Skip Navigation

What's your Sci-Fi unpopular opinion?

It's a slightly click-baity title, but as we're still generating more content for our magazines, this one included, why not?

My Sci-fi unpopular opinion is that 2001: A Space Odyssey is nothing but pretentious, LSD fueled nonsense. I've tried watching it multiple times and each time I have absolutely no patience for the pointless little scenes which contain little to no depth or meaningful plot, all coalescing towards that 15 minute "journey" through space and series of hallucinations or whatever that are supposed to be deep, shake you to your foundations, and make you re-think the whole human condition.

But it doesn't. Because it's just pretentious, LSD fueled nonsense. Planet of the Apes was released in the same year and is, on every level, a better Sci-fi movie. It offers mystery, a consistent and engaging plot, relatable characters you actually care about, and asks a lot more questions about the world and our place in it.

It insists upon itself, Lois.

329 comments
  • I think this might be a truly unpopular opinion, but I could not get into the expanse at all. Just never got invested in the characters enough to stick with it. I've retried watching it 4 times due to everyone recommending it, kind of given up now!

    Also the latest star wars films killed any interest I had in star wars.

    • well, I love The Expanse, but I applaud you for posting an actual unpopular opinion!

    • That means you've missed out on Andor, which I think is better than any live action Star Wars (including, perhaps controversially, Empire Strikes Back)!

      It's mature, deep, detailed, grounded, and very political. The characters and world are built up phenomenally, and it's much more contemplative in its pacing, and it definitely treats its audience as intelligent rather than beating them around the head with obvious exposition. It feels more like an HBO show than your standard Star Wars affair, frankly. And it works as a standalone, too - it's not just yet more Skywalker family drama.

      • I've always loved anything Star Wars that didn't really involve Jedi. The universe is incredibly diverse and interesting, and cutting out the light side vs dark side trope most star wars content is centered on lets writers make really interesting characters and situations. Like in Mandandolrian the scene with Bill Burr confronting the Imperial officer that spearheaded the Burning Khan massacre was just fantastic, regardless of it being star wars.

      • You ads selling that to me! I don't have Disney + so that might be an issue. I loved rogue one, but that was the last star wars thing I enjoyed.

      • You know how OP said 2001 was pretentious nonsense? That's how I felt about Andor. It was actively bad, and I struggle to see all the praise it gets as anything other than Morbius level trolling! It was badly written, badly plotted, was trying to be about three things at once and didn't do any of them well, and was about six episodes too long. It's what really turned me off Starwars!

    • If you are least made it past s1e4 CQB then you gave it a solid shot. That episode imo is where you either pick it up and like it or move on. The first 3 episodes can be a bit slow and introduce so many characters.

      • I heard this, and so I think I get to episode 4 or 5 drop it and then I leave it too long, try and watch it all again but I've seen the first 4 episodes too many times.

        Maybe I'm due trying to watch it again!

    • I imagine you've probably heard this a few times as well, but give the books a try instead, I read them first and now I can't watch the show.

      • Oh, thanks I'd actually never heard this before. I will try the books!

    • How far do you usually get before giving up on it? Not saying you should force it more, just curious.

      • I'd heard it was a bit hard going until episode 5 so I always try and get to that point but I don't think I've got past. At this point I've rewatched the first episodes too many times

    • Unpopular? Yes. Wrong? I don't think so. I finished The Expanse and at the end I didn't feel like it added anything to my life but I didn't hate it either. There was definitely some standout moments but I would not rewatch it.

      • Interesting! I've only ever heard people sing it's praises, so I've definitely felt in the wrong for not loving it. Someone else suggested the books so I might try reading them instead of going for the 6th rewatch

    • You're valid. It took us a couple tries before we really got into The Expanse.

      As for Star Wars, we stick with the Dave Filoni shows now. If I may suggest, try a Clone Wars rewatch with a viewing order that emphasizes the story arcs. That's what brought me back to Star Wars, and I hated the sequels and the prequels.

      • Thank you, I appreciate the star wars watching suggestions! I'm more of a trekkie but there are elements of star wars I love, they just became less and less with the latest films!

    • I would say that while the show does a fantastic job of bringing the books to the screen, it misses the interpersonal intimacy that makes the book series so fantastic. The plots are cool, but at its core, The Expanse is really about its characters. If you like to read or listen to audio books, I HIGHLY recommend them. A big part of where the show fails, is it was impossible for them to tell the story and also deal with the internal dialogues of each character. In the books, every chapter is told from the point of view of a specific character, so you get to know their inner thoughts and feelings on an extremely personal level.

