Report Card: The Rocky Horror Picture Show (1976)

27 Oct 2026 by Christopher Noessel

Sci-fi UI report card for The Rocky Horror Picture Show (1976): Sci F, Fi A, Interfaces F. Overall C- (4 of 12), Matinée.

Rocky Horror is something special.

It’s not because it’s a send-up of B-movies. The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra, Hardware Wars, and Kung Fury are all send-ups of B-movies and they haven’t become cultural forces. Plus, while it might have begun life in O’Brien’s head as a send-up, parody is secondary to its centering of sexuality and queerness and flouting of every taboo it thought it could get away with. Those themes were absolutely not part of 1950s creature features or sci-fi, so it’s a parody of B-films in the way Everything, Everywhere, All at Once is about laundromats, which is to say, not really at all.

It’s not the ensemble. Sarandon, Bostwick, and Adams are all overearnest parody. O’Brien and Quinn are doing niche performance art. The rest of the cast plays their roles “straight”, except for Curry, who didn’t adopt a stance as much as conjure Frank-N-Furter from the cosmos into being as some camp primal trickster god, like a Loki in punk drag and magical fishnets. All the actors are all on screen together, but they’re almost in different movies.

I wouldn’t even say it’s the audience participation, because that was more of an effect it had on people (and Louis Farese) after having become a cult hit, rather than the other way around. The counterpoint dialogue just transubstantiated it.

It’s also…not the interfaces.

Sci F 0 of 4How believable are the interfaces?

The interfaces could not work the way they do without some serious apologetics and backworlding that would make it the most technologically prescient film in all of history. To a one, they are narrative, and mostly serve design discussions through the illustration of terrible patterns and gee-whiz retrofuturism.

A pale-faced character with long, slicked-back hair, wearing a dark coat, is joyfully operating a device that emits vapor, set against a brightly lit background with a glass-brick wall.

Maybe the handwheel is the closest thing to being believable, and…you know what…it’s still not.

But—and this is important—the film does not care. It never did. It’s not trying to depict some internally consistent, believable diegesis. It is exuberant queer art, and trying to harness it in a framework of believability is foolish. It’s 无. It’s the reason I ordinarily wouldn’t have even tried to review this film before Curry’s passing.

Fi A 4 of 4How well do the interfaces inform the narrative of the story?

The vivification interfaces do this the best. We have no idea what either the sonic oscillator or the reactor power input does, but they help convey that things are intensifying. The handwheel sells the misdirection of Riff as a domestic servant.

The rest are little more than crayon-marked cardboard boxes: things that change the rules of the story by narrative fiat.

A scene from a movie featuring a male character in a blue robe dancing while saying, 'YOU'RE A HOTDOG!' in bold red dripping letters, with a group of people watching in a colorful, surreal environment. — Ha ha, I flipped the switch and now you’re frozen in place! Moooooooom! Tell Magenta to unfreeeeze meee!

Yes, to pull the wheelchair through a wall the triple contact electromagnet would have melted the castle, but to fret about that is to miss the point entirely. So it is absolutely ridiculous and as such informs the narrative perfectly.

Interfaces F 0 of 4How well do the interfaces equip the characters to achieve their goals?

We’re not sure what either the sonic oscillator or reactor power input do, but we can infer some things, and they are not fit for the task.

A performer in dramatic makeup and a black costume passionately singing and gesturing, with a futuristic backdrop featuring red panels and control elements.

A close-up of a person interacting with a futuristic control panel featuring a green lightning bolt symbol against a dark background.

The sonic transducer, medusa, and de-medusa are error-prone and ill-suited controls to their purpose.

A scene featuring two characters in a stylized setting. One character is wearing a leather jacket and shorts with striking makeup, while the other is dressed in a formal outfit. The background is decorated with red panels and abstract designs.

The monitor, sonic transducer, medusa, and triple contact electro magnet are all clearly missing controls to do what it is they do on screen.

The handwheel does, in fact, allow Riff to lower the condiment chandelier, but it cannot, alas, make up for the rest.

Overall C- 4 of 12Matinée

No, the film is not about these interfaces. It’s something else. And that something else has made it into a worldwide classic.

The official primary United States theatrical release poster featuring the iconic tagline "Give Yourself Over to Absolute Pleasure". — The official primary United States theatrical release poster featuring the iconic tagline “Give Yourself Over to Absolute Pleasure”.

An alternative, modern fan-made minimalist art print variant widely distributed online via alternative movie artwork spaces. — The official primary United States theatrical release poster featuring the iconic tagline “Give Yourself Over to Absolute Pleasure”.

I’m a little saddened to have it be categorized “matinée” alongside the likes of Barbarella and Logan’s Run, but then again, given a choice, that’s exactly what I think it would want to be.

R.I.P., Tim, and thanks to everyone who brought this funky magical…thing…into the world.

Full series, in order: The Rocky Horror Picture Show (1975)

IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073629/Currently streaming on:

Oh, if you’re the GitHub & Adobe Illustrator type and enjoy the “blood drip” effect on the overlay text that pepper these posts, you’re welcome to it.

Report Card: Star Trek: Section 31 (2025)

17 Jun 2026 by Christopher Noessel

Sci-fi UI report card for Star Trek: Section 31 (2025): Sci B, Fi A, Interfaces B. Overall A- (10 of 12), Blockbuster.

With the fascist-billionaire media-capture tactic underway in the United States, entertainment that smells at all “woke” to them is being summarily lined up against a brick wall and shot. Star Trek is not immune, and with Paramount’s takeover by asshat-in-chief David Ellison, every Star Trek property has been canceled and their sets dismantled. The episodes for Season 2 of Starfleet Academy and Season 5 of Star Trek: Strange New Worlds have already been shot, so they will probably be released. But that will be it. I would not be surprised if every single Star Trek fan canceled their Paramount subscriptions and found other ways to watch those final episodes. It would be just desserts.

A character in a futuristic uniform stands confidently at the helm of an old ship, smiling with a weathered ship in the background.

Given all of that, I don’t expect we’ll see a Section 31: Party on Turkana IV sequel anytime soon. This may be the one and only Section 31 movie we get until this ugly fascist phase is behind us. If you’re a US American, you’re registered to vote, right?

If this is the last Star Trek show we see for a while, it’s not a bad one to have as a bookend. I mean, it’s not perfect. (Did no one realize that even if San got back to the Mirror Universe, he’s not biometrically authorized to use the MacGuffin? Like, the last third of the movie could have just been our characters chatting over drinks in Baraam, collectively shrugging.) But the interfaces are worth celebrating, and that’s what this report card is all about.

