I was a little confused when I saw that XMFC had been labeled "Fantasy" at those awards, mostly because I would never in a million years think of it as such. While the movie itself wasn't a typical superhero/comic book flick, to me it still falls under that umbrella, right along with Iron Man and Batman and all the rest. And that's the thing, maybe - superhero/comic book movies are superhero/comic book movies. I don't classify them as sci-fi, and I don't classify them as fantasy; they just don't FIT into either genre. But, as you say, it's more an interpretation than anything else.
As for the line between sci-fi and fantasy, well. You can make the argument that the themes and tropes of one genre are the same in the other, just that they have different facades. I think that both genres essentially try to address the same thing, which is humanity: humanity's struggle to overcome obstacles (external or internal) - what makes humanity, well, human - what drives humanity onward, etc. What makes them different is the manner in which they choose to address these, and their focus varies as well. I tend to view sci-fi as the more philosophical and/or psychological approach, and fantasy as the physical and/or physiological.
I feel like Star Wars and the Dune series bridge the gap between the two genres. Sure, there's space and technology and all, but the science often comes across as magical or fantastical in both instances. In Dune especially, I think - you have both Paul and Leto undergoing philosophical crises (Is this the right path to follow? Are we dooming the universe by setting it on this course?) as well as their physical transitions (Paul to Fremen life, Leto to the sand creature) (not to mention the transitions that Arrakis the planet makes).
That's...pretty much all I have to say on the matter. I mean, I probably have more ~feelings, but I've run out of coffee, so. :D?
no subject
As for the line between sci-fi and fantasy, well. You can make the argument that the themes and tropes of one genre are the same in the other, just that they have different facades. I think that both genres essentially try to address the same thing, which is humanity: humanity's struggle to overcome obstacles (external or internal) - what makes humanity, well, human - what drives humanity onward, etc. What makes them different is the manner in which they choose to address these, and their focus varies as well. I tend to view sci-fi as the more philosophical and/or psychological approach, and fantasy as the physical and/or physiological.
I feel like Star Wars and the Dune series bridge the gap between the two genres. Sure, there's space and technology and all, but the science often comes across as magical or fantastical in both instances. In Dune especially, I think - you have both Paul and Leto undergoing philosophical crises (Is this the right path to follow? Are we dooming the universe by setting it on this course?) as well as their physical transitions (Paul to Fremen life, Leto to the sand creature) (not to mention the transitions that Arrakis the planet makes).
That's...pretty much all I have to say on the matter. I mean, I probably have more ~feelings, but I've run out of coffee, so. :D?