robot is after FFM, and you've got Kirk Douglas running about starkers(..why not FFM? Blame producer.

 

Some don't agree.

 

I'd like to think that, if a movie is good enough, it will stand the test of time. I recently saw Blade Runner again and I know that is perhaps an extreme example but it holds up extremely well, whereas something like Logan's Run is definitely frozen in it's own 70's amber and can be hard to take seriously as a result. Even a fairly decent movie like Total Recall hasn't held up that well because the effects work now looks so badly dated, so it gets complicated. It might be a matter of time also. I love 50's SciFi and have no expectation for it to be anything other than what it is - people blasting off into space sitting in office chairs and fending off giant rubber creatures with rayguns. Something like 'It Conquered the World is completely nuts but it's extremely entertaining also and in that sense, it holds up really well. Perhaps one day we will look back on stuff like 'Saturn 3' with the same perspective. Then again, perhaps not.

 

Creature From The Black Lagoon 1954 3D still has a period sorta charm.though not sci-fi per se.