'Science in Hollywood' by Carolyn Porco, AAI 2009

Wonderist
atheist
Wonderist's picture
Posts: 2479
Joined: 2006-03-19
User is offlineOffline
'Science in Hollywood' by Carolyn Porco, AAI 2009

A nice talk by Carolyn Porco. I concur with her on popularizing science in a variety of media, such as movies and TV. Also echoes my concerns about anti-science themes in movies.

Wonderist on Facebook — Support the idea of wonderism by 'liking' the Wonderism page — or join the open Wonderism group to take part in the discussion!

Gnu Atheism Facebook group — All gnu-friendly RRS members welcome (including Luminon!) — Try something gnu!


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10140
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I stopped watching about ten

I stopped watching about ten minutes after she was focusing so much on entertainment, but that in no way suggests I didn't enjoy watching it. Her speech was awesome. It reminded me that we are merely enwrapped in what religions have evolved into since Galileo, and that a century or two hence, the "debate" on evolution will occupy the same place that the "debate" on astronomy once did. That Galileo was as much a hero of rational views as any. His deeds are so accepted now that he sometimes doesn't get the credit he is due. 400 years of the scientific method, and look how far it has brought us!

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1474
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
im sorry science is not

im sorry science is not entertaining... it is boring as hell. What it can produce can be awesome but science as a theme in a movie just sounds boring to me. Science is evil is what works. But then again I haven't seen a good movie in years and thats not from not watching movies but more because they all suck. what good yay science movies are there anyway?

 

edit:

P.S. im not saying there cannot be good movies that promote science... but I just don't think it would work out.

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10140
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Star Trek is the first thing

Star Trek is the first thing that comes to mind when someone says science can't be entertaining. You might or might not like Star Trek, but it clearly and inarguably has a large following. Yes, many of the themes it has used are more fantasy than scientific, but many very entertaining episodes are based purely on science. If you focus too much on science then it can become boring, simply because the process takes so bloody long. But that can be taken advantage of. Story arcs are a perfect way to do it. Have multiple stories telling of multiple events with an underlining backdrop of the scientific process, and you have a potential winner (I'm in the midst of such a process now).
Though I'd be the first to agree that a single two hour movie is generally over way too quickly to properly display science AND be entertaining at the same time.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1474
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Star Trek is

Vastet wrote:
Star Trek is the first thing that comes to mind when someone says science can't be entertaining. You might or might not like Star Trek, but it clearly and inarguably has a large following. Yes, many of the themes it has used are more fantasy than scientific, but many very entertaining episodes are based purely on science. If you focus too much on science then it can become boring, simply because the process takes so bloody long. But that can be taken advantage of. Story arcs are a perfect way to do it. Have multiple stories telling of multiple events with an underlining backdrop of the scientific process, and you have a potential winner (I'm in the midst of such a process now). Though I'd be the first to agree that a single two hour movie is generally over way too quickly to properly display science AND be entertaining at the same time.

Look the main problem with movies in general is a good story cannot be told in 2 hours. imo you need at least 16 hours. To develop charicters, develop good plots etc. you cannot expect me to care about charicters I met 1 hour ago. People try to cram the story into 2 hours and have action.... it is simply not possible. This is the reason why movies are a waste of time and money.

 

Now star trek.... first it is crap and had very bad acting. But yes there are a number of fans.... but you are right the show was science based in fantasy, imo even those "science episodes" had almost nothing to do with science, at least the ones iv seen. 

 

I just don't think science can be entertaining, it is sciences job to stuff up and create something that threatens humanity and then a lone marine goes and domenates it. (think quake 2, but replace strog with surfing robots)

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10140
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I already agree that a

I already agree that a single movie is too short, but also point out a series could do more. As far as Trek goes, if you ignore the transporters, warp drive, energy weapons, tactical shields, and replicators; which were common usage material to the show, then many episodes of it were very scientific, displaying the scientific method again and again.
I also disagree that all of Trek had bad acting. Patrick Stewart is one of the greatest actors of all time. Eye-wink
One is capable of creating a story where science is the hero, no matter the threat. It can be used to win a war, or cure a voracious disease, or solve puzzles, etc. The gaming industry has jumped on this unconciously, and due to its interactivity it is in the best place to use it. It's harder to do with movies. TV shows could do it easier, due to their frequency. But successful movie series' are many. I could list dozens of them. So it could be done.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1474
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote: One is capable

Vastet wrote:
One is capable of creating a story where science is the hero, no matter the threat. It can be used to win a war,

Is science not used to fight the war? tanks, plane? all a result of science. Infact pretty much everything is a result of science exessially so in war, you cannot put science as a good guy in war, we are only able to kill so many people because of science. The same can be said with diseases, many are a indirect result of scientific process. Besides we know all diseases in the movies are man made....science

 

With a little thought you will realise science cannot be good or bad. Thats for people.

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10140
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Tapey wrote:Vastet wrote:

Tapey wrote:

Vastet wrote:
One is capable of creating a story where science is the hero, no matter the threat. It can be used to win a war,

Is science not used to fight the war? tanks, plane? all a result of science. Infact pretty much everything is a result of science exessially so in war, you cannot put science as a good guy in war, we are only able to kill so many people because of science. The same can be said with diseases, many are a indirect result of scientific process. Besides we know all diseases in the movies are man made....science

 

With a little thought you will realise science cannot be good or bad. Thats for people.

Good and bad are subjective. It is shown as bad, it doesn't have to be. Many diseases are not created intentionally or otherwise, they just happen. Many wars can be made to have legitimate reasons, such as WWI and II, to name just two.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10140
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
You're mirroring her

You're mirroring her criticisms to an extent, and so am I, but I think it can be done, and that there is plenty of evidence to support it. If you don't, that's fine, but I'll try anyway. Eye-wink

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.