Do science fiction films need to have realistic science?

[philmophlegm]

“An American physicist is calling for Hollywood producers to tone down the fanciful science in movies - and restrict themselves to just one scientific flaw per film.”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8530405.stm

So – how real should the science in science fiction be?

Discuss.

Personally, as long as the fictional setting is internally consistent, I’m not overly bothered by fanciful ‘science’ in science fiction. I think science fiction should be more about the fiction than the science.

Comments

[sigisgrim.livejournal.com]

I'm not familiar with the film at all, so it's difficult to comment to that level, but I suspect you're right! Sometimes one has to suspend disbelief to get anything out of the film (or book). I suspect I would have avoided that film for much the same reason as I avoided the third.

[philmophlegm.livejournal.com]

You're not familiar with Deep Blue Sea?

It's a pretty crap film with only one memorable scene. Admittedly that one scene features a dripping wet Saffron Burrows in her underwear electrocuting a giant frickin' shark, but it's still only one scene...

[wellinghall.livejournal.com]

*heads off to Amazon to order the DVD*