Tuesday, 11 January 2011

What The Hell Do NASA Know About Anything?

Those crazy kids over at NASA have proclaimed 2009's steaming apocalyptic turdcake 2012 to be the most absurd science fiction film ever, due to its 158-minute eruption of scientifically implausible events and, of course, its massive shitness.

Well excuse me, but I'd prefer it if NASA would stick to building rockets rather than ripping apart rubbish films for their own entertainment. That's my job. Besides, I bet I could pick five science fiction films at random that are more absurd than 2012. What's that? You want me to do just that? Oh OK. Jesus, anybody would think I was just desperately looking around for something to blog about.

Back To The Future
A teenage boy spots another teenage boy watching a teenage girl undressing and, rather than hoofing up the tree and joining him, looks on in disgust? ZAZEEV.

Absurdity: Heavy

He spends the entire film calling his girlfriend by the wrong name and at no point does she get so pissed off that she fires red hot laserbolts into his stupid, massive, undeniably adorable eyes? That woman must be some kind of robot.

Absurdity: MIGHT·E

District 9
There's an alien mincing about in a pink bra. PINK. With those shoes? Bitch please.

Absurdity: Intergalactic

Megan Fox is sexually attracted to Shia LaBeouf? Er, HELLO? Have you looked at his face, love?

Absurdity: Astronomical

The Thing
A man puts his hands through another man's chest, gets them bitten off by a gigantic set of rib-teeth, then a tower of guts shoots out of the chest cavity with a set of tentacles and a really ugly wailing head on top which Kurt Russell immediately sets fire to, only for the chesty rib-teeth guy's own head to pull itself off and along the floor with a four-foot-long tongue before sprouting spider's legs and antennae and scampering out of the room, and NOBODY says "You've gotta be fucking kidding"?

What's that?


Absurdity: Zero. Totes plausible.


  1. Excellent, excellent post. :D

    But the whole NASA 'list' story is a fabrication:


  2. Science fiction films may be set at any time in the future, but they all betray the era in which they were made because they all adapt the technology and fashions of their own time. Stanley Kubrick was stuck with cathode ray tubes and film back projection when he made 2001 in 1968. The communicators in Star Trek look pathetic now that we have i-phones. The chief virtue of a science fiction film is that alien species do not complain about their rights when they are denigrated, patronised or blasted to pieces on sight. However fictional the stories they are really about us now. None of us can escape from the present. (Unless there is a TARDIS in the back garden.)