PHYS 380R/FILM 373 – Science in Film
INSTRUCTORS: Dr. Sidney Perkowitz, Eddy Von Mueller
CONTACT: Perkowitz, physp@emory.edu
Von Mueller, emuelle@emory.edu
SCREENING: Wed., 6 – 8 pm, White Hall, Room 112
OFFICE HOURS: Wed, 4:15 – 5:45, Caribou Coffee
Fri, 11:30 – 2:00, Caribou Coffee
Or by appointment
TIME: T, TH, 2:30 – 3:45
COURSE DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: Even the wildest science fiction film has
hidden in it, somewhere, a nugget of real science, and such films often involve scientists as
characters. Analyzing and appreciating a science fiction film involves understanding it in
cinematic terms, as well as understanding its use of science – especially when the science
affects the way we live, relating to potential disasters such as global warming, playing on
widespread anxieties about infectious diseases and genetic manipulation, and sometimes
helping to shape public opinion and popular discourse.
In Science and Film we’ll look at a selection of films, mostly science fiction. We’ll
critically examine them as works of cinema, and as presentations of science, and explore
what these films tell us about the universe. We will also look at how such movies have
influenced our perception of how science is practiced and of scientists – from fictional Mad
and Martyred Scientists to “real” scientists whose lives and work have been committed to
film. Students taking this course will learn some science, from biology to astronomy, as they
become better at figuring out what makes a good science-based film and what makes a good
film, period.
TEXT: Sobchack, Screening Space: The American Science Fiction Film (selections)
Perkowitz, Hollywood Science: Movies, Science and the End of the World (manuscript
selections).
COURSE REQUIREMENTS:
Attendance: Attendance is mandatory. An attendance sheet will be circulated at the beginning
of each class. It is your responsibility to sign the attendance sheet. Late sign-ins will be
allowed at the instructor’s discretion. After your second unexcused absence, your final course
grade will be lowered by one half of one letter grade for each absence.
Participation: Your active and courteous engagement with the class is an important part of
the process. Participation will count for 10% of your final grade.
Exams: There will be a midterm exam, worth 25% of the course grade.
Critical Review: Based on the methods and approaches explored in class, students will select
a film not screened in its entirety during the course and execute a careful analysis of the use
(or abuse) of science in the film and the use of cinema to execute that project (i.e. how
elements of film form or technique are deployed to create the movie’s particular perspective
on or deployment of scientific issues, etc.). The critical review should be no less than 5
pages, typed and double spaced, and is worth 30% of the final course grade. It’s due in class
on April 20.
2
Film Journal: Students will comment thoughtfully and critically on SIX films over the
semester, 3 of them from class screenings, and 3 from the additional filmography listed for
each week of the course. Journals should be no less than 1½ pages long and are due no later
than 5:00 pm on the Friday of the week during which the film is screened or the topic
discussed.
You may, if you like, address in your journal entries some of the questions and issues
listed under the topic for the week. Each journal entry is worth 5% of the final grade. At least
three of these responses must be completed before the mid-term exam.
A 7th and final journal entry due on the last day of class, April 27, is also required.
The details are given in the course calendar. This entry is worth 5% of the final course grade.
Screenings: There will be a mandatory screening associated with the course Wednesday
evenings from 6:00 – 8:00 p.m. Attendance will be taken.
Course grading
ACTIVITY
Class participation
Critical review (due April 20)
Midterm
Film journal, 6 entries @ 5%
7th film journal entry, “best and worst”*
* See April 27 for details.
% FINAL
GRADE
10%
30
25
30
5
Jan. 19: Course Introduction
Screen: excerpts of Voyage des la Lune, La Hotel Electrico, Destination Moon
Jan. 24, 26: When Worlds Collide – Planet-Killers, Rogue Stars & Other Enemies
Astronomical
Read: Perkowitz, Chapter 3. Devastating Collisions
Screen: excerpts from Deep Impact, When Worlds Collide, Night of the Comet.
Screening Jan. 25: Armageddon
Question 1: There is now a body of solid science that can begin to predict the odds of
the Earth being hit by a cosmic object such as a comet, and can estimate the consequences of
a major impact event. Are the results in the movies exaggerated as to the frequency and
effects of collisions, or are they understated? Resources:
http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects/
http://www4.tpg.com.au/users/tps-seti/bioastr2002.pdf
http://www4.tpg.com.au/users/tps-seti/spacegd7.html#tsunamiimpact
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/tsunami_asteroid_030602.html
3
Jan 31, Feb 2: Worlds Gone Mad – (Un)Natural Disasters and Environmental Crises
Read: Perkowitz, Chapter 4. Our Violent Planet
Screen: excerpts from Soylent Green, Volcano, Waterworld.