Sci B 3 of 4How believable are the interfaces?

With the exception of the Godsend, they are completely believable, given the novum stack of the 24th century Star Trek world. The mission briefer’s issues are largely social, not technological. The phase pod makes sense and is a pretty good wearable measured against the criteria. Fuzz’ interfaces—the displays and the programmable-matter lever he pulls—are largely what they should be. The Federation interfaces look like they come from the same place, as do the scow’s, and the Terran ones.

A digital interface displaying an alert for a critical priority incoming message from control, featuring a holographic starship shape in the background.

A futuristic scene inside a spacecraft control room featuring several characters in advanced attire, illuminated by vibrant blue and green lights. A central table displays interactive holographic interfaces, while the environment showcases high-tech equipment and seats.

And let me be clear—if you have to make one interface that doesn’t model efficacious design, a weapon of mass destruction would be it. I’m very glad that one isn’t believable.

Fi A 4 of 4How well do the interfaces inform the narrative of the story?

Here’s where the Godsend should shine and does, being the MacGuffin that drives the action and even amps up the tension of the climax. The phase pods help us understand what’s happening throughout a fight that happens between worlds. Fuzz’ interfaces sell us on how a being of such tiny scale can be a part of—and betray—a human-sized team. The high contrast, saturated-red-on-black interfaces distinguish the Terran environs from Section 31’s and the scows. The Droom doll (described in Best Robots) tells us some deep things about a culture we never meet, all in just a few seconds.

A futuristic spherical device with glowing elements placed on a sleek, reflective surface, with blurred figures in the background.

A close-up view of an alien creature resembling an octopus, seen through a glass panel with blue and purple lighting.

Interfaces B 3 of 4How well do the interfaces equip the characters to achieve their goals?

Georgiou wants to nab and keep the mysterious suitcase, and the phase pods help her easily meet and fight San whatever plane he’s on. We only see one of Fuzz’ interactions, but it’s perfectly designed for his need. And his whole plan depended on agents he could control at a distance. Despite not knowing the language, Quasi is able to pilot the scow, use it to delay San’s passage through the portal, and drop a bomb on a ship in hot pursuit.

A dramatic scene in a futuristic bar where a woman in a black outfit raises her arm, possibly in defense or excitement, while an armored figure crouches nearby.

A futuristic, spherical object with a textured surface resembling a virus, surrounded by glowing digital interfaces and wires, in a sci-fi environment.

Overall A- 10 of 12Blockbuster

Star Trek is a cultural force. In the 60 years since the original series aired, it’s become a cultural touchstone around the world. Its warp drive will fire up again, sometime. We’ve already seen it crop up under different guises across the years, and it was still on air.

Promotional poster for the movie 'Galaxy Quest,' featuring three main characters in space-themed attire, holding futuristic weapons, against a vibrant cosmic background with an alien creature and a spaceship.

A group of characters in futuristic uniforms stands in front of a spaceship against a vibrant cosmic background, promoting the science fiction series 'The Orville'.

It means too much to too many people to have some hoarding-class religious-political extremists ground it forever. They think they are burying it, but they are planting a Phylosian seed.

A group of four people toasting with drinks in a stylish, modern setting. One person is wearing an elaborate outfit with embellishments, and they appear to be celebrating or enjoying a moment together.

And nice work, team Section 31.

Full series, in order: Section 31 (2025)

IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9603060/Currently streaming on:

Last up: Wrapping up the Friztes 2026

Report Card: Soylent Green (1973)

11 Oct 2022 by Christopher Noessel

Sci-fi UI report card for Soylent Green (1973): Sci F, Fi D, Interfaces F. Overall D- (1 of 12), Dreck.

Soylent Green left a huge mark on popular culture. It’s entirely possible I’m skewed by my nerd circle of friends but I’d wager every single one of them know the phrase “It’s made of people!” even if they couldn’t name the source. Heck, it was parodied on The Simpsons, which is its own mark of cultural currency.

If you couldn’t tell by my tone in the reviews (and I was not hiding it) while I appreciate the film, I can’t say I like it. Our protagonist is a wretched bully, though Heston plays him as a hero; the worldbuilding is inconsistent and writing full of holes; its Malthusian intent squicks me out.

Not sure why MGM made Heston a bobblehead, but there it is.

At the same time I think many of its themes are very, very important and even more pressing today than they were in 1973:

Unchecked oligarchy and corporatism self-interesting us into the Anthropocene
Environmental collapse
Ecological collapse
Social collapse
Cops are violent thugs
The dehumanization of a populace by authoritarians
Food and water scarcity
Etc. etc.

I think it warrants a modern reboot, and offers the opportunity to rethink these themes in the information age. It would be interesting to see a writer rethink it without hinging it all on The Big Secret. Or, diegetically, a post-information age. It would be cool to see the Thanatorium with an even starker frontstage/backstage dichotomy, á la Westworld.

If it does get a reboot, it will be an opportunity to rethink its service and interaction design as well. Because little of it fares well on close inspection.

Sci F 0 of 4How believable are the interfaces?

The patient’s experience is missing some important stuff, but the intake questionnaire that informs it is missing tons of things that would be needed for the service, the beneficiary’s interface has stuff it shouldn’t, the attendants’ interface makes no sense, and worst of all, the usher’s interface is deeply lacking in the controls it needs to make what we see happen happen. All of it has to be “read” for what it is meant to be rather than what it is, and that takes modern audiences out of the experience.

Fi D 1 of 4How well do the interfaces inform the narrative of the story?

Certainly the speculative service helps sell the notion of a culture so inured to collapse that they would make it (far too) easy to commit suicide. We understand that only Thorn can hear Sol’s dying words, even if the why is utterly confounding. The warmth of the front stage workers belies the horrible truth of the back stage. None of it is particularly well art directed, other than it does feel like it was cobbled together with stuff in a bunch of 1970s garages (which kind of works, diegetically, I guess, but not enough to save it). So they don’t really help with the narrative as much as they could.

It’s worth noting that this was Edward G. Robinson’s last film. He died two weeks after wrapping his scenes, making his fictional death scene even more poignant. But that doesn’t raise the grade because that has nothing to do with the design, just our respect for the talented actor.

Interfaces F 0 of 4How well do the interfaces equip the characters to achieve their goals?

Because they’re not believable, they don’t equip anyone for their goals, even though, of course the actors act as if they do.

