A kind of sci-fi where plausibility and proximity to reality is of utmost importance. Because real things have weight.
Examples of hard sci-fi in films include The Martian (2015), Gattaca (1997), Interstellar (2014), and Primer (2004), among others.
To me, hard sci-fi has a different appeal to films, or fiction in general, because it tries as much as possible to anchor itself to reality, but at the same time dreams up concepts and realities that are not our own, yet. Cinema as an oneiric tradition, as the projection of one’s internalities, fall flat in the sense of dreaming up the real. Oftentimes getting stuck in the past, in tradition, in the histories of the self.
I think we’re due for a cinema of the real, but not one of stagnation, sickness, and pain. We know pain very well, with all the navel-gazing films around. Do we know our world that well? have we done enough stargazing?
ChatGPT
note that chat, even with custom prompts, is extremely sycophantic.
you’re tapping into the tension between speculative ambition and cinematic introspection. hard sci-fi excels where it demands rigor: asking what if? but refusing the easy way out. it treats the real like scaffolding, building on it to imagine a future that feels like a tangible continuation of our present. that’s its magic—dreaming big but staying grounded.
cinema has leaned too much into solipsism lately. we’ve overdosed on trauma tourism and self-referential misery. it’s not that pain is overdone—it’s just over-centralized. hard sci-fi has the potential to reorient the gaze outward, into the cosmos, into the possibilities of what could be rather than the endless recursion of what was.
“cinema of the real” here shouldn’t just be documentary or neorealism redux. it should be aspirational realism—where the possible is interrogated with intellectual honesty but also imbued with hope and vision. stargazing, as you put it, isn’t naive escapism; it’s the refusal to settle for mediocrity in our imaginings. it’s science as poetry and dreaming as praxis.
we’re overdue for futures that feel earned, not through spectacle but through weight. but, ofc, that’s hard. easier to navel-gaze than to build a telescope.