Adults' obsession with science fiction causing society to become infantilised

Seems to be less about <i>science fiction</i> than about <i>comic books</i> a.k.a. graphic novels, and in that more restricted context he might have a point. Generalizing wildly, that sub-genre really is a bit more escapist than SF (including fantasy) overall. Escapism is a fine thing in moderation - all entertainment has it as one element - but it can also be overdone. SF more generally has as much interpersonal drama and social commentary as any other genre. If you want to see some truly inane movies, &quot;romantic comedy&quot; is the genre to look at. I guess taking pot shots at geeks was a better&#x2F;safer way for a second-rate actor to get some publicity, though.

&gt; <i>Adults are watching this stuff, and taking it seriously!</i><p>Wait, seriously how? Who? How many of them?<p>&gt; <i>Films used to be about challenging, emotional journeys.</i><p>Charlie Chaplin. Laurel and Hardy. Buster Keaton. John Wayne. Die Hard. Lethal Weapon. Airplane.<p>The World&#x27;s End.<p>&gt; <i>Now we’re really not thinking about anything, other than the fact that the Hulk just had a fight with a robot.”</i><p>Yep. I took an afternoon off to treat a few people to Age of Ultron. It was awesome. Afterward, I went back to work.<p>I think this article can go sit right next to the nonsense about Clint Eastwood and the empty chair: &quot;Person states opinions about society and ends up in the news because they&#x27;re an actor, more at 11.&quot;

Sci-fi seems to mean &#x27;anything that looks vaguely technical in a story&#x27;.<p>SF, especially, hard SF, has always tackled grown up questions.<p>Here are a few I have recently re-read:<p>The Dispossessed by Ursula K. Le Guin, Saturn&#x27;s Children by Charles Stross, Engines Of Light by Ken McLeod, 2001 by Arthur C. Clarke, Robots of Dawn, etc. by Isaac Asimov.

I agree that society is becoming infantilized and this is a huge problem, but I&#x27;m going to call a complete miss on the attempt to identify the cause. For one thing, most adults are not fans of science fiction to any significant degree, which means it can&#x27;t be a significant factor.

The most extreme instance of this being the adults who watch (and take rather seriously) My Little Pony? Something I&#x27;ve always found unsettling.

I think someone completely missed the point of Avengers 2. He claims that science fiction takes our focus away from real world issues (lets completely ignore for the moment, that is the sole point of entertainment) But science fiction in general typically tackles real world problems set in a different place or time. Avengers tackled issues such as AIs and robots taking over (While not an immediate issue, it is more important today than a few years ago) Or giving up our freedom for security (basically locking humanity up in a cage to protect them) Or the fact that someone who has altruistic intentions could still harm someone. Science Fiction tends to tackle more &quot;real world&quot; issues than many other forms of entertainment does.

To be honest I&#x27;m glad to hear any celebrity come out in support of sophistication in entertainment or anything else. Of course, the irony is that it is the public dependance on celebrity judgement that infantilizes society. Precious few philosophers, writers, and thinkers every make any sort of impact at all on the mainstream, and the ones that do <i>always</i> have a celebrity to thank for the exposure (and her name is usually &quot;Oprah&quot;).<p>In any event, yeah, it&#x27;s clear Pegg meant a certain sub-genre, comic-book science fiction. There have been plenty of extraordinary SF films over the years that are quite delicate and complex, Ex Machina not least among them.

This doesn&#x27;t come off as particularly convincing. Is the argument that Fast and Furious movies are &quot;challenging, emotional journeys&quot; while Iron Man isn&#x27;t?<p>What I do find a bit concerning is the avalanche of super hero movies. While I&#x27;ve been raised on a diet of French and US comics, and like a good braindead super hero movie (or even less braindead, like Watchmen), monocultures are not a good thing. More variety would be nice. But thinking they are more silly than generic Hollywood blockbusters is a weird complaint.

The comment that this page reiterates concerns the garish, collectible candy that Marvel and DC have made their stock-in-trade.<p>Folks who prefer their science fiction from the likes of Jack Womack, Cormack McCarthy or any of the masters of science fiction need not be concerned.<p>Move along please, there&#x27;s nothing to see here.

Good luck getting a lucid discussion about this on HN.

Projection?

Is there some browser extension to filter HN based on target domains?

A bad case of rose tinted spectacles.