      This is one of those series where I will tell someone that if they read the books and enjoyed them, they would enjoy the show - and vice-versa. That said, if you didn't enjoy the show for the reasons you stated, and you're willing to give it a go, I think you'll probably enjoy the books.

  • The writing in The Three-Body Problem is so dry that I could barely keep up with the plot due to being deceased from boredom.

    Totally a me problem but it just did not vibe with me. I could never bring myself to read the second book. Tho to be fair to Ken Liu I have trouble with translations in general and I've never read a translation of Chinese-language literature I did vibe with.

    • I wasn't a big fan, either. I think for me it was cultural; I had trouble understanding the main character's motivations and why she made the decisions she did.

    • Hah. I read the whole thing in pretty much one long sitting over a weekend, so I don't think I quite agree. I was way more bothered by the obvious propaganda than I was about the writing or the translation. But then again that's pretty frequent in all sci-fi, don't think I don't notice it just as much in US media.

      EDIT: I also don't quite thing its game theory approach to the Fermi paradox makes too much sense, but once again, that one is shared with a lot of other hard sci-fi.

      EDIT EDIT: Oh, here's a fun one: given the Prime Directive, Star Trek is technically a "dark forest" sci-fi setting. That one may need its own thread.

    • My big dislike of the Three Body Problem is somewhat meta. The Fermi Paradox solution that it presents, the Dark Forest hypothesis, only "works" in the books because the author made up a bunch of magic technologies and just-so scenarios to make it work. But ever since then /r/Fermiparadox has been overrun with "what about the Dark Forest??" shower thoughts.

      I guess it's not so much a problem I have with the Three Body Problem as it is a problem I have with humanity in general.

      • Arguably it doesn't work in-universe, either, as proven by the fact that... well, it literally doesn't work, the dark forest is plenty bright by the time it all gets wrapped up.

        From a western perspective the idea that the entire planet would successfully suppress a Dune-style disapora because "either we all make it or none of us does" also seems absurd, but it's not just a humanity prerequisite for the plot, it's a universal prerequisite for the dark forest, at least if the technology rollout is somewhat plausible.

        Also, see above my point about Star Trek under the Prime Directive technically being a dark forest. Which is a funny meme, but also makes just as much sense as the TBP solution.

        But hey, it's fun to think about for a minute and not that much wonkier than the Foundation or Dune takes on the same scale of problems. Except perhaps the slightly harder sci-fi approach making people take it more seriously than it deserves.

    • I think there are some forms of world building that just aren't everyone's cup of tea. It requires a certain willingness to be completely confused, lost, and aimlessly wandering with no discernable plot goal to get through something like 3BP, the first few episodes of The Expanse, or Chris Nolan's Tenet.

      But can I tell you that holy shit, the reveal in 3BP is probably the single best set up and truly unexpected, shocking payoff for any fiction I've ever read. It's just one of those "you can only experience it for the first time once" moments that will stick with me that I wish I could help other people experience.

      But I get it, the price you pay to get there is steep. That book is dense.

    • Yep, totally agree with you there. Couldn't get past the first chapter, just glazed over and gave up

    • You know, I'm really with you on this one. I read it, and it never rose above a resounding "meh" from me.

  • @Anomandaris

    I went to film school, and had to watch 2001 like five times in classes, breaking down every little element of it. And you know what? I also think it's boring and pretentious AF. The fx and production design are incredible, and parts of it are good enough, but other than that it's just Kubrick demonstrating how much smarter he thought he was than everyone else (I am not a fan of his films, if that wasn't clear enough).

    I did enjoy the book a lot, though! If you haven't read it I think you'll be surprised how it tells the same story, just better.

    • Another film school refugee! My brother/sister/other in arms!

      It truly was like being on another planet. Not only did I obtain a functionally worthless degree (I'm grateful for the media literacy I learned, but holy crap), but I also got to spend three years feeling like a stranger in a strange land, because almost any time something popular came out in the theaters my peers immediately labeled it Absolute Garbage and moved on.

      Yeah? Well screw you, Mike! I liked The Matrix! I saw it in theaters twice!

      • @DuckCake

        It was fighting words to say Kubrick was overrated in film school-- people would get really mad about it! (I admit, I do really like the Killing, but that's about it).

        And I saw the Matrix multiple times as well! It's okay to like action movies, and sometimes they even have real value too!

        @Anomandaris

  • This should make some people mad... I thought The Dispossessed was an awful book. The characters were flat and the way Le Guin explored the themes had all the nuance and subtlety of a Garfield comic. It's the only book of hers that I've read, put me off exploring the rest of her work.

