10 Sci-Fi Films That Would Struggle to Hit the Big Screen in Today’s World

Creating timeless works in the science fiction genre poses a unique challenge. Much of this stems from the fact that sci-fi often explores futuristic settings or technologies. In many cases, the imaginative technologies depicted in these films have become a reality, rendering the once speculative ideas outdated or even obsolete. Consequently, numerous sci-fi films have not aged well, as they feature innovations that have already come to pass or appear quaint by today’s standards.

Beyond technological advancements, sci-fi films can also date themselves through cultural and societal elements, a challenge shared with other genres. At the forefront of these elements are outdated ideals that falter when examined through a contemporary, more progressive perspective. This includes offensive portrayals of races and genders, jokes that lose their edge without their initial shock value, and graphic depictions of sex and violence that now seem out of place. Such content serves as a common thread among these sci-fi films.

Even among the classics hailed as highly watchable, there are aspects that would likely be omitted if these films were produced today. This is evident in the absence of such elements in movies and shows that draw direct inspiration from these originals.

One film that stands out in this regard is “A Clockwork Orange.” Despite sparking a highly polarized response, it holds the distinction of being the first sci-fi movie to earn a Best Picture Oscar nomination. The film is unflinching in its depiction of brutal violence and sexual assault, often intertwining these acts with dark humor. A particularly notorious scene involves Alex, played by Malcolm McDowell, breaking into a couple’s home and assaulting a woman while energetically performing “Singin’ in the Rain.”

Despite its extremely polarizing response, “A Clockwork Orange” nonetheless made history as the first sci-fi movie to get nominated for a best picture Oscar. It pulls no punches, not shying away from depicting brutal violence and sexual assault. Not only that, but the scenes in question were often laced with layers of dark humor — when Alex (Malcolm McDowell) breaks into a couple’s home and assaults a woman, he does so while gleefully dancing to and belting out “Singin’ in the Rain.” 

Make no mistake: “A Clockwork Orange” was met with more than its fair share of controversy when it was released. The original cut was threatened with an X rating in the U.S., and was outright banned in several countries. All that to say, that “A Clockwork Orange” was barely able to get made in 1971. So of course it wouldn’t get made today, unless its intent of not glorifying sociopathic violence was more transparent. 

If nothing else, any filmmaker who tackled a movie adaptation of “A Clockwork Orange” today would treat their actors better than Stanley Kubrick did. That iconic scene of Alex having his eyes held open with hooks? Malcolm McDowell actually had to endure that — and he’s still got the scars to prove it. 

For the most part, “Short Circuit” is a harmless little movie about robots meant to be light sci-fi for children. It being released in 1986, it of course features a robot that seemed impossibly futuristic at the time but now just looks laughably clunky and awkward, but that sort of thing is forgivable and even quite charming.

However, something only adults probably noticed in “Short Circuit” is that the character of Ben Jabituya, the assistant to robot designer Newton Crosby (Steve Guttenberg), is as cringeworthy of an Indian stereotype as they come. We are talking Apu (Hank Azaria) levels of one-note ethnic portrayals. But at least Apu had the benefit — for awhile, anyway — of people not actually seeing the white actor who voiced him. Not so for Fisher Stevens, the white actor who played Ben in “Short Circuit,” quite visible as he delivers his lines in an over the top accent that was hard to swallow even at the time.

Speaking of seeing Stevens, that’s when things really go off the rails. A mere accent would’ve been bad enough, but Stevens is actually wearing brownface in his portrayal of an Indian man. While Hollywood isn’t as far removed from white actors wearing dark makeup to portray people of color as it should be, it is thankfully widely maligned these days.

John Hughes was  on a filmmaking tear in the ’80s, and sure enough, 1985 saw him dip his feet into sci-fi by way of “Weird Science.” Though still a hybrid of his go-to teen comedy genre, “Weird Science” leaned into sci-fi by having it be about two boys who create their dream woman by Frankenstein-ing a doll to life. Enter Lisa (Kelly LeBrock), who looks like she jumped right off of a supermodel poster hanging in a teenage boy’s bedroom.