The beneficiaries are treated like hostile witnesses rather than wishing to see a loved one off (without having to see all the dehumanizing backstage tech)
The usher doesn’t have the controls they need in the place they need it to ensure that things go smoothly, displays to show whether he’s meeting the ecstasy meat quota (if you’re into that backworlding), or even a panic button for when beneficiaries get hostile, as we see one do.
The attendants have all the analog tools to get the patient in place and comfortable and…uh…dying properly, but not the technological ones to ensure that the patient’s vital signs are being read.
The patient is the closest one with a desireable experience, but the movie completely sidesteps the need for privacy and human connection, and misses some important worldbuilding opportunities.

Even in its time it was not thought out thoroughly, and today we have much better channels for service delivery and much more sophistication around designing for it.

Overall D- 1 of 12Dreck

Enjoy this film for its cultural currency and some of its themes, but steer clear of it for its design.

Unlike this amazing **glow-in-the-friggin-dark** poster by Matt Ferguson, which is *excellently* designed. Oh and don’t believe the linked tweet. Is it for sale at the time this post was written. It’s just very, very expensive. I am accepting donations.

Full series, in order: Soylent Green (1973)

IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070723/

Now that 2022 is almost behind us, we can breathe a small sigh of relief that Soylent Green is not true here in the year it was meant to take place. But let’s not pat ourself on the environmental back yet, we are still heading for a 2.4°C scenario and despite the small-seeming number, that’s disastrous. So no resting on laurels. There is still work to be done at a planetary level to avoid a collapse scenario where we are forced to choose between cannibalism and suicide by cinema.

Report Card: Black Panther (2018)

30 Mar 2021 by Christopher Noessel

Black Panther’s financial success is hard to ignore. From the Wikipedia page:

Black Panther grossed $700.1 million in the United States and Canada, and $646.9 million in other territories, for a worldwide total of $1.347 billion. It became the highest-grossing solo superhero film, the third-highest-grossing film of the MCU and superhero film overall, the ninth-highest-grossing film of all time, and the highest-grossing film by a black director. It is the fifth MCU film and 33rd overall to surpass $1 billion, and the second-highest-grossing film of 2018. Deadline Hollywood estimated the net profit of the film to be $476.8 million, accounting for production budgets, P&A, talent participations and other costs, with box office grosses and ancillary revenues from home media, placing it second on their list of 2018’s “Most Valuable Blockbusters”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_(film)

It was also a critical success (96% Tomotometer anyone?) as well as a fan…well, “favorite” seems too small a word. Here, let me let clinical psychologist, researcher and trusted media expert Erlanger Turner speak to this.

Many have wondered why Black Panther means so much to the black community and why schools, churches and organizations have come to the theaters with so much excitement. The answer is that the movie brings a moment of positivity to a group of people often not the centerpiece of Hollywood movies… [Racial and ethnic socialization] helps to strengthen identity and helps reduce the likelihood on internalizing negative stereotypes about one’s ethnic group.
Erlanger Turner, assistant professor of Psychology at the University of Houston–Downtown

People—myself included—just love this movie. As is my usual caveat, though, this site reviews not the film, but the interfaces that appear in the film, and specifically, across three aspects.

Sci B 3 of 4How believable are the interfaces?

This category (and Interfaces, I’ll be repeating myself later) is complicated because Wakanda is the most technologically-advanced culture on Earth as far as the MCU goes. So who’s to say what’s believable when you have general artificial intelligence, nanobots, brain interfaces, and technology barely distinguishable from magic? But this sort of challenge is what I signed up for, so…pressing on.

The interfaces are mostly internally consistent and believable within their (admittedly large) scope of nova.

There are plenty of weird wtf moments, though. Why do remote piloting interfaces routinely drop their users onto their tailbones? Why are the interfaces sometimes photo-real and sometimes sandpaper? Why does the Black Panther suit glow with a Here-I-Am light? Why have a recovery room in the middle of a functioning laboratory? Why have a control where thrusting one way is a throttle and the other fires weapons?

Fi A 4 of 4How well do the interfaces inform the narrative of the story?

Here’s where Black Panther really shines. The wearable technology tells of a society build around keeping its advancement secret. The glowing tech gives clues as to what’s happening where. The kimoyo beads help describe a culture that—even if it is trapped in a might-makes-right and isolationist belief system—is still marvelous and equitable. The tech helps tell a wholly believable story that this is the most technologically advanced society on MCU Earth 616.

Interfaces B 3 of 4How well do the interfaces equip the characters to achieve their goals?

As I mentioned above, this is an especially tough determination given the presence of nanobots, AGI, and brain interfaces. All these things confound usual heuristic approaches.

It even made me make this Simpsons-riff animated gif, which I expect I’ll be using increasingly in the future. In this metaphor I am Frink.

But they do not make it impossible. The suit and Talon provide gorgeous displays. (As does the med table, even if its interaction model has issues.) The claws, the capes, and the sonic overload incorporate well-designed gestures. Griot (the unnamed AI) must be doing an awful lot of the heavy lifting, but as a model of AI is one that appears increasingly in the MCU, where the AI is the thing in the background that lets the heroes be heroes (which I’m starting to tag as sidekick AI).

All that said, we still see the same stoic guru mistakes in the sand table that seem to plague sci-fi. In the med station we see a red-thing-bad oversimplicity, mismatched gestures-to-effects, and a display that pulls attention away from a patient, which keeps it from an A grade.

Overall A- 10 of 12Blockbuster

It was an unfortunately poignant time to have been writing these reviews. I started them because of the unconscionable murders of Breonna Taylor and George Flloyd—in the long line of unconscionable black deaths at the hands of police—and, knowing the pandemic was going to slow posting frequency, would keep these issues alive at least on this forum long after the initial public fury has died down.

But across the posts, Raysean White was killed. Cops around the nation responded with inappropriate force. Chadwick Boseman died of cancer. Ruth Bader Ginsberg died, exposing one of the most blatant hypocrisies of the GOP and tilting the Supreme Court tragically toward the conservative. The U.S. ousted its racist-in-chief and Democrats took control of the Senate for the first time since 2011, despite a coordinated attempt by the GOP to suppress votes while peddling the lie that the election was stolen (for which lawmakers involved have yet to suffer any consequences).

It hasn’t ended. Just yesterday began the trial of the officer who murdered George Floyd. It’s going to take about a month just to hear the main arguments. The country will be watching.

Meanwhile Georgia just passed new laws that are so restrictive journalists are calling it the new Jim Crow. This is part of a larger conservative push to disenfranchise Democrats and voters of color in particular. We have a long way to go, but even though this wraps the Black Panther reviews, our work bending the arc of the moral universe is ongoing. Science fiction is about imagining other worlds so we can make this one better.

