When I was thinking about starting this Lemmy community, I tried writing down every single Weird West work I'd seen, read, or played. In that list, I added Wild Wild West. But now that I think about it, I'm not sure if I'd call it a Weird Western.
Most Weird West works involve some sort of supernatural or fantasy element added to a Wild West setting. But does steampunk count as supernatural or fantasy? I mean, technically there weren't any giant steam-powered spiders in the Wild West but is that "weird" enough to qualify? The fact that it was steam-powered makes it harder for me to call it sci-fi. Besides, if I call Wild Wild West a Weird Western, does that mean Back to the Future Part 3 is a Weird Western too? I'm at the point where I'm questioning the definition of the genre to determine whether or not to post something.
Here's a trailer, and I'm sorry if watching it gets that theme song stuck in your head. The movie isn't streaming anywhere though.
I know, this really gets to be splitting hairs about genre definitions. I don't mind calling Cowboys & Aliens a Weird West movie because it takes place in the Wild West and then goes full-blown scifi. Something about upending a normal Western setting with scifi seems to work for me.
Yet creating James Bond-esque gadgets using technology that technically existed in the era (steam-power, magnets) doesn't feel as scifi to me because while the devices are new to the residents, this isn't "sufficiently advanced technology indistinguishable from magic". Besides, if we consider James Bond-esque gadgets to be scifi, does that mean the James Bond series itself is scifi? I would've said no, but I can see your argument for it.
In the end, it doesn't really matter. I just thought it'd be fun to discuss where we define the boundaries of this genre.
The flying saw blades that homed into the collars and the giant spider were either sci fi or magc as both break the laws of physics. Not just fantastial abilities, but they could not possibly be steam powered.
James bond using super future tech is sci fi, like when he went to space in Moonraker. Some Bond films aren't when they just use spy tech.
Yeah, that's fair. Just because the movie says a giant robot spider is steam-powered doesn't mean that explanation makes any sense at all.
I thought the saw blades were just magnetic but it's been awhile since I watched the movie so I'm sure "magnets" isn't enough to justify what those blades did anyway.
Yeah, they said in the movie they were magnetic, but they fly in circles like drones. The characters even duck and the blades go right over the headas nd back up into the airnfor another pass, which isn't how magnets work.
It is a very entertaining movie!
The scene with the head & projector alone makes it qualify in my mind!
I mean... the reason it's science fiction and not fantasy is because it has some kind of backing in explainable phenomenon. Just because you can say "It's powered by steam" or "it's pushed by magnets" doesn't mean it's not in some way fantastic.
Would more grounded science fiction not count as science fiction to you? Things like The Martian or The Expanse don't count because they don't involved magical fantasy technology that turn the world on its head?
Frankenstein is undoubtedly science fiction... but it's just using electricity to awaken a cobbled together corpse. There's no magic space rays or warp drives or matter transporters.
That's true, just because an explanation is given doesn't mean that explanation makes any sense. You still have to suspend disbelief either way.
the expanse features a fair amount of fantasy in regards to the protomolecule and its fantastical effects and results, as well as it's opponents as the story goes on.
You're making me think too hard!
Seriously, though, I never thought about Bond being sci-fi, but I guess most spy movies would fall into that category. Especially the ones that have "secret government technology not available to the public."
This is what I love about the internet.