If you wanted further evidence that science fiction authors and film makers are outcasts of the cinematic and literary establishment (as we argued in Why Science Fiction authors just can't win) recent quotes I stumbled across in USA Today from one of Avatar's stars, Sigourney Weaver, highlight this point yet again:

"Jim was telling someone about how sci-fi had always gotten a bad rap, and that maybe now that would change," Weaver said. "And I thought, 'Science fiction? Really? Is that what this movie is?' Because to me it's just a great story that happens to take place in another time."

Science fiction films obviously can't have great stories, can they? I wasn't overjoyed with Avatar's story, but reacting as if it was something else simply because "it's good" seems crazy, and illustrates the uphill battle creators of genre fiction and film face. Perhaps though, Sigourney was simply highlighting this point, trying to downplay the science fiction tag to try and give it a better chance at this year's Academy Awards.  Later in the article, when asked whether Avatar has a chance, she appeared to be pessimistic about Avatar's chances of landing some of the big awards:

"With that label, 'sci-fi,' I think it'll be tough," she said about Avatar's Academy Award chances. "But of course, to look at these movies with that label is to miss the points they are trying to make. These movies ask us to look at what it means to be human."

Cynicism aside, this could be a great year for science fiction as far as film recognition goes. Both Cameron's Avatar and Neil Blomkamp's District 9 are up for the Academy’s Best Picture Award. I'd vote for District 9 myself if given the opportunity.

In the same article, Terri Tatchell, who co-wrote District 9, said:

"I'd always thought sci-fi was a dirty word, but now I wear that badge proudly.”

Maybe the tide can turn back towards science fiction - in the cinematic world at least.

(USA Today via David Langford's Ansible).