I’ve written a lot about science and scientists in movies. I have long hoped that real science would find its place in Hollywood, with TV shows and movies doing more to promote actual science and try to get it right. There’s been a lot of progress lately, with science advisors becoming more common in the script-writing process, and then — gasp — actually being listened to!
This has taken a giant leap forward with the creation of the Science and Entertainment Exchange (SEE), a project of the distinguished National Academies of Science to encourage and foster a relationship between scientists and Hollywood. The cast of characters involved is impressive: Jerry Zucker (cripes, he wrote "Airplane!"), Seth MacFarlane ("Family Guy"), and Dustin Hoffman among many others on the entertainment side, and U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu, science writer Lawrence Krauss, and John Rennie (Scientific American editor-in-chief) advocating science. My pal (and TAM 7 speaker!) Jennifer Ouellette from Cocktail Party Physics is running the shebang, too.
 |
They have a blog which is both very entertaining an informative… which I suppose makes sense, given the two fields we’re dealing with here. I particularly liked this entry written by Jerry Zucker. It looks to me that he Gets It, and it’s extremely cool to see someone highly placed in Hollywood who does.
Dustin Hoffman does, too. He’ll be hosting events for SEE to try to get more folks involved. I love Hoffman, despite some, um, not-so-scientifically accurate movies he’s been in (cough cough "Sphere" cough "Outbreak" cough cough), and I’m really happy he’s involved.
In fact, I just think that overall I’m really happy SEE exists. It’s already producing results, and I fully plan on getting more involved with them as time goes on. The portrayal of science and scientists in movies is important to me, so I heartily stand behind SEE’s efforts.
June 17th, 2009 at 11:30 am
Thanks for pointing us to this… great website… just spent some time poking around. Also a funny essay by Zucker.
REALLY looking forward to the Moon movie next month. What I personally hope to see are more movies where science gaps aren’t filled in by “magic” and more bio-pics about people who changed our understanding of the world… not just disasters, psychos or aliens.
June 17th, 2009 at 11:42 am
I still like Stanley Kubrik use of sfx in 2001: A Space Odyssey. Expecally, where Dave is blown into the airlock from the shuttle craft!
June 17th, 2009 at 11:48 am
As a one-time scientist, is there anyway I can contribute to SEE?
Eric
June 17th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
I picked up a book called something like the top science articles of 2007 and one of the articles was about how movies were trying to get sciency types more involved, like making what the scientician actor is saying actually sound plausible.
I take offense at your Outbreak comment. There was plenty of factual science, like the way the helicopters flew, monkeys are cute, and rednecks will always try to run a military blockade in pick up trucks (In Red Dawn it worked).
June 17th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Thanks for promoting this! My friend, Dr. Sidney Perkowitz from the Physics Dept. at Emory is one of the folks working hard on this project and I’m glad it’s getting more exposure. Awesome stuff.
June 17th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
“science writer Lawrence Krauss”? Did I miss the irony, or did somebody else miss that he has recently been promoted to professor of physics at ASU? ;>
June 17th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
I’m focused on Science of the Star Trek movie at http://structureddream.blogspot.com/
right now, but delighted to SEE this program started!
The real science trumps fiction almost everytime, and where you have to use “the force”, at least SEE can help them make it PLAUSIBLE techno-babble.
June 17th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
Maybe SEE would get more attention paid to it if they called it the Science & Entertainment Xchange.
June 17th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
I really like Zucker’s Science Smackdown idea. That would be awesome. Now that would get people’s attention!
June 17th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Hey! I liked Outbreak!
June 17th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
I had less problem with “Sphere” being unscientific than for having such relentlessly stupid characters who supposedly are scientists.
“Moon” looks worth seeing, but it sounds like the premise for having one guy man a mining station for three years is pretty thin:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=105201326
Everbody knows that scientists are sexy, brilliant rock stars as demonstrated on the documentary, “Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension”.
June 17th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
I didn’t watch Sphere for the scientific accuracies, did you?
June 17th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Hey! I wanted to like Sphere!
…but I couldn’t.
June 17th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
WOOT!
Brian Greene
Marvin Minsky
Rob Reiner
(I’m also a closet Outbreak fan.)
June 17th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
Peter (#8); I know Krauss is a scientist, but he’s better known as a science popularizer.
June 17th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
@ The Chemist: I liked Outbreak too, (and The Core /duck) but I remember the science in them as being poor. And I think that was the point there. I did, however, feel that Outbreak was a copy of The Andromeda Strain, just updated.
June 17th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
I thought all the celebs with literary ambitions were blogging over at Huffington Post. Are these the celebs who aren’t into alternative medicine, etc?
