To be real, or not to be real...

Mark Harris said:
Though I do think Star Trek more than most, used real science as a jumping off point, rather than just making up nonsense. Even the WARP drive, matter/anti-matter, in TNG things like the computer being housed in a subspace field so that it could perform faster than light calculations while in WARP(okay, subspace is bulls**t, but...). There's actually a pretty good book written by a physicist called "The Science of Star Trek" or something. He uses a lot of elements of the show to lead people into learning about real physics.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I notice they do layer in small details you can speculate on so it doesn't come off as total BS. In TOS they even provided an explanation for why they encounter so many humanoid races in the galaxy. Sure, they real reason is that they didn't have the budget to do a new alien every week, but at least they cared enough to explain. This discussion reminded me of a talk Ron Moore gave about his exasperation with Star Trek tech and how that influenced BSG--

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/hl-50005879/blastr_ronald_d_moore_star_treks_tech_in_the_tech/
 
Batutta said:
Yeah, I notice they do layer in small details you can speculate on so it doesn't come off as total BS. In TOS they even provided an explanation for why they encounter so many humanoid races in the galaxy. Sure, they real reason is that they didn't have the budget to do a new alien every week, but at least they cared enough to explain. This discussion reminded me of a talk Ron Moore gave about his exasperation with Star Trek tech and how that influenced BSG--

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/hl-50005879/blastr_ronald_d_moore_star_treks_tech_in_the_tech/
Click to expand...

I'm actually developing a storyworld that uses all real science, in part to prove that the story can be just as exciting. For instance, it takes place all in the solar system, because the idea that we will ever leave the solar system before we go extinct is just about laughable, and there's plenty of cool **** to fly to right here. And using things like quantum-entangled atoms placed on various starships to make for instant communication even at very very large distances. I know none of it is necessary to storytelling, but as I said, I don't think there's any reason it can't be there and have the stories still be just as good.
 
Mark Harris said:
I'm actually developing a storyworld that uses all real science, in part to prove that the story can be just as exciting. For instance, it takes place all in the solar system, because the idea that we will ever leave the solar system before we go extinct is just about laughable, and there's plenty of cool s**t to fly to right here. And using things like quantum-entangled atoms placed on various starships to make for instant communication even at very very large distances. I know none of it is necessary to storytelling, but as I said, I don't think there's any reason it can't be there and have the stories still be just as good.
Click to expand...

That is exactly what I'm doing as well. I've written two sci-fi scripts and they both take place within our solar system due to real limitations. Some believe there's already not much left to know within our Solar System. Yes we know a lot, but it's like saying we know everything there is to know about the ocean, when we're still discovering new species.
 
Jon Starr said:
That is exactly what I'm doing as well. I've written two sci-fi scripts and they both take place within our solar system due to real limitations. Some believe there's already not much left to know within our Solar System. Yes we know a lot, but it's like saying we know everything there is to know about the ocean, when we're still discovering new species.
Click to expand...

LOL, I dunno who says there's not much left to know about the solar system, but they would be very very wrong. We know very very little. Same with the Earth, actually. We discover crazy new things all the time. Funny.
 
Mark Harris said:
LOL, I dunno who says there's not much left to know about the solar system, but they would be very very wrong. We know very very little. Same with the Earth, actually. We discover crazy new things all the time. Funny.
Click to expand...

I agree. There are plenty of places in our solar system to set a story or film that haven't been seen on film yet because most science fiction and space operas make up imaginary planets that are in far off star systems. Nothing wrong with that either, just that the solar system is not used up for cool and interesting locales to drop some characters in.

That is what I liked about Moon and Sunshine. Sure they had some far fetched elements, but they did the best they could with presenting a somewhat reasonably believable environment within the confines of what the story demanded. Hard sci-fi is difficult on film, especially when trying to marry it with a high concept idea that will get the audience interested in actually watching the film. I suppose that is why there are more sci-fi novels than films set in the solar system and also not using FTL and stuff like that to get around.

Speaking of newer knowledge of our solar system, you guys will probably laugh but I thought the recently announced theory of Tyche, the theorized mega-sized gas giant hiding out in the Oort Cloud, would be a cool jumping off point for a film or novel. Maybe in a hundred years or so after heavy solar system exploration and colonization, an expedition sets out towards Tyche to explore it and its moons. There was one theory I read that said Tyche might have been a world from another star system that was thrown from its parent star and was eventually caught up by our sun. That is a pretty cool notion, a potentially alien world that is now part of our solar system. It is surely not bulletproof hard sci-fi, but at least it is in the ballpark.
 