Screening Feb. 1: The Day After Tomorrow
Question 2: Science, society (in the form of governments, institutions, industries and
communities), and nature are three vectors at work in many natural disaster movies. How do
these vectors intersect or interrelate in the film under discussion? Who is the villain, who is
the hero? Can science understand or master nature? Can society? Resources:
http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/17.htm
http://nationalacademies.org/onpi/06072005.pdf
http://www.gesource.ac.uk/hazards/timeline.html
http://www.exploratorium.edu/theworld/iceland/volcanoes.html
Feb 7, 9: The Third Horseman – Plagues, Pandemics & Viral Catastrophes
Read: Perkowitz, Chapter 6. Genes and Germs Gone Bad, Part I
Screen: excerpts from The Omega Man, The Andromeda Strain, Rabid, Panic in the
Streets
Screening Feb. 8: Outbreak
Question 3: With modern biomedicine, we can cure more diseases than ever, but we
can also make them deadlier than ever, and in our globally connected world, can easily
spread them. We may even have to worry about off–world disease. What are the chances of a
natural or man-made disease, or an alien disease, becoming a true world-wide pandemic?
Does the film realistically show the possibilities? Are biowarfare and bioterrorism now
mankind’s favored methods to self-destruct? Resources:
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/plague/
http://www.genomics.nl/genomics_momentum_2004/conference2004/the_moving_world/mo
nroe_pres_010904.pdf
http://cns.miis.edu/research/cbw/possess.htm
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvrd/spb/mnpages/dispages/ebola/qa.htm
Feb 14, 16: Alien Encounters I – The Invader Complex
Read: Perkowitz, Chapter 2. Alien Encounters
Screen: excerpts from The Thing From Another World, The War of the Worlds
(1953), The Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956, 1978)
Screening Feb. 15: War of the Worlds (2005)
Question 4: We don’t know if there’s life out there, but we do know some of the rules
that determine how life looks and operates. Does the film follow the known science of alien
life, or does it speculate without much scientific basis? Are the aliens malevolent? Are they
benign? Or are they merely responding to biological imperatives contrary to those of
humans? How does the film represent the alien on screen, i. e. how are special effects,
costuming, music, light, composition, etc. used to reveal the alien? What responses or
emotions do these representations evoke?
4
Feb 21, 23: Alien Encounters II – the Messiah Complex
Read: Perkowitz, Chapter 2. Alien Encounters
Screen: excepts from Starman, E. T., Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Screening Feb. 22: The Day the Earth Stood Still
Question 5: Are the aliens hostile, benign, or neither, and why? Whether they’re
benign or malevolent, the figure of the scientist is sometimes presented as a mediator or
ambassador between humanity and the aliens. Does the film present the scientists or the
scientific establishment as worthy of this position? Are they more worthy than governments
or ordinary individuals? How do scientists shape human encounters with alien life-forms?
Feb. 28, Mar. 2: The Movie Scientist I – Knights in White Coats
Read: (Tentative) Perkowitz, Chapter 9. Those Weird Scientists
Screen: excerpts from Rocketship X-M, Bram Stoker’s Dracula, The Beast from
20,000 Fathoms
Screening Mar. 1: Contact
Question 6: Does a “good” scientist in a film equate to a film with “good” science,
that is, a film that presents science correctly? In the film under discussion, are the scientist or
scientists not only “good” but heroic, that is, do they use science to produce heroic results?
What motivates the scientists to behave in good or heroic ways? In other words: is science
moral?
Mar. 7: The Movie Scientist II – the Madman with a Lab or A Weapon
Read: (Tentative) Perkowitz, Chapter 9. Those Weird Scientists
Screen: excepts from Metropolis, The Bride of the Monster, Frankenstein vs. The
Monster From Hell, Boys from Brazil
Screening Mar. 10: Dr. Strangelove
Question 7: Does a “bad ” scientist in a film equate to a film with “bad” science, that
is, a film that presents science incorrectly or with exaggerated outcomes? In the film under
discussion, are the scientists’ motives evil ones? What makes a scientist “mad,” that is, what
motivates him or her to behave in evil ways? Do motives matter when you weigh how
scientific results affect society? To what extent can or do scientists impose their own
morality or immorality on the things they create?
Mar. 9 – MID-TERM EXAM
Mar . 13, 17: Spring Break!