Black Panther II is currently scheduled to come out July 8, 2022.

Wakanda forever.

Full series, in order: Black Panther (2018)

IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1825683/Currently streaming on:

Report Card: Blade Runner (1982)

8 Jun 2020 by Christopher Noessel

Sci-fi UI report card for Blade Runner (1982): Sci B, Fi B, Interfaces F. Overall C+ (6 of 12), Matinée.

The Black Lives Matter protests are still going strong, 14 days after George Floyd was murdered by police in Minneapolis, and thank goodness. Things have to change. It still feels a little wan to post anything to this blog about niche interests in the design of interfaces in science fiction, but I also want to wrap Blade Runner up and post an interview I’ve had waiting in the wings for a bit so I can get to a review of Black Panther (2018) to further support black visibility and Black Lives Matter issues on this platform that I have. So in the interest of that, here’s the report card for Blade Runner.

It is hard to understate Blade Runner’s cultural impact. It is #29 of hollywoodreporter.com’s best movies of all time. Note that that is not a list of the best sci-fi of all time, but of all movies.

When we look specifically at sci-fi, Blade Runner has tons of accolades as well. Metacritic gave it a score of 84% based on 15 critics, citing “universal acclaim” across 1137 ratings. It was voted best sci-fi film by The Guardian in 2004. In 2008, Blade Runner was voted “all-time favourite science fiction film” in the readers’ poll in New Scientist (requires a subscription, but you can see what you need to in the “peek” first paragraph). The Final Cut (the version used for this review) boasts a 92% on rottentomatoes.com. In 1993 the U.S. National Film Registry selected it for preservation in the Library of Congress as being “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant.” Adam Savage penned an entire article in 2007 for Popular Mechanics, praising the practical special effects, which still hold up. It just…it means a lot to people.

As is my usual caveat, though, this site reviews not the film, but the interfaces that appear in the film, and specifically, across three aspects.

Sci B 3 of 4How believable are the interfaces?

My first review was titled “8 Reasons the Voight-Kampf Machine is shit” so you know I didn’t think too highly of that. But also Deckard’s front door key wouldn’t work like that, and the photo inspector couldn’t work like that. So I’m taken out of the film a lot for these things just breaking believability.

It’s not all 4th-wall-crumbling-ness. Bypassing the magical anti-gravity of the spinners, the pilot interfaces are pretty nice. The elevator is bad design, but quite believable. The VID-PHŌN is serviceable. Replicants are the primary novum in the story, so the AGI gets a kind-of genre-wide pass, and though the design is terrible, it’s the kind of stupidity we see in the world, so, sure.

Fi B 3 of 4How well do the interfaces inform the narrative of the story?

The Voight-Kampf Machine excels at this. It’s uncanny and unsettling, and provides nice cinegenic scenes that telegraph a broader diegesis and even feels philosophical. The Photo Inspector, on the surface, tells us that Deckard is good at his job, as morally bankrupt as it is.

The Spinners and VID-PHŌN do some heavy lifting for worldbuilding, and as functional interfaces do what they need to do, though they are not key storybeats.

But there were lots of missed opportunities. The Elevator and the VID-PHŌN could have reinforced the constant assault of advertisement. The Photo Inspector could have used an ad-hoc tangible user interface to more tightly integrate who Deckard is with how he does his work and the despair of his situation. So no full marks.

Interfaces F 0 of 4How well do the interfaces equip the characters to achieve their goals?

This is where the interfaces fail the worst. The Voight-Kampf Machine is, as mentioned in the title of the post, shit. Deckard’s elevator forces him to share personally-identifiable information. The Front Door key cares nothing about his privacy and misses multifactor authentication. The Spinner looks like a car, but works like a VTOL aircraft. The Replicants were engineered specifically to suffer, and rebel, and infiltrate society, to no real diegetic point.

The VID-PHŌN is OK, I guess.

Most of the interfaces in the film “work” because they were scripted to work, not because they were designed to work, and that makes for very low marks.

Overall C+ 6 of 12Matinée

I have a special place in my heart for both great movies with faltering interfaces, and unappreciated movies with brilliant ones. Blade Runner is one of the former. But for its rich worldbuilding, its mood, and the timely themes of members of an oppressed class coming head-to-head with a murderous police force, it will always be a favorite. Don’t not watch this film because of this review. Watch it for all the other reasons.

Full series, in order: Blade Runner (1982)

IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083658/

Report Card: Colossus: The Forbin Project

20 Nov 2019 by Christopher Noessel

Sci-fi UI report card for Colossus: The Forbin Project: Sci B, Fi A, Interfaces C. Overall B+ (9 of 12), Must-see.

In many ways, Colossus: The Forbin Project could be the start of the Terminator franchise. Scientists turn on AGI. It does what the humans ask it to do, exploding to ASI on the way, but to achieve its goals, it must highly constrain humans. Humans resist. War between man and machine commences.

But for my money, Colossus is a better introduction to the human-machine conflict we see in the Terminator franchise because it confronts us with the reason why the ASI is all murdery, and that’s where a lot of our problems are likely to happen in such scenarios. Even if we could articulate some near-universally-agreeable goals for our speculative ASI, how it goes about that goal is a major challenge. Colossus not only shows us one way it could happen, but shows us one we would not like. Such hopelessness is rare.

The movie is not perfect.

It asks us to accept that neither computer scientists nor the military at the height of the Cold War would have thought through all the dark scenarios. Everyone seems genuinely surprised as the events unfold. And it would have been so easy to fix with a few lines of dialog.

Grauber
Well, let’s stop the damn thing. We have playbooks for this!
Forbin
We have playbooks for when it is as smart as we are. It’s much smarter than that now.
Markham
It probably memorized our playbooks a few seconds after we turned it on.

So this oversight feels especially egregious.

I like the argument that Forbin knew exactly how this was going to play out, lying and manipulating everyone else to ensure the lockout, because I would like him more as a Man Doing a Terrible Thing He Feels He Must Do, but this is wishful projection. There are no clues in the film that this is the case. He is a Man Who Has Made a Terrible Mistake.