    • hottest take, and written with poignant scorn

    • I really liked it when I was a teenager, but I'm forced to agree, I re-read it a couple years back while I still enjoyed it overall, there were a few aspects I found didn't age super well.

      "Left Hand of Darkness" was way, way better. "Earthsea" too, actually (here's a bonus fantasy hot take: LOTR is at least as good as Earthsea). "The Dispossessed" gets hyped because left-anarchists like the depiction of anything close to what they're into, but in many ways it's not actual a very strong novel for the reasons you mention.

      My point is, some of her other books are much better if you ever feel inclined to give her another try. IMO She developed a lot both as a writer and in terms of the depth of her personal philosophy. "Always Coming Home" is an extremely ambitious scifi project that is IMO underappreciated in expanding the idea of "worldbuilding" as a thing that authors share with audiences rather than do behind the scenes. It's less of a novel and more of an anthropological survey of a fictional future culture. Also it's the only scifi novel I know of that comes with a bangin soundtrack.

      • I love "The Dispossessed", but thats an interesting perspective! Ive had most of these books on my reading list for some time, guess i have to move them further up. Thanks!

      • Haha, I once mentioned on reddit that I thought I would've liked it if I'd read it as a teenager and got downvoted to hell. The setting was interesting, and I appreciated the ideas, I just thought the actual writing was very clunky. No judgement on anyone who liked it is intended, I've certainly enjoyed some poorly written books just because the ideas explored were new to me.

        Thanks for the recs, I may give another book a try once the memory has faded more.

  • I've got 3 of them...

    1. I liked Prometheus. I had no issues with Covenant, enjoyed it as well.
    2. I'd like to see more original sci-fi shows than just yet another time-travel or evil alien/AI destroys humanity scenario. I enjoy them, but I'd like to think there's a lot more to the future than just those two possibilities.
    3. I've never seen Firefly or Serenity and have no interest in doing so.
    • Is the disinterest about Firefly because of the years of people hyping it up?

      • idk, when I've watched snippets or clips, it just doesn't appeal to me? I always got the impression, to me, that it looked like "Friends in space".

        The fandom hasn't bothered me, everything has a rabid fandom. You should see the frothing at the mouths when I dare to say that I liked the new Starbuck as much as I liked the old Starbuck from BSG 2003/1978.

  • My unpopular sci-fi opinion is that Discovery is an amazing adaptation of the Star Trek universe into the gritty, modern sci-fi paradigm.

    I love it and I love that it is in the Star Trek franchise.

    For perspective, my favorite Trek series is TNG.

    • It's pretty interesting as a Star Trek show, since I think that it is also one of the few that actually pushed its boundaries. It might not have been well-received, but it also tried to do something new, like Deep Space 9, and the original Star Trek, and stuck to that something new, despite having to find its footing under a myriad of production issues.

      Although I would say that it wasn't a direct adaptation in and of itself. It seemed to be following the lead of the 2009 films in that sense, seemingly leaning on some of their groundwork to try and "modernise" Trek. They didn't quite succeed, but the attempt is at least commendable.

      Personally, though, I'm more of a TOS fan, just because the world building seemed much more expansive on the older show, but TNG is also quite good.

    • I mean, my unpopular opinion then would be that Discovery is not at all gritty and modern. Even in season 1 that drops off pretty quickly, but by S2 they're all making big speeches and having emotional declarations about the spirit of Starfleet and saving the space whales and whatnot.

      I do think it's a pretty great adaptation of Trek to modern serialized TV narrative. I guess from that perspective, my unpopular opinion is that Discovery is to serialized shows what Strange New World is to episodic shows.

    • The Last Jedi is the best Disney Star Wars movie, bar none.
    • Rogue One is overrated.
    • Andor is not overrated, but it also cannot be the blueprint for all or even most Star Wars going forward.
    • The Last Jedi is the 2nd best Star Wars movie, period, behind Empire, IMO. Followed by Rogue One, so I can't agree with you on that one.

      Rian Johnson gets so much insane criticism for TLJ, when he was just doing what he does - making great, original movies. If Kathleen Kennedy and JJ Abrams wanted a cohesive, overarching, three-movie storyline - like the guys down the hall at Marvel - they should have had it in place before pre-production began on The Force Awakens. Instead, you hire two directors to follow JJ who are both huge Star Wars fanboys and have visions of their own, and somehow you're surprised when the guy who takes the baton for the sequel doesn't walk a path he was never told existed.

      If what they wanted was Luke coming back and kicking ass, they probably could have found out in a 10 minute conversation that Rian Johnson wasn't going to be their guy. But they gave him creative freedom! And the dude is an incredible writer and filmmaker; he probably looked at TFA and thought, "Well, okay, that was nice. But are we just remaking the original trilogy or...? Nah."