Mar. 21, 23: Smashing Atoms I – A-Bomb Nightmares
Read: Perkowitz, Chapter 5. Atoms Unleashed
Screen: excepts from Them, Godzilla, The Amazing Colossal Man, The War of the
Worlds (1953), On the Beach (2000)
Screening Mar. 22: On the Beach (1959)
Question 8: During the cold war, nuclear destruction was the dominant fear for
humanity. Atomic weaponry could produce enormous death tolls through direct blast and
through deadly radiation. Does the film under discussion correctly portray the horrific effects
5
of nuclear weaponry? Does it comment on the role scientists played in developing these
weapons, and discuss their morality in doing so?
Mar. 28, 30: Smashing Atoms II – Cinema For the Atomic Age
Read: Perkowitz, Chapter 5. Atoms Unleashed
Screen: excepts from The Sum of All Fears, The China Syndrome, Chain Reaction
Screening Mar. 29: Fat Man and Little Boy
Question 9: Along with the destructive capacity of atomic weaponry, there is the
promise of benefits to mankind such as non-polluting energy sources. Does the film under
discussion correctly portray the science behind these good outcomes? Does it spell out all the
consequences of supposedly beneficial uses of atomic energy? And is it science, society, or
some other set of institutions or policy makers who are portrayed as responsible for those
consequences?
Apr. 4, 6: Send in the Clones – Cinema of the Genomic Age
Read: Perkowitz, Chapter 6. Genes and Germs Gone Bad, Part II
Screen: excerpts from Jurassic Park, The Sixth Day, Boys From Brazil, The Island of
Dr. Moreau (1996).
Screening Apr. 5: Gattaca
Question 10: The world changed when the structure of DNA was discovered in 1953.
Over 50 years later, we’re grappling with what genetic engineering and cloning
mean for humanity. Does the film under discussion realistically present the power of genetic
manipulation? Does it show desirable, or undesirable, outcomes? Does the story use genetic
issues to tell us something about the human soul or spirit? Are genetic issues used
metaphorically or symbolically, to “stand in” for more immediate social or ideological
concerns?
Apr. 11, 13: Of Men and Machines I – Artificial Intelligence and Synthetic Souls
Read: Perkowitz, Chapter 7. The Computers Take Over
Screen: A.I., War Games, Electric Dreams, 2001: A Space Odyssey
Screening Apr. 12: Colossus: The Forbin Project
Question 11: Now that we’re all dependent on computers, we can start worrying
about whether they’re smarter than we are. What does the film say about the intelligence,
consciousness, and emotions of mechanical minds? Are these realistically portrayed in terms
of today’s technology? What cinematic effects are used to make the computers and robots
seem alive? Are there moral issues in creating artificial minds that interact with humans?
Resource: Sidney Perkowitz, Digital People (National Academy of Sciences, 2004)
6
Apr. 18, 20: Of Men & Machines II – Robots and Cyborgs in Cinema
Read: Perkowitz, Chapter 7. The Computers Take Over
Screen: excerpts from The Undersea Kingdom, The Forbidden Planet, Westworld,
RoboCop, I, Robot
Screening Apr. 19: Terminator
Question 12: An intelligent computer doesn’t have a body that can carry out physical
actions, but an intelligent robot, or a cyborg – a combination of man and machine – does.
What difference does this make in interactions with humans? Does the film under discussion
want us to believe the artificial body is really human, or only human-like? How does it show
the difference between human actions and robotic or cyborg-like actions? Are there moral
issues in creating such artificial creatures?
Resource: Sidney Perkowitz, Digital People (National Academy of Sciences, 2004)
Apr. 25: Reel Science – the Scientist Biopic
Read: (Tentative) Perkowitz, Chapter 9. Those Weird Scientists
Screen: Gorillas in the Mist, Dr. Erlich’s Magic Bullet, Infinity, Beautiful Mind
Screening Apr. 26: Kinsey
Question 13: Films about real scientists are different from science fiction films. They
have to present true personal, biographical, and historical elements along with the real
science that made that particular scientist famous. Does the film under discussion balance all
these elements, or does it heavily weigh one side or the other? How much does it fictionalize
real events, and is the fictionalization justified in the service of telling a good story? Does the
real scientist in the film resemble any fictional scientists in film?
PLEASE NOTE! You have one more assignment due for the last class, April 27. Read
the details below.
Apr. 27: Last Class – The Best and the Worst
Read: -- No assignment
Screen: -- Eddy’s and Sidney’s personal best and worst.
Screening: -- No screening.
Required assignment for the last class, April 27: Among all the films shown wholly
or in part this semester, pick two: the one that does the best job of telling a science-based
story, and the one that does the worst. Your criteria might include plot, characterization,
quality of the acting, production values such as special effects and music, accuracy and
believability of the science and of projections about how the science affects people and
society, and more. Write one or two paragraphs defending each choice, and bring it in to
class on April 27 for collection and grading. Be prepared to talk about your choices in an
open class discussion.