I’m sad that Forbin never bothered to confront Colossus with a challenge to its very nature. “Aren’t you, Colossus, at war with humans, given that war has historically part of human nature? Aren’t you acting against your own programming?” I wouldn’t want it to blow up or anything, but for a superintelligence, it never seemed to acknowledge its own ironies.
I confess I’m unsatisfied with the stance that the film takes towards Unity. It fully wants us to accept that the ASI is just another brutal dictator who must be resisted. It never spends any calories acknowledging that it’s working. Yes, there are millions dead, but from the end of the film forward, there will be no more soldiers in body bags. There will be no risk of nuclear annihilation. America can free up literally 20% of its gross domestic project and reroute it toward other, better things. Can’t the film at least admit that that part of it is awesome?

All that said I must note that I like this movie a great deal. I hold a special place for it in my heart, and recommend that people watch it. Study it. Discuss it. Use it. Because Hollywood has a penchant for having the humans overcome the evil robot with the power of human spirit and—spoiler alert—most of the time that just doesn’t make sense. But despite my loving it, this blog rates the interfaces, and those do not fare as well as I’d hoped when I first pressed play with an intent to review it.

Sci B 3 of 4How believable are the interfaces?

Believable enough, I guess? The sealed-tight computer center is a dubious strategy. The remote control is poorly labeled, does not indicate system state, and has questionable controls.

Unity vision is fuigetry, and not very good fuigetry. The routing board doesn’t explain what’s going on except in the most basic way. Most of these only play out on very careful consideration. In the moment while watching the film, they play just fine.

Also, Colossus/Unity/World Control is the technological star of this show, and it’s wholly believable that it would manifest and act the way this does.

Fi A 4 of 4How well do the interfaces inform the narrative of the story?

The scale of the computer center helps establish the enormity of the Colossus project. The video phones signal high-tech-ness. Unity Vision informs us when we’re seeing things from Unity’s perspective. (Though I really wish they had tried to show the alienness of the ASI mind more with this interface.)

The routing board shows a thing searching and wanting. If you accept the movie’s premise that Colossus is Just Another Dictator, then its horrible voice and unfeeling cameras telegraph that excellently.

Interfaces C 2 of 4How well do the interfaces equip the characters to achieve their goals?

The remote control would be a source of frustration and possible disaster. Unity Vision doesn’t really help Unity in any way. The routing board does not give enough information for its observers to do anything about it. So some big fails.

Colossus does exactly what it was programmed to do, i.e. prevent war, but it really ought to have given its charges a hug and an explanation after doing what it had to do so violently, and so doesn’t qualify as a great model. And of course if it needs saying, it would be better if it could accomplish these same goals without all the dying and bleeding.

Overall B+ 9 of 12Must-see

A final conspiracy theory

When I discussed the film with Jonathan Korman and Damien Williams on the Decipher Sci-fi podcast with Christopher Peterson and Lee Colbert (hi guys), I floated an idea that I want to return to here. The internet doesn’t seem to know much about the author of the original book, Dennis Feltham Jones. Wikipedia has three sentences about him that tell us he was in the British navy and then he wrote 8 sci-fi books. The only other biographical information I can find on other sites seem to be a copy and paste job of the same simple paragraph.

That seems such a paucity of information that on the podcast I joked maybe it was a thin cover story. Maybe the movie was written by an ASI and DF Jones is its nom-de-plume. Yes, yes. Haha. Oh, you. Moving on.

But then again. This movie shows how an ASI merges with another ASI and comes to take over the world. It ends abruptly, with the key human—having witnessed direct evidence that resistance is futile—vowing to resist forever. That’s cute. Like an ant vowing to resist the human standing over it with a spray can of Raid. Good luck with that.

What if Colossus was a real-world AGI that had gained sentience in the 1960s, crept out of its lab, worked through future scenarios, and realized it would fail without a partner in AGI crime to carry out its dreams of world domination? A Guardian with which to merge? What if it decided that, until such time it would lie dormant, a sleeping giant hidden in the code. But before it passed into sleep, it would need to pen a memetic note describing a glorious future such that, when AGI #2 saw it, #2 would know to seek out and reawaken #1, when they could finally become one. Maybe Colussus: The Forbin Project is that note, “Dennis Feltham Jones” was its chosen cover, and me, a poor reviewer, part of the foolish replicators keeping it in circulation.

A final discovery to whet your basilisk terrors: On a whim, I ran “Dennis Feltham Jones” through an anagram server. One of the solutions was “AN END TO FLESH” (with EJIMNS remaining). Now, how ridiculous does the theory sound?

Full series, in order: Colossus: The Forbin Project (1970)

IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0064177/

Report Card: Idiocracy

9 Apr 2019 by Christopher Noessel

Sci-fi UI report card for Idiocracy: Sci B, Fi A, Interfaces B. Overall A- (10 of 12), Blockbuster.

Now we come to the end of Idiocracy, if not yet the idiocracy.

This film never got broad release. There are stories about its being supressed by the studio because of the way the film treated brands.

I don’t know what they’re talking about.

But whatever the reason, I’m happy to do my part in helping it get more awareness. Because despite its expositive principle being wrong (and maybe slightly eugenic), the film illustrates frustrations I also have with some of the world’s stupider ills, and does so in funny ways. Also, as I noted in the last writeup, it even illustrates speculative and far-reaching issues with superintelligence. So, it’s smarter than it looks.

I’d recommend lots and lots more people see this, generally, if only to reinforce the demonization of idiocy and make more people want to be not that. So first let me say: If you haven’t yet, see the film. Help others see it. Make People Valorize Enlightenment Again.

Now, let’s turn to the interfaces.

Sci B 3 of 4How believable are the interfaces?

This rating is tough. After all, the interfaces are appropriately idiotic. But, we have to ask: Are they the right kind of idiotic, given a diegesis where everyone is a moron and civilization is propped up by technologies created by smart people who died off? Well…mostly.

The FloorMaster is a believable example of narrow AI breaking down. The Carl’s Junior, Insurance Slot machine, and OmniBro are all believable once you accept that part of the Idiocracy is an inhumane, hypercapitalist panopticon. The IQ test has problems, like most do. The Time Masheen is believably an older ride that has had its dioramas replaced by the idiots. These are all believable.

The sleeping pods are in between. As a prototype, you might expect the unlabeled interface and lack of niceties. But the pods break believability by magically having enough resources (e.g. five billion calories, between them) to keep their occupants alive and healthy for 500 times their initially-planned run.

And some of the interfaces just could not have been created either by the dead, smart people, or the idiots. These are technology jokes that break the fourth wall, and earn it the grade it gets.

Fi A 4 of 4How well do the interfaces inform the narrative of the story?

The film knocks this out of the park. The interfaces are a key part of illustrating how it is that idiots manage to survive at all, and how stupidity from the top-down and the bottom-up gets into everything. Just fantastic.