Last edited:
Mark Harris said:
LOL, I dunno who says there's not much left to know about the solar system, but they would be very very wrong. We know very very little. Same with the Earth, actually. We discover crazy new things all the time. Funny.
Click to expand...

Oh I've gotten that comment before. A friend read my script, and he said that it was strange because it took place within our own solar system, and there's so little we don't know about it already. I laughed inside.

Sure we know the main planets we can make out within our telescope, but not since the 60's or 70's have we gotten any insight on these planets. Since then so little is known. We hardly have a clear image of Mercury or Venus and they're so close to us. Venus had one probe on it's planet before it was destroyed, with very few photographs. Mars is probably the most explored planetary body, and even then there's still so much to know. We're not sure if there's even life, and water had just recently been sort of, kind of confirmed...

Heck, there could be life living right next to us and we wouldn't even know it. Don't get me started on the outer planets, and whatever lays beyond that...

To me the Solar System is ten times more interesting that way lays beyond it. It's so 'close' yet so little is known.

Nektonic said:
I agree. There are plenty of places in our solar system to set a story or film that haven't been seen on film yet because most science fiction and space operas make up imaginary planets that are in far off star systems. Nothing wrong with that either, just that the solar system is not used up for cool and interesting locales to drop some characters in.

That is what I liked about Moon and Sunshine. Sure they had some far fetched elements, but they did the best they could with presenting a somewhat reasonably believable environment within the confines of what the story demanded. Hard sci-fi is difficult on film, especially when trying to marry it with a high concept idea that will get the audience interested in actually watching the film. I suppose that is why there are more sci-fi novels than films set in the solar system and also not using FTL and stuff like that to get around.
Click to expand...

Though what frustrates me the most is that films or tv shows that travel to other planets, like Star Trek, tend to find very terrestrial planets. I understand there's some limitations, but how many bipedal humanoid aliens are there that have some main characteristic that derives itself from the complexities of humans? One is very promiscuous, one is very violent, one is very stoic and reposed... and these characteristics seem to be dominant in the entire species...

It needs to push the boundaries of what we know. I love how science fiction can suspend what you believe in, and how it plays with the mysteries of the unknown. That's why I love the solar system as a backdrop.
 
Jon Starr said:
Though what frustrates me the most is that films or tv shows that travel to other planets, like Star Trek, tend to find very terrestrial planets. I understand there's some limitations, but how many bipedal humanoid aliens are there that have some main characteristic that derives itself from the complexities of humans? One is very promiscuous, one is very violent, one is very stoic and reposed... and these characteristics seem to be dominant in the entire species...

It needs to push the boundaries of what we know. I love how science fiction can suspend what you believe in, and how it plays with the mysteries of the unknown. That's why I love the solar system as a backdrop.
Click to expand...

This is what I loved about Farscape. Because it was the Henson studios they created a lot of crazy aliens. Of course, they also were insanely expensive to produce...
 
I understand there's some limitations, but how many bipedal humanoid aliens are there that have some main characteristic that derives itself from the complexities of humans? One is very promiscuous, one is very violent, one is very stoic and reposed... and these characteristics seem to be dominant in the entire species...
Click to expand...

Boy, it's really difficult though to come up with something entirely different. How would we even begin to imagine personality traits that no one has ever experienced before? It's like trying to imagine what the other dimensions of M-theory would be like. Who can imagine what another dimension is like?! I'd love to be the guy who did it, but it's a very daunting task to say the least.

Also, I agree with with those moral philosophers who believe in universal morality (to a degree). That the Tao, or first precepts, or the laws of nature--whatever you wish to call them--are present everywhere in the universe among intelligent beings. I don't like when stories go against that adage. They never seem to work.
 
the idea that we will ever leave the solar system before we go extinct is just about laughable
Click to expand...

Boy do I agree with that. I know stories about interstellar travel are often fun though. I loved the ending to "2001 A Space Odyssey" (the book--not the movie), but that ending was more fantasy based, and that's why it worked. You can do just about anything in fantasyland. But to imagine that anyone anywhere will ever achieve interstellar travel is absurd. You may as well try to figure out how to toss a tin can across the Atlantic. There are certain laws of physics that no amount of brain power can overcome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top