Right off the bat, these are two minors hanging out with a half-naked adult woman, who returns their flirting and sexual energy. One may argue she’s not “real” so it’s not the same — but for all intents and purposes, the movie turns into a sexually-charged love triangle between an adult and two teenagers. If “Weird Science” was made today, it would likely be written that the boys at least create a female their own age. Though that still would only marginally improve the driving force behind Lisa’s creation  — which probably wasn’t watching TV and playing Dungeons & Dragons.

Beyond that, “Weird Science” is full of the poorly aged things common in ’80s comedies — racist jokes, homophobia, body shaming, and women existing as sexual objects to be fawned over and “won by” the male characters. 

You know a movie is controversial when it’s alleged it was banned in the United States. While 2000 Japanese sci-fi action film “Battle Royale” was never actually banned in the U.S. in the traditional sense, it’s telling that such rumors were widely accepted as fact. But make no mistake, there was indeed a lot of controversy surrounding the movie’s release, and U.S. distributors weren’t exactly fighting to bring it here.

So why all the hubbub about “Battle Royale?” It’s a violent movie, no doubt about it. Within the first few minutes, someone has a knife thrown between their eyes, and a few more peoples’ heads literally explode. But what makes the violence particularly eyebrow-raising is that it’s centered on high school students. The way the kids are killed, the number of them that are killed, and the fact that they are dispatched by other kids, encompasses the lion’s share of the controversy surrounding “Battle Royale.”

As proof that “Battle Royale” is very much a product of its time, look no further than the fact that it’s generally considered to be an R-rated “Hunger Games” precursor. The similarities between the two movies are impossible to deny, as both are youth-based bloodbaths — but notably, “Hunger Games” goes to great lengths to have the worst of its violence happen offscreen or be otherwise obscured in some way. 

Without “A Boy and His Dog,” the oft overlooked 1975 sci-fi gem based on the Harlan Ellison novella of the same name, we probably wouldn’t have “Mad Max” or “Fallout.” The idea of someone searching a post apocalyptic wasteland for what little resources are left heavily influenced both aforementioned franchises, while the major focus on a canine companion inspired “Fallout” in particular. 

Considering some of the themes of “A Boy and His Dog,” it’s probably best we stick with the works inspired by it rather than take another crack at this particular story. Chief among the problematic elements is main character Vic (Don Johnson) who, along with seeking basic necessities like food and water, is on the hunt for women to have sex with. And he doesn’t seem particularly concerned with getting their consent. Worse, he is using his dog, Blood, to help him sniff out potential conquests.

Would people in such situations give into their most base urges and not bother with decency or humanity? Some would, certainly. But that doesn’t change how much that aspect of “A Boy and His Dog” makes it tough to appreciate for all the ways it was a trailblazer. And that aspect would’ve no doubt been severely tempered, if not removed entirely, if the story had been adapted even 10 to 15 years later.

The most obvious reason why “Flash Gordon” wouldn’t fly today is its pure cheese factor. There have been recent attempts to recapture the spirit of that era’s B movies, but there’s always a self-referential wink behind the proceedings. That can be fun and all, but there’s something special about movies we now appreciate as campy that were taken seriously in their day — and that definitely applies to “Flash Gordon.” 

Putting all that aside, “Flash Gordon” has a serious problem with the way it views Asian culture. It is cited as a glaring example of “yellow peril,” a term used to describe media that makes Chinese and Japanese characters the villains and does so via exaggerated racist stereotypes. Yellow peril is all over “Flash Gordon,” from the political makeup of fictional planet Mongo to the primary antagonist named Emperor Ming the Merciless — complete with Fu Manchu mustache, exaggerated eyebrows, garish red gowns, and of course, portrayal by a white actor, Max Von Sydow. It’s not quite Mickey Rooney in “Breakfast at Tiffany’s” levels of racism, but it’s not terribly far off, either. 

Newer films adapting comic books featuring outdated depictions have been smart to change them in some way, such as the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s subversion of the Mandarin (Guy Pearce) — an acknowledgement that such characters no longer have a place in modern media. 

We sense the pitchforks coming out. “The Terminator” is generally looked at as an unimpeachable classic, placing high among rankings of every James Cameron movie. Whether you put it in the category of sci-fi, action, or horror, it is among the best in those genres. So what could possibly be wrong with “The Terminator” that makes it un-makable today?