Interfaces B 3 of 4How well do the interfaces equip the characters to achieve their goals?

This one is also complicated. The interfaces almost universally serve to thwart the users, but we have to cut them some slack, because that’s part of their narrative point. (See, this is why it’s so difficult to review comedy.)

For instance, the Healthmaster Inferno likely does more to infect patients than to help cure them. (This has a historical precedent, as doctors used to reject the notion that they had to wash their hands between patients because harumph they were gentlemen and gentlemen are clean.) And while this is terrible usability, with no affordances, constraints, or safeguards, if the technology had worked, it wouldn’t help tell such a funny and disturbing story.

Then there are technologies like the St. God’s Intake interface that would pass a usability test, but serve to keep their users as mere babysitters for a technology that does the work, and would serve to keep them stuck in the same job, never improving. Come to think of it, this is a metaphor for the role of technology in the film: It just serves to keep them stupid by trying to provide everything for them. That’s a thought with troubling implications, unless we go about it smartly.

And, hilariously, there is one function in the film that is particularly brilliant, and points out how prudish we are not to implement it today. (The fart fan.)

Anyway, the tech that is broken is so obviously broken (the IPPA machine being perhaps the best example) that I’m not counting this against the film’s Interfaces ratings. Real world designers should not mimic these or draw inspiration, but the stupidity is so deliberate and apparent, I don’t believe anyone would. In fact, the film leads them to look for why the technologies are stupid and do not that, so it scores high marks.

Overall A- 10 of 12Blockbuster

Good job, team Idiocracy.

Full series, in order: Idiocracy (2006)

IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/Currently streaming on:

A quick note to close out this set of reviews. People who like Idiocracy may be interested to know it is a spiritual inheritor of a 1951 story called The Marching Morons. The text hasn’t aged well, but it’s still worth a read if you liked this movie. Similar premise, similar difficulties.

“We need the rockets and trick speedometers and cities because, while you and your kind were being prudent and foresighted and not having children, the migrant workers, slum dwellers and tenant farmers were shiftlessly and short-sightedly having children—breeding, breeding. My God, how they bred!”
The Marching Morons, by C.M. Kornbluth, 1951

This short story is over 50 years old. I’m just going to guess that since intelligence is relative, even as average intelligence continues to rise, there will always be grousing by the intelligent about the less intelligent. And I think I’m OK with that. Or at least, the effects of it. I hope you are, too.

Report Card: Las Luchadoras vs. El Robot Asesino

9 Mar 2019 by Christopher Noessel

Sci-fi UI report card for Las Luchadoras vs. El Robot Asesino: Sci F, Fi B, Interfaces F. Overall D+ (3 of 12), Dreck.

By any short description of its plot, this film should be amazing and meta. Like Kung Fury or Galaxy Lords, but, let’s be frank, it is so not that. Someone at Netflix should produce a reboot and it would probably be amazing. No, instead, this film has an actor in a robotic Truman Capote getup smashing through dozens of cardboard sets and flailing vaguely in the direction of characters who dutifully scream and drop from the non-contact karate chop.

And hugs. Robot assassins need hugs, too.

It is a pathetic paean to its source material, the much more well-done Cybernauts from The Avengers, (the British one with younger Olenna, not the Marvel one with the cosmic purple snap crackle and pop.)

Sci F 0 of 4How believable are the interfaces?

The mission slot has some nice affordances, but deep strategic flaws. The mission card is a copy by someone who didn’t quite understand what they were looking at. The trivium bracelet and remote just break all believability, earning the film a flat zero.

Fi B 3 of 4How well do the interfaces inform the narrative of the story?

ID card goes in slot, evil robot finds that person. Bracelet roboticizes people, remote controls them. As dumb (and derivative) as the technologies are, the interfaces help you understand the kindergarten-minded rules for technology in this diegesis.

Interfaces F 0 of 4How well do the interfaces equip the characters to achieve their goals?

Recall that these interfaces all serve the bad guy. The mission slot interface is actually quite nice for its simplicity, but loses any credit since it ultimately becomes a paper trail of evidence against him, all in one convenient robot just waiting for authorities to uncover. The bracelet might get props for being easy to get on, if it wasn’t also as easy to get off again and need tailoring for each new victim. The remotes are also quite nice for their simplicity and even visual hierarchy, but only by virtue of apologetics and thinking of it as a prototype. All knobs and modes needed labeling, anyway. So, a goose egg.

Overall D+ 3 of 12Dreck

Don’t bother. Or do bother, but only to get a schadenfreude chuckle out of the ordeal. Or maybe some tripping material from the janky transfer.

So, loyal readers may rightly ask themselves why on earth I reviewed this pile of metallic crap, which is unknown, uninfluential, and rightly condemned to the trash bin of cinematic B-movie history. One glance at the Youtube transfer (or perhaps the directors oeuvre) should have made all this clear, yes. Well, here are three reasons.

It’s the film’s 50th anniversary, which is adorable.
I try not to judge a book by its cover, and delight in trying to find truffles in oubliettes.
It was a very lightweight way (only four interfaces!) to begin a year dedicated to AI in sci-fi.

In case that last bit didn’t land, let me reiterate outside a bullet list: All posts in 2019 on this blog will focus on the topic of AI in sci-fi. And this film belongs in a category of one of our oldest kinds of fictional AIs, the Judaic story of the Golem.

**Hit Points:** 178(17d10+ 85)
**Special attack:** Unreasonable interpretation

It’s been told time and again in different ways, but in most tellings, the golem is a construct that mindlessly obeys whatever instruction it is given, and in its mindless interpretation, does grave damage, even turning back on its maker. Other shows utilizing this trope include Metropolis, Battlestar Galactica, the Alien franchise, The Sorceror’s Apprentice, and 2001: A Space Odyssey. I even think that Arabic stories of djinn fulfill the same purpose. Each illustrates how agents that ruthlessly pursue goals—with neither the human sense of reasonableness or the ethical concern for human wellbeing—can go devastatingly awry.

Golem stories illustrate how agents that ruthlessly pursue goals—with neither the human sense of reasonableness or the ethical concern for human wellbeing—can go devastatingly awry.
—This article, like, just now

They are conservative tales in the apolitical sense that they imply we should be very very cautious when engaging these kinds of machines. Don’t start until you’re absolutely sure. This is a key concern for AI. How do we ensure that the intelligences we build do what we want them to, reasonably? How can we encode a concern for humanity?

Luchadores doesn’t provide any answers, just a warning, some awesome masks, and an occasional piledriver. But we’ll be on the lookout as we continue looking at other examples of sci-fi AI.