      Then Disney doubled down on their mistake by, instead of taking things the new direction Rian had pointed them, bringing JJ back to steer things in to the most awkward, retconned, third-act ever. She's a...Palpatine? And an "ancient" Sith artifact is a map that matches up to wreckage of the Death Star that's like 50 years old? TF is happening?!

      Ugh. Aside from the heavy-handedness of the Canto Bight storyline - there had to be a gentler way to impart to Finn that fighting for big causes is always gonna leave you empty, it's the "people you love" you fight for (or whatever) - TLJ is a freaking awesome movie.

      (Also, I agree with you about Andor not being the blueprint for everything SW going forward. This is a project that fits a very specific type of storytelling by its very nature. It won't work for everything.)

      • If what they wanted was Luke coming back and kicking ass, they probably could have found out in a 10 minute conversation that Rian Johnson wasn't going to be their guy.

        If what they wanted was Luke coming back and kicking ass, they should have done so in TFA.

        Luke's characterization is basically the only aspect that TLJ keeps from TFA. His nephew has turned to the dark side and cosplays as his father as a part of Galactic Empire 2: Electric Boogaloo, his sister was kicked off the government of the New Republic she helped to create, and his brother-in-law goes back to smuggling. And all that Luke does is playing galactic hide-and-seek? The Luke Skywalker of the OT would never abandon his friends, family and the galaxy, but that's exactly what JJAbrams did with his character. Johnson did what he could to save that shipwreck, adding the motivation of his failure and struggle with the dark side. But for some reason, the haters of TLJ think that Johnson is responsible for Luke's character assassination.

    • I would agree with Rogue One there if not for the fact that it... kinda got mediocre reviews when it came out.

      It somehow was reappraised as "the good one" later, but at the time it was thought to be a bit of a mess.

      I can't agree with The Last Jedi. The bad faith criticism of that one is way more annoying than the movie itself, which is well intentioned and creative. Its biggest sin is being a bit of a poorly structured jumble, which is also true of the original Star Wars.

      • I'll even go one farther. TLJ is better than any other Disney SW movie, and it's better than any prequel.

        It does have pacing and focus issues, and the degree to which Rian Johnson ignored some of the techno-lore didn't really serve him well in dealing with fans, but it's better made than any prequel and is the only Disney era film trying to to do anything interesting.

      • Rogue One could have used a bunch of editing, and IMO Chirrut shouldn't have been there (can we not have "normal people" save the galaxy at least once without a magic Jedi wizard monk to take credit). Still the best Disney Star Wars movie of the bunch though.

        The Last Jedi was the stake in the heart of Star Wars. The Rise of Skywalker merely desecrated the corpse. I don't think this is unpopular so much as it is controversial, though. Though less and less controversial over time I think.

  • I didn't love The Martian. It wasn't a bad book, but I got bored in places. I was more engaged by Project Hail Mary (which is probably another unpopular opinion).

    EDIT: Guess I should mention I'm referring to the books. Never saw The Martian movie.

    • Project Hail Mary was SO good. One of the times when the audiobook really added to the experience, too.

    • The Martian is one of the few times where I feel strongly that the movie was "better" than the book, though I think we do well sometimes to question whether maybe we just like books better than movies. :-)

      Weir is never going to be Tolstoy or Faulkner, but as of the time he wrote The Martian, it was clear he only had the skill and/or interest in making his author-insert anything like a real human being. Most scenes without him are some combination of tedious, juvenile, and unbelievable. A couple of rounds with a screenwriters and then professional actors to deliver the lines improved them dramatically. Throw in that Matt Damon was absolutely in his wheelhouse and that they didn't cut out too much until the rover trip, and there you go.

      Artemis was Weir trying to grow as an author, partly succeeding and partly very much not, and Project Hail Mary was him settling in and evolving what he does best without exceeding his grasp.

  • ST:TNG specific: Data is not sentient, there is no ghost in the machine. His code is just very good at mimicry. he doesn't understand what he is saying any more than ChatGPT does. He is just predicting the appropriate course of action to do next.

    • Unpopular real world opinion: There is no difference.

      • Indeed. This seems right up there with the "the transporter kills you and creates an exact duplicate at the destination to replace you" take.

        Yeah... so?

  • I'd like to see season 4 of Dark Matter produced. The cliffhanger at the end of S3 was insane and I still can't believe they canceled the show and left it at that.

    • Not sure that's an unpopular opinion, that was a good show and deserved a real ending.

