Inspired by the suggestion of a pro-science film festival, the Seed editors have launched a poll asking about science movies. They’ve narrowed it to four, all with both pros and cons:
- Contact Pro: Arecibo is way cool. Con: woo-woo ending is even less compelling than in the book.
- Gattaca Pro: Believable human interactions between characters. Con: Implausible dystopian setting. Also, it’s about biology.
- An Inconvenient Truth Pro: An important message for society and a mountain of supporting evidence. Con: It’s Al Gore giving a PowerPoint presentation.
- Jurassic Park Pro: CGI dinosaurs! Con: Everything else.
Tough choice…
March of the Penguins – unlike Gore teh penguins actually very cute + not trying to bullshit anyone. More dramatic, too.
real genius or brain candy would have been my votes.
What, no Apollo 13?
The only con there is Tom Hanks….
What is Jurassic Park even doing on that list? It’s based on a novel by Michael Crichton, who is notorious for painting scientists as villains (and had this reputation even before the kerfluffle over his recent anti-climate-science novel). I thought the idea was to screen films that would give the audience a positive view of science.
Real Genius, as Brian suggested, would be a better choice. While it also features a mad scientist character, it at least gives a semi-realistic view of what a university-based research lab is like.
Jurassic Park belongs, I think, because it has a reputation for inspiring kids to study molecular biology (as implausible as it might seem at first glance). I’ve read that in Nature, the science fiction Focus issue from last summer. I think it was Joan Slonczewski who said it. Maybe they all want to grow up to be mad scientist and take over the world!
Eric wrote: “What is Jurassic Park even doing on that list? ”
Hear, hear. Jurassic Park was the real beginning of Crichton’s anti-science screed, which continued with State of Fear (anti-environmental science) and Prey (anti-nanoscience). Both the book and the movie Jurassic Park treat genetics as a Pandora’s Box that should never be (have been) opened.
Hell, I thought Ghostbusters put science in a more positive light.
An Inconvenient Truth is dead,
http://www.fourmilab.ch/fourmilog/
Friday 25 April 25 2008
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/solarsystem/solar_cycle_graphics_prt.htm
bottomed out and stayed bottomed out.
Patience. Polar bears will be freezing their buns off within the decade. Short growing seasons, massive food shorfalls, no more grain stupidly fermented into fuel – no more fuel. Lethal 1920s weather has returned, and famine with it BURN COAL! to save the planet.
Apollo 13 is wonderful, but it’s more of an Awesome Engineer Movie than an Awesome Scientist Movie.
Implausible? Geez! Are you even paying attention?
Jurassic Park was the real beginning of Crichton’s anti-science screed,
Read Andromeda Strain, Terminal Man, Congo, Sphere, …
Virtually every Chrichton science fiction book is anti-science. Some of there are good reads, but they’re all scientists doing arrogant/stupid things based on bad assumptions or science run amok. The only recent change is that now he’s vocally anti-science.