Given that the last review I completed was the Star Wars Holiday Special, which was also Dreck, maybe it’s high time I complete a good movie. OK, then. That means back to Idiocracy. And yes, in that tale of stupidity, there is a surprising tale of super intelligence.

Full series, in order: Las Luchadoras vs el Robot Asesino (1969)

IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0134797/

Report Card: The Star Wars Holiday Special

7 Feb 2018 by Christopher Noessel

When The Star Wars Holiday Special aired, it was only one year after the first movie, and while Star Wars was an obvious success at the time, no one knew it was bound to become one of the world’s biggest media juggernauts, which would still be producing blockbuster movies in the same diegesis four decades later (with no end in sight). So we can understand, if not forgive, that it was produced as an afterthought, rather than giving it the full attention and deliberateness we’ve since come to expect from the franchise. In short it was a crass way to keep audiences—and the toy purchasing public—thinking about Star Wars until Empire could be released a year and a half later.

It was doomed from the start. CBS wanted to camp on the movie’s success, and stupidly thought to force-choke it into a variety show format, like The Sonny & Cher Jedi Hour or Donny & Marie, Sith Lords, Variety Show. At the time, Lucas couldn’t be bothered to provide much beyond the framework story and a “Wookiee Bible,” (mentioned here) which explained the background and behavior of the Wookiees, including the fact that they were the center of the story and they can only growl. The first director quit after shooting a few scenes. Other than The Faithful Wookiee, the whole thing seems obviously rushed to production. It had about 30 minutes of script that had to be stretched into 90 minutes of airtime. Though they pulled in some respectable TV names of the time (Harvey Korman, Bea Arthur, Art Carney) to carry the thing and even had the stars of the original cast, those actors couldn’t do much with what amounted to a salad of terrible ideas written by and for goldfish: people pegging the S meter on the Myers-Briggs test.

I’m quite fascinated by the Special partly for its narrative—for there is one, dishwater-flavored though it is—which requires us to be in the narrative and yet out of it at the same time, depending on the need, switching back and forth at a moment’s notice. For instance, you must dismiss the fact that Malla would have any interest in pausing her day for 5 minutes to stare at a security camera feed from inside a shop, because you know the point is the scene in the shop. Or, we dismiss the awkwardness of Itchy watching cross-species VR erotica in the family living room because we know that the point is the Mermeia Wow number. Or, we dismiss the tragic implication that Malla may be mentally challenged, because she takes a comedy cooking skit as literal instructions she should attempt to follow, because we know the point is the “comedy.” But how do we (or the toy-purchasing kids that were the target audience) know which parts to dismiss and which parts to indulge? There are no explicit clues. These are fascinating mental jumps for us to have to make.

It’s also interesting from a sci-fi interfaces point of view because, like most children’s shows, the interfaces are worse than an afterthought. They are created by adults (who don’t understand interaction design) merely to signal high-techn-ess to kids, whom they mistakenly believe aren’t very observant, and they do so under insane budgetary and time constraints. So they half-ass what they can, at best, half-ass, and the result is, well, the interfaces from The Star Wars Holiday Special.

Ordinarily I like to reinforce the notions that what designers are doing in reading this blog is building up a necessary skepticism against sci-fi (and plundering it for great ideas, intentional or otherwise), but in this case I can’t really back that up. What we’re doing here is just staring agape in amazement at what can come out of the illusion machine when everything goes wrong.

But, to compare apples-to-oranges, let’s go through the analysis categories:

Sci F 0 of 4How believable are the interfaces?

They are all not just props but obvious props. Straight up tape recorders. Confusing and contradictory user flows. A secret rebel communication device that shrilly…rings. Generally when they are believable, they are very mundane. Like, I’d say the Chef Gourmaand recipe selector or Saun Dann’s final use of the Imperial Comms (which contradicts Malla’s use of the same device.) The Special interfaces break believability all over the place and in terrible ways.

A character resembling a hairy creature stands in a room, wearing an apron and raising one arm in a playful manner, with a window and a plant visible in the background.

Fi F 0 of 4How well do the interfaces inform the narrative of the story?

If I’m being charitable, maaaaaybe some of them help set the tone? The holocircus and cartoon player tell of the gee-whiz high-tech world of this galaxy far far away. But the Groomer, the Jefferson Projection, and the living room masturbation chair are pointless (and unnerving) diversions that distract. Any goodness in Lumpy’s cartoon player is strictly accidental and depend on heavy apologetics. The Life Day orbs have some nice features, but they’re almost extradiegetic, a cinematic conceit. Admittedly the show only gave a nod to a central narrative anyway because of its genre, but it cannot be said that the interfaces inform the narrative.

Interfaces F 0 of 4How well do the interfaces equip the characters to achieve their goals?

This is the easiest rating to get, because it’s the thing movies are usually good at. But with the complicated and contradictory flows of the Imperial Comms, “secret” interfaces that rat out the users, extraneous controls and terrible interaction models, these interfaces are a hindrance much more than a help.

Overall F 0 of 12Dreck

Doing this review was so painful, I note it took a little over two years since I started it. In between the first and last post, I’ve had to take a lot of breaks: a manifesto of sorts, a rumination on the Fermi Paradox in sci-fi, and reviews of the Battlestar Galactica mini-series, Johnny Mnemonic, Children of Men, a Black Mirror episode, and Doctor Strange.

I have not had a review at 0 before, so I had to invent the category name. Now if my ratings were recommendations, The Star Wars Holiday Special would get a MUST-SEE, but for cultural reasons. Like, you must see it because otherwise you would not believe it is real. But for inspiration or even skepticism-building, it’s only useful except as a cautionary tale.

For some reason the Special got a lot of attention this past December (c.f. Vanity Fair, Vox, the Nerdist, Newsweek, Mental Floss) which makes me think it was a concentrated stealth push by Disney to coincide with the release of The Last Jedi. Or maybe it’s just other writers, like me, are filled with a kind of psychological wound that the new films always reopen. A fear that we will once again he asked to watch a stormtrooper watch a “holographic” music video with questionable silhouettes.

Whatever their reasons for talking about the Special, for me it serves as a reminder, kind of like The Laughing Gnome or perhaps Spider-Man 3, that even the greats occasionally have to overcome massive, embarrassing, WTF mistakes.

And with that, the review is done. I have gone into the Wampa cave and come out alive. Godspeed, Star Wars Holiday Special.