  • Enter my hot take: I dont really like the golden age of science fiction books. They are boring to read and the concepts are clunkily applied. Personally I think this is because while the authors might have been very creative, Ive since seen and read the same concepts and ideas in books and movies much better written, with a better ending and more mature thoughts on it. Those movies and books obviously stand on the shoulders of the golden age of science fiction. But that fact doesnt make me like those books more.

    • At some point, books like Doc Smith's and Edgar Rice Burroughs' are more interesting as historical texts than entertainment.

      • It's not just science fiction that ends up like this, IMO. I've bounced pretty hard off of most of the "classics."

        Most, but not all, I should note. There's a few now and then that have surprised me. But often those are lesser-known works, not ones widely labeled "classics."

  • The vast majority of Star Wars, new canon and legends, is poorly written trash, but the cringe ass campiness is what makes it a star war.

    Rey isn't the problem, revisionist history is.

  • Lexx: Xev was superior to Zev in every way.

    • I feel like enjoying Lexx at all is an unpopular opinion, at least where I am. I really loved potatohoe, stand-out moment for me.

      • I can't believe I've encountered another Potatohoe lover in the wild.

        I had a D&D character once who was a simple farmer who'd been dragged into being a soldier and then an adventurer, who worshipped an evil goddess of agriculture. His catchphrase was "potato is virtue," always said with great solemnity and conviction.

        Potatohoe lives on in the hearts of its fans.

  • I love the entire "2001" series, and I've even watched the "2010" movie. I understand where your opinions are coming from and I will not judge you for them; but I personally disagree. Then again, I'm also someone who genuinely enjoys watching Citizen Kane, so I might just have a skewed perspective. Mind you, I also enjoy the 1995 Johnny Mnemonic movie and have watched Overdrawn at the Memory Bank without MST3K - so I'm all over in terms of sci-fi.

    Here's my big hot take lately: of the "virtual world" sci-fi movies of 1999, I'm honestly upset that the Matrix was the one that won the cultural zeitgeist, rather than The Thirteenth Floor and eXistenZ. I understand that a Cronenberg movie probably wasn't going to win the public even if it did have Jennifer Jason Lee, Jude Law, and cameos from Ian Holm and Willem Dafoe; but The Thirteenth Floor had a great story, a solid cast, and really nice set designs - not to mention the moment that the covers of the home releases have always spoiled.

    • As someone who's old enough to remember seeing 2001 on a huge screen when it was first released, it's hard to express how monumentally spectacular the effects were. It brought the moon and space alive in a way that no movie had done before. The closest comparison I can make is with the first Jurassic Park movie, which was the first time movie audiences experienced living, breathing dinosaurs.

      The whole psychedelic transit thing, hotel room/zoo and star baby was pretty obtuse for most audiences. You really needed to read the book to suss out what happened.

    • I watched 2010 before I watched 2001, because back in the olden days you could only watch whatever was on TV.

      Needless to say I was very confused multiple times throughout that process.

  • The Fast and Furious movies are science fiction movies. The complete disregard for how physics work is literally impossible visual fiction foisted into our faces against against the concept of reality.

    and because, Family.

  • I really cannot understand why everyone gets so excited by Rogue One. It’s a story that there was absolutely no need to tell, and I felt it only cheapens the stakes of both itself and A New Hope. Besides, the plot is barely coherent at times, with characters who are worked up into huge deals being left behind without any meaningful affect on the story. I liked the Vader scene, I’ll give it that.

  • I think Mobile Suit GUNDAM directed by Yoshiyuki Tomino is one of the best SF TV show.

  • Came into this thread not feeling like I had any particularly spicy opinions, and maybe this is totally accepted and uncontroversial and basic but, reading these posts has just cemented my belief that sci-fi as a genre works much better in written form than it does in visual.

  • I fully agree with you. 2001 is literally the most disappointing movie I've ever watched. Not exaggerating. I heard so much about it and was excited to finally watch it, only to be extremely let down by how boring it is. Only good thing I got out of it is memes and references. I'd name my Google Home HAL if I could (but literally no major smart device lets you set their name).

    One opinion of mine that may be unpopular is that Star Wars has very amateur writing. I say this this mostly in reference to how the villains are so comically evil, yet so incompetent that the galaxy spanning villain is frequently defeated by a band of a couple hundred rebels. There's many parts of Star Wars I really enjoy (I've admittedly seen nearly every TV show and movie), but the big picture writing is pretty much never one of them.

    Andor had the best writing among any of the Star Wars movies/shows I've seen, because it frequently showed the villains as terrified themselves. Plus the very first "villain" we encounter isn't actually wrong (he's a security guard investigating the murders of some people and genuinely believes he's trying to stop a murderer).

329 comments