> It's actually a pretty decent movie, but it's a drama, not sci-fi. It uses "science" purely as an aesthetic device without actually exploring any scientific effects.
Fair assessment, but I beg to differ on your definition of "sci-fi"; I find it quite restrictive. You can say the same for Bradbury's "The Martian Chronicles". Mars might as well be Narnia as he just uses the notion of it being an alien planet to set-up tension and make a point about human behavior. It's more philosophical/psychological than scientific but I'd still call it sci-fi.
I guess you are entitled to expect a harder integration of science from a 2011 sci-fi film but I think "Another Earth" definitely takes from established, if outdated, cues in the genre.
But potaytos and potahtos. We can differ in opinion.
Fair assessment, but I beg to differ on your definition of "sci-fi"; I find it quite restrictive. You can say the same for Bradbury's "The Martian Chronicles". Mars might as well be Narnia as he just uses the notion of it being an alien planet to set-up tension and make a point about human behavior. It's more philosophical/psychological than scientific but I'd still call it sci-fi.
I guess you are entitled to expect a harder integration of science from a 2011 sci-fi film but I think "Another Earth" definitely takes from established, if outdated, cues in the genre.
But potaytos and potahtos. We can differ in opinion.