So you're talking entirely about film and TV, right? Okay, I'll get behind that.StBishop said:It just tends to be poorly made (production value) and my dislike of space enhances it rather than help me to get over it.
Still, this one isn't so hard to figure out is it?
Science fiction and fantasy generally require some kind of indication that they're set in the future and/or an alternative reality, respectively. This means a lot of things which cost money (constructed sets, elaborate makeup, animatronics, CGI if you're feeling lush or old school visual effects if you're not) to fill in the blanks. This costs money which most science fiction which is generally a strictly genre thing with a limited fanbase, doesn't have.
If what you're arguing that Science Fiction needs a stronger focus on good writing and acting over visual effects, I agree. Too many plots come down to completely arbitrary McGuffins or painful allegories for current events which are then completely robbed of any meaning because they have to be solvable within a film or an episode. Too many actors are basically reduced to playing amateur dramatics because of the perception that science fiction can't deal with emotion (or, if I was being less favourable, because the writers are such geeks they can't understand it).
Seriously, though. Have you seen 'Children of Men'? It's (in my opinion) a near perfect example of how to make science fiction relevant to current events without being heavy handed.
Also, Blade Runner is totally still worth watching.
In other news. Someone really needs to make a contemporary film of 'I have no mouth but I must scream'.