Cameron himself has expressed some regrets about his masterpiece. He told Esquire Middle East, in no uncertain terms, “I wouldn’t make ‘The Terminator’ today.” In particular, Cameron takes issue with the heavy use of firearms in the movie, saying, “I look back on some films that I’ve made, and I don’t know if I would want to make that film now. I don’t know if I would want to fetishize the gun, like I did on a couple of ‘Terminator’ movies 30+ years ago, in our current world.” 

If the filmmaker behind “The Terminator” says he wouldn’t make it now, then that’s a pretty clear indication that it wouldn’t be made today, period. And that doesn’t even get into the problematic “relationship” between Kyle Reese (Michael Biehn) and Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton) that has her hooking up with a mysterious — and clearly unhinged — man claiming to be from the future who she only met a few days prior.

It seems obvious in retrospect that a movie about a talking duck from outer space, based on a Marvel comic that hardly anyone had heard of, would be a total flop. Nevertheless, George Lucas, in his first major post-“Star Wars” project, and Universal bet big on it anyway. However, that’s not what we’re here to discuss.

While “Howard the Duck” was an edgy, adult-skewing comic, the movie felt very marketed to children, not helped by its PG rating. So imagine the shock of parents and their children seeing the movie, and being confronted with a naked duck woman in a bathtub — complete with fully visible breasts — within the first few moments of the film. It’s the kind of whiplash-inducing adult moment in an otherwise seemingly family-friendly comedy that wasn’t unusual, but it’s still the type of thing that’s tough to justify.

Doubly so for the bizarre relationship between Howard (voiced by Chip Zien) and human woman Beverly Switzler (Lea Thompson). Howard makes no secret about how horny he is for her — and pretty much every women he encounters. The two share an extremely uncomfortable bedroom scene that seems like it’s going to lead to intercourse before being interrupted. How anyone thought that was a good idea is baffling, but there is no way a scene teasing interspecies coitus — especially in a “kids movie” — would move beyond the brainstorming phase today. 

To its credit, “Alien Nation” tries to tackle a lot of tough topics that most sci-fi movies would stay far away from. Telling the story of a race of intergalactic beings who have settled in Los Angeles and are attempting to peacefully live among humanity, “Alien Nation” uses that framework to address racism, xenophobia, immigration, and more. And it gets really close to nailing it, remarkably.

However, that’s also why “Alien Nation” would never be made today. No sci-fi movie today, especially from a major studio, would touch hot button subjects like immigration with a 10-foot pole. A movie that takes a stance on a topic like that would prove extremely divisive, and risk alienating — no pun intended — audiences that disagree with that message. It’s unfortunate that things have to be that way, but that’s just the nature of sociopolitical themes in mainstream movies these days.

There are other nitpicks about “Alien Nation” that don’t hold up so hot to modern scrutiny, such as the heady topics too often taking a backseat to a fairly standard buddy cop drama with a light sci-fi twist. That would be taken to task much more harshly today than it was at that time. But it’s mostly the aforementioned existence of the challenging topics in “Alien Nation” that make it a product of its time.

Whether it’s a tragedy that we don’t see erotic sci-fi actioners anymore comes down to personal preference. But other than the occasional slapdash B movie that you probably wouldn’t find anywhere outside of Tubi, it’s a subgenre you don’t see anymore. All that to say, there really isn’t a place for a movie like 1968’s “Barbarella” today. 

Is there a plot in “Barbarella”? Sure — it involves the title character (Jane Fonda), who is sent by Earth to find a scientist who created a laser that could wipe out humanity. From there, campiness ensues, during which time Barbarella bounces around in outfits specifically designed to accentuate Jane Fonda’s curves. That’s what most remember “Barbarella” for — that super cheesy sci-fi romp starring a half-naked Fonda. Again, if a movie like that were even made today, it would go straight to a streaming service you never heard of and develop a fanbase that can be counted on two hands.

That being said, there has been talk of rebooting “Barbarella” over the years, with filmmakers Robert Rodriguez, Nicolas Winding Refn, and Robert Luketic each entering the fray before seeing their versions fall apart. Most recently, Edgar Wright has been attached to a version set to star Sydney Sweeney. Whether that comes to fruition is yet to be seen, but if it does, expect a lot more substance and artistic integrity to accompany the cleavage.