On the balance between a story with too many rules and not enough.
If there is a "throughline" for our moment in time, it's not something that condenses itself down to the kind of overarching planning found in fiction.
The mere fact that David Lynch's Dune was made at all, and in the Hollywood of the early 1980s to boot, is something of a miracle. Would that it was a better adaptation of the source material, or just a better movie, period.
In a field that's trend-driven, all the most interesting and truly groundbreaking work can only come from the fringes.
Darren Aronofsky's ingenious micro-budget debut, twenty-plus years later, holds up better than some of his bigger-budgeted efforts
Near-future SF has always struck me as the most precarious kind of SF, because of its sell-by date.
A kooky example of science fiction from Hong Kong, a cinematic world that has relatively little SF to begin with.
Twenty years later, the Wachowskis' digital fable still stands tall, outliving the slickness of the moment and attempts to misappropriate it
How not all fiction has to be "realistic" to be affective, and how new aesthetic standards can follow from that.
Here's a good article about the way novel lengths have been influenced by technology and marketing, with an except I found particularly enlightening:
Why not propose something truly new, instead of just taking the old and rejugging it?
I didn't leave Star Wars. Star Wars left me. And not in the way you might think.
On how new influences keep every kind of art healthy, including and especially popular arts.
At the end of the day, it's just a fancy excuse to shoot a bunch of scenes in reverse.
How science fiction and fantasy stories live and die by their technical details, for both better and worse.