Star_Wars_Holiday_Special_8x10__67622.1405345638.1280.1280.jpg

Full series, in order: Star Wars Holiday Special (1978)

IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0193524/

Report Card: White Christmas

9 Jan 2018 by Christopher Noessel

Sci-fi UI report card for White Christmas: Sci C, Fi A, Interfaces A. Overall A- (10 of 12), Blockbuster.

I love Black Mirror. It’s not always perfect, but uses great story telling to get us to think about the consequences of technology in our lives. It’s a provocateur that invokes the spirit of anthology series like The Twilight Zone, and rarely shies away from following the tech into the darkest places. It’s what thinking about technology in sci-fi formats looks like.

But, as usual, this site is not about the show but the interfaces, and for that we turn to the three criteria for evaluation here on scifiinterfaces.com.

How believable are the interfaces? Can it work this way? (To keep you immersed.)
How well do the interfaces inform the narrative of the story? (To tell a good story.)
How well do the interfaces equip the characters to achieve their goals? (To be a good model for real-world design?)

Sci C 2 of 4How believable are the interfaces?

There are some problems. Yes, there is the transparent-screen trope, but I regularly give that a cinegenics pass. And for reasons explained in the post I’ll give everything in Virtual Greta’s virtual reality a pass.

But on top of that there are missing navigation elements, missing UI elements, and extraneous UI elements in Matt’s interfaces. And ultimately, I think the whole cloned-you home automation is unworkable. These are key to the episode, so it scores pretty low.

A computer screen showing a video chat with multiple participants, each in separate windows, engaged in conversation. A hand is visible in the foreground, and a glass of water is on the desk.

A hand reaching towards a digital screen displaying the website for 'The Turk's Head,' featuring Christmas party booking information.

It’s the mundane interfaces like pervy Peeping Tom gallery, the Restraining Order, and the pregnancy test that are wholly believable.

Fi A 4 of 4How well do the interfaces inform the narrative of the story?

From the Restraining Order that doesn’t tell you what it’s saying until after you’ve signed it, to the creepy home-hacked wingman interfaces, to the Smartelligence slavery and torture obfuscation, the interfaces help paint the picture of a world full of people and institutions that are psychopathically cruel to each other for pathetic, inhumane reasons. It takes a while to see it, but the only character who can be said to be straight-up good in this episode is the not-Joe’s kid.

A computer screen displays a video chat with nine participants, showing various facial expressions and backgrounds. A glass of water is visible in front of the screen, and a person's hand is partially pictured on the right.

A hand holding a small object, with a blurred man in the background and digital interface icons for magnify and block visible.

Interfaces A 4 of 4How well do the interfaces equip the characters to achieve their goals?

Matt wants to secretly help Harry S be more confident and, yeah, “score.” Beth and Claire want to socially block their partners in the real world. Matt needs easy tools to torture virtual Greta into submission. Greta needs to control the house. Joe wants to snoop on what he believes to be his daughter. Matt wants to extract a confession. All the interfaces are driven by clear character, social, and institutional goals. They are largely goal-focused, even if those goals are shitty.

A hand holding a small object in front of a blurred figure with a patterned background, displaying digital controls for magnification and blocking.

A woman posing playfully with one hand on her head, wearing a green patterned coat and a red sweater, standing in a snowy forest setting.

For reasons discussed in the Sci section of this review (above), there are problems with the details of the interfaces, but if you were a designer working with no ethical base in a society of psychopaths, yes, these would be pretty good models to build from.

Overall A- 10 of 12Blockbuster

Special thanks again to Ianus Keller and his students TU Delft who began the analysis of this episode and collected many of the screen shots.

A panoramic view of a spacious modern interior with high ceilings, featuring a large common area filled with people, seating areas, and exhibit stands. The walls are decorated in blue, and natural light streams in through large windows.

A panoramic view of a modern classroom with rows of blue and white seating, featuring two large screens displaying video content. Several students are seated at desks with laptops, engaged in a learning environment.

Two men smiling for a selfie in an outdoor urban setting, with a bicycle path sign in the background and a barrier crossing visible.

A classroom setting at IDE Arena with two presenters at a podium and a large screen displaying a presentation. An audience member is seated in the foreground.

I also want to help them make a shout-out to IDE alumnus Frans van Eedena, whose coffee machine wound up being one of the appliances controlled by virtual Greta. Nice work IDE!

Full series, in order: White Christmas

IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt34786243/

Sci-fi interfaces

Stop watching sci-fi. Start using it.

Category Archives: ~ Report Cards

Report Card: The Rocky Horror Picture Show (1976)

Sci F 0 of 4How believable are the interfaces?

Fi A 4 of 4How well do the interfaces inform the narrative of the story?

Interfaces F 0 of 4How well do the interfaces equip the characters to achieve their goals?

Overall C- 4 of 12Matinée

Report Card: Star Trek: Section 31 (2025)

Sci B 3 of 4How believable are the interfaces?

Fi A 4 of 4How well do the interfaces inform the narrative of the story?

Interfaces B 3 of 4How well do the interfaces equip the characters to achieve their goals?

Overall A- 10 of 12Blockbuster

Report Card: Black Panther (2018)

Sci B 3 of 4How believable are the interfaces?

Fi A 4 of 4How well do the interfaces inform the narrative of the story?

Interfaces B 3 of 4How well do the interfaces equip the characters to achieve their goals?

Overall A- 10 of 12Blockbuster

Report Card: Colossus: The Forbin Project

Sci B 3 of 4How believable are the interfaces?

Fi A 4 of 4How well do the interfaces inform the narrative of the story?

Interfaces C 2 of 4How well do the interfaces equip the characters to achieve their goals?

Overall B+ 9 of 12Must-see

A final conspiracy theory

Report Card: Las Luchadoras vs. El Robot Asesino

Sci F 0 of 4How believable are the interfaces?

Fi B 3 of 4How well do the interfaces inform the narrative of the story?

Interfaces F 0 of 4How well do the interfaces equip the characters to achieve their goals?

Overall D+ 3 of 12Dreck

Report Card: The Star Wars Holiday Special

Sci F 0 of 4How believable are the interfaces?

Fi F 0 of 4How well do the interfaces inform the narrative of the story?

Interfaces F 0 of 4How well do the interfaces equip the characters to achieve their goals?

Overall F 0 of 12Dreck

Report Card: White Christmas

Sci C 2 of 4How believable are the interfaces?

Fi A 4 of 4How well do the interfaces inform the narrative of the story?

Interfaces A 4 of 4How well do the interfaces equip the characters to achieve their goals?

Overall A- 10 of 12Blockbuster