Would you consider Wild Wild West to be a Weird West movie?
Would you consider Wild Wild West to be a Weird West movie?
When I was thinking about starting this Lemmy community, I tried writing down every single Weird West work I'd seen, read, or played. In that list, I added Wild Wild West. But now that I think about it, I'm not sure if I'd call it a Weird Western.
Most Weird West works involve some sort of supernatural or fantasy element added to a Wild West setting. But does steampunk count as supernatural or fantasy? I mean, technically there weren't any giant steam-powered spiders in the Wild West but is that "weird" enough to qualify? The fact that it was steam-powered makes it harder for me to call it sci-fi. Besides, if I call Wild Wild West a Weird Western, does that mean Back to the Future Part 3 is a Weird Western too? I'm at the point where I'm questioning the definition of the genre to determine whether or not to post something.
Here's a trailer, and I'm sorry if watching it gets that theme song stuck in your head. The movie isn't streaming anywhere though.
Wait, you wouldn't call a giant robotic spider Sci-fi just because it's powered by steam? What about the concealed, man-sized robotic spider legs? Or the semi-sentient flying death saws? Or all the myriad old-timey James Bond-esque gadgets?
I haven't looked in detail at all the other movies you've included, but WWW is definitely a western and definitely weird AF. It's also possibly my (quite inexplicably and unironically) favourite movie.
I know, this really gets to be splitting hairs about genre definitions. I don't mind calling Cowboys & Aliens a Weird West movie because it takes place in the Wild West and then goes full-blown scifi. Something about upending a normal Western setting with scifi seems to work for me.
Yet creating James Bond-esque gadgets using technology that technically existed in the era (steam-power, magnets) doesn't feel as scifi to me because while the devices are new to the residents, this isn't "sufficiently advanced technology indistinguishable from magic". Besides, if we consider James Bond-esque gadgets to be scifi, does that mean the James Bond series itself is scifi? I would've said no, but I can see your argument for it.
In the end, it doesn't really matter. I just thought it'd be fun to discuss where we define the boundaries of this genre.
The flying saw blades that homed into the collars and the giant spider were either sci fi or magc as both break the laws of physics. Not just fantastial abilities, but they could not possibly be steam powered.
James bond using super future tech is sci fi, like when he went to space in Moonraker. Some Bond films aren't when they just use spy tech.
I mean... the reason it's science fiction and not fantasy is because it has some kind of backing in explainable phenomenon. Just because you can say "It's powered by steam" or "it's pushed by magnets" doesn't mean it's not in some way fantastic.
Would more grounded science fiction not count as science fiction to you? Things like The Martian or The Expanse don't count because they don't involved magical fantasy technology that turn the world on its head?
Frankenstein is undoubtedly science fiction... but it's just using electricity to awaken a cobbled together corpse. There's no magic space rays or warp drives or matter transporters.
Man Kevin Smith's story about the dude behind WWW is so absurd and funny. Absolutely obsessed with making a movie involving a giant spider (machine? can't remember if it had to be a machine) and it's basically the sole reason that exists in the movie.
Sci-fi has certain standards of world building and a tradition of social commentary that WWW is simply removed from.
Its one of the first things I would list when naming Weird West movies so I'd say yes.
Edit: if it matters the Wikipedia page lists it as an example
In my opinion steampunk is 100% fantasy. It is all form, no function, purely aesthetic.
The technology aspect could possibly be considered science fiction, but I'd argue that steampunk tech is about style, not function, so should be considered fantasy.
Wikipedia goes both ways, calling it sci Fi and fantasy, so perhaps it can be both.
Even within sci fi there's a divide between "hard" and "soft", where the former puts emphasis on plausible technology and the latter can be little more than an aesthetic.
The Difference Engine by William Gibson and Bruce Sterling is an example of hard steampunk.
I've read Gibson but not that one, I'll check it out. Thanks!
Science fantasy is also a genre. I would usually say it's acience fiction though. Star Wars is more form than function that most steampunk, but people (usually) don't debate that. It's just soft sci-fi.
Will Smith sucks.
It does make me feel a certain satisfaction that he passed on The Matrix to make this
Agreed. There were several good actors in this movie and the whole thing still came out awful.
Him telling that story will never not be funny to me.
In the "Superman Doomsday" DC animated film, the first thing Superman does after being revived is fight a giant mechanical spider. Here's a link to the immediate aftermath:
I enjoy more these stories than his movies, and I do like some of his movies.
I would consider it to be a hot mess.
It's barely a movie 😂
I would say it's steampunk in a Wild West setting but not weird west.
It absolutely is Weird West. The TV show it's based on is quintessential Weird West
After suffering through it once, I don't consider it at all
Pre-slap-action-comedy. Too light and plastic for weird.
I dunno, there was that weird part where the guy without legs implied he was going to mechanically penetrate the female lead and it had a visual aid.
It started out as a script of The Sandman by Neil Gaiman.