June 17th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
13. BJN Says:
Everbody knows that scientists are sexy, brilliant rock stars as demonstrated on the documentary, “Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension”.
Yeah, yeah… laugh while you can, monkey boy.
J/P=?
June 17th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
I can see how given the choice of two equally appealing options one being a misrepresentation of reality and one more true to reality movie directors should be guided to choose the latter. However, I think it is unrealistic to expect directors to avoid creating scenes that sell merely because an advisory or agency recommends they don’t. Directors will film what makes money.
Now, there are creative ways to infuse reality and sell (‘Primer’ anyone?). I’d just hate to see creative license get sacrificed just because someone has a problem with willing suspension of disbelief when it comes to movies.
June 17th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Sounds like a good idea let’s see how it works.
But missing Wapner.
Have watch to Wapner.
June 17th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
Um, isn’t Hoffman’s forte to make the unbelievable believable? I’m pretty sure he takes odd roles and movies just for the heck of it.
That said, it would indeed pay off for Hollywood to capture a larger crowd, either by appealing to “common science” with correct effects or common people with grandiose effects.
Down with “The Blob”, in with “Grey Goo”?!
June 17th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
“Jessica Alba really is a nuclear physicist?”
That was just possible after all Danica McKellar(The GIRL from Wondor Years) is a Mathematician and Mayim Bialik, Blossom has a degree in neuroscience. But for Jessica, it’s only beauty and not the brain.
I should know better, but one can hope, right?
June 17th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
If Gerry Zucker is going to invoke Marshall McLuhan he should spell it righter.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
UK actor Ben Miller is something of a science nerd, and yet he stars in Primeval, a show that runs fast and loose with logic and “science”. It must keep him up at nights.
June 17th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
A nice antidote to Expelled!
June 18th, 2009 at 2:04 am
IIRC Dustin Hoffman is not a Scientologist, but a quite vocal supporter of the Church of Scientology, comparing the observation of Scientology in Germany (where they want to achieve the tax-exempt status of a more conventional church) to the Nazi’s persecution of the Jews. (IIRC this was spelled out in an open letter written with Chic Corea and perhaps some other celebrities—I don’t know if John Travolta was involved. (To get back to real science, Olivia Newton-John, who starred with Travolta in GREASE, is the granddaughter (via his daughter) of Max Born.)) Let’s face it: Scientology is up there with homeopathy and anti-vaccination a prime example of crackpot pseudo-science. It was even invented by a science-fiction writer, according to some sources as the result of a bet he made that he could start a religion. Let’s hope that Hoffman doesn’t have a hidden agenda here. Put on your sceptical hat if Tom Cruise jumps on board!
June 18th, 2009 at 4:34 am
“I love Hoffman, despite some, um, not-so-scientifically accurate movies he’s been in”
A gig’s a gig. If an actor were to insist on only appearing in scientifically-accurate movies, they’d never work again.
June 18th, 2009 at 4:41 am
Dear Phil,
About Sphere. I remember liking the book in high school. I’m just curious, if you read it, did you happen to like it any more than the movie?
Anyway, great blog, great post, great news. Thanks!
June 18th, 2009 at 6:45 am
Unfortunately, John Rennie is no longer Scientific American’s editor-in-chief.
He got booted out. His farewell note appeared in the July edition.
June 18th, 2009 at 8:53 am
For Eric and anyone else interested in volunteering to work with The Exchange, please do get in touch! The program is only as strong as the people involved and so we want to hear from you. Our contact information is on our web site. Follow this link to get to us:
http://www.scienceandentertainmentexchange.org/contact.html
June 18th, 2009 at 10:48 am
26. Phillip Helbig:
Ref: Ron Hubbard: It wasn’t actually a bet. At a SciFi con in 1947, he was complaining to Issac Assimov and Robert Heinlien that the only way for a SciFi writer to get rich was to start a new religion. Later reports(mostly unsubstantiated) had him noticing that churches were tax free, so of course, he glommed onto that,,,(and died with 60 plus million in the bank)( I actually have to give him kudos for that).
GAry 7
June 18th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
@teacherninja For years I thought I made the cappuccino that inspired Sidney Perkowitz’s cosmic foam theory, but he claims he made it at home. Dude definitely had trouble sleeping at night. OMG Perk-o-witz perfect name for a dual purpose warp drive and espresso machine.
June 18th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
I’m glad to see that they also represent computer science, even though it’s not a natural science.
June 19th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
[...] I wrote about the Science and Entertainment Exchange yesterday, and now they’ve posted a video from their recent meeting. It features some notable folks giving their opinions on science in the movies, and it’s well worth a few minutes of your time. [...]