Sorry, I just edited my last post too late.
My point is, most stuff in the Superman story (as transitory & fluid as it's been over the last 8 decades) is accounted for. Whereas in a story like Solaris, the tangible questions are not even addressed. In Star Trek, for instance, we can go to planets in other star systems due to a fictional device called "warp drive" - it doesn't exist, but is a plot device that gets us to our setting. The physics behind any attempted explanations for it don't work beyond the wildly theoretical just like most of the attempts to use physics to explain anything else in sci-fi.
But Solaris doesn't offer any attempts to even supply the plot device that gets the characters to the setting - unless, as I said in one possible theory - that Solaris is relatively close by.
My point is, most stuff in the Superman story (as transitory & fluid as it's been over the last 8 decades) is accounted for. Whereas in a story like Solaris, the tangible questions are not even addressed. In Star Trek, for instance, we can go to planets in other star systems due to a fictional device called "warp drive" - it doesn't exist, but is a plot device that gets us to our setting. The physics behind any attempted explanations for it don't work beyond the wildly theoretical just like most of the attempts to use physics to explain anything else in sci-fi.
But Solaris doesn't offer any attempts to even supply the plot device that gets the characters to the setting - unless, as I said in one possible theory - that Solaris is relatively close by.
__________________
Letterboxd
Letterboxd