JURASSIC WORLD: SCREAM . . .THEN RUN

I didn’t go to see the latest installment of the Jurassic Park film franchise expecting to have a problem with its philosophical approach. I expected Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom, helmed by Spanish director J.A. Bayona, to provide me with plenty of popcorn-worthy thrills as roaring dino-creatures pursued greedy humans. In that I was not disappointed. It is an action franchise, after all.

But this particular film introduced a new way of thinking about the creatures cloned from the DNA in the blood in the belly of that mosquito trapped in amber way back in 1993’s Jurassic Park. And here Jeff Goldblum’s mathematician character and I parted ways with everyone else in the film.

[Spoiler alert! Sorry, there is just no way to talk about this without giving things away!]

Up until now, it’s been an underlying assumption of the Jurassic Park universe that cloning the dinosaurs in the first place was a dangerous mistake. Dr. Hammond (Richard Attenborough) and his assistant Dr. Wu (B.D.Wong—who reappears in this film) were the stereotypical mad scientists, over-reaching in the name of science, although with every good intention. In previous films they took precautions, of course, like making sure all their little dinos were female so they can’t reproduce. And, at first, everyone was charmed by the wonder of it all—seeing dinosaurs in their natural habitat for the first time in millions of years, yadda, yadda. 

But, then, as Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum) so aptly puts it, there was “the running and the screaming.” Not just once, but, so far, five times (in the original film; The Lost World: Jurassic Park; Jurassic Park III; Jurassic World; and Jurassic World: The Lost Kingdom). Once might ask, will we never learn?

Apparently not.

Because in this latest film a volcano is set to destroy Isla Nublar, site of the original Jurassic World theme park, an event which would kill all the remaining dinosaurs. Dr. Ian Malcolm (Goldblum), in testimony before the U. S. Senate, argues that maybe this is a good thing. (One is reminded of Captain Kirk’s vehement statement about the Klingons facing a similar fate: “Let them die!”) The mathematician is asked whether he’s suggesting that God is taking a hand. He shrugs and demurs, but says maybe He was just trying to fix what we had screwed up by messing in His business.

In the end the Senate decides not to act, BUT Hammond’s one-time partner Benjamin Lockwood agrees to help, and off we go to SAVE THE DINOSAURS! (Oh, yes, they are to go to another island where they will be isolated from everything else (sure) and no theme park this time!) Does anyone else have a problem with this?

Certainly not Jurassic World’s former Operations Director Claire Dearing (Bryce Dallas Howard) and hunky raptor trainer Owen Grady (Chris Pratt). They are all about saving the dinosaurs, especially Owen’s raised-from-the-egg-raptor, Blue. It’s not until Claire and Owen get knocked in the head and almost left behind while the dinos are brutally corralled that our heroes begin to get an idea that something is not right.

Of course, the dinosaurs are not headed for their idyllic island, but rather for auction to the highest bidder. The evil scientists and a greedy assistant to the dying Lockwood have joined up to “weaponize” and commercialize the innocent creatures. Claire and Owen, aided by Blue and some surprise allies, must save them from this horrible fate!

Unfortunately, this involves MUCH more running and screaming. And, in the end, a decision that violates every environmental and ethical choice made in every Jurassic Park franchise movie so far, not to mention every “monster” movie since the beginning of cinematic time. When once again faced with the wrenching decision to let the dinosaurs die a quick death or release them to the “wilds” of Oregon, the adults in the room rightly make the hard choice to save our current biosphere. But a child pushes the button that allows the dinosaurs—eleven species of them—to escape into the world. Because they’re innocent. And “clones, like me.”

Yes, okay, fine. A rattlesnake is “innocent,” too, but I don’t want one in my kitchen. Much less a three-story-tall creature that has been extinct for 65 million years and can eat its weight in steer beef every two hours.

The guiding principle of “mad scientist” science fiction, from its beginnings in Frankenstein to this day, is that just because we can do something doesn’t mean we should. In the end, even Frankenstein’s monster preferred death to life in a world where he didn’t belong. Perhaps we can’t expect a little girl to consider the consequences of her action. But we can certainly expect the writers of this film to consider them. Michael Crichton (who wrote the original Jurassic Park and was a doctor and an environmentalist) would certainly have considered them. But, in this case, I think the writers are only thinking of the sequels.

FAREWELL (FOR NOW) TO THE EXPANSE

This week saw the season finale for SyFy Network’s excellent SF seriesThe Expanse, and what an ending it was! Lots of edge-of-your-seat action and character redemption, along with the mind-bending conceptualization the show is known for. Because the show is moving to Amazon Prime next season, this finale had to wrap up the current plot arc. I must say the writers did so in a very satisfying way. I, for one, will have to make do with this ending, since I’m not a Prime customer, but I do appreciate the care with which the show’s creators left me behind.

Cheers, Donna

The Expanse: Seven Reasons Why You Should be Watching This Show

First, I'm going to make a guess.

You're here because you love science fiction in more ways than just books.

If so, trust me, if you're not already doing so, you should really check out The Expanse, SyFy Channel's original series that is just starting its second season. Why? Because it's everything good science fiction should be--told within the framework of a darkly imagined future, with terrific characters, factual science (which is neither boring nor dumbed-down) and very high stakes.

For booklovers, this television series was based on a series of books by James S. A. Corey, which is actually the writing team of Ty Franck and Daniel Abraham. I got to see Ty Franck in action with a panel of Caltech scientists and this author can hold his own with the most brilliant minds. Getting it right was very important to him.

The series "went deep" with the books, pulling in characters from connected novellas to round out the cast and the story. I haven't read the books yet. I'll save that for a time after this series ends--which hopefully will be in the distant future. This one's a keeper.

Some describe it as "Game of Thrones meets Battlestar Galactica" and though the tag fits it's also a little superficial. I haven't fallen this much in love with a sci-fi series since the demise of Defying Gravity, which was never given a chance to find an audience due to network politics and a DOA time slot late on Sunday night. 

I really don't want to see The Expanse fall into the same pit, so I've made it my mission to spread the word. If I were ever to write straight sci-fi, this would be the kind of story I'd want to tell.

Here are some insights from the author team, because what writer out there doesn't want to know what it's like to stand on the deck of a ship you created on a page years before? (Hey, we can all dream, can't we?) They also discuss their system for collaborating. (Cool insights for authors, but readers may prefer to skip it.)



I could give you a hundred reasons why this show rises above the rest, but instead, I'll key in on just seven things that make The Expanse so remarkable. And I'll do it with clips so you can get an actual taste for this world.

Number 7.
The future. It's 200 years from now, but a time that still reflects much of the here and now. The slang has changed and the language has evolved, but the basic needs, desires and struggles of humanity are the same as we begin to colonize the solar system. In this clip, the cast explains the complex world-building behind The Expanse.



The wide diversity of the cast is just one element that seems dead-on. As we start to colonize our solar system, I believe it will be a global effort and that means the colonies will reflect global diversity. The future won't belong to, as Ty Franck put it during a Caltech panel discussion, "white guys in space." And true to that thinking, this is not a "white guys in space" series. In fact, it's also not a "guys in space" series. It's shot through with strong, tough-minded female characters--engineers, politicians, military officers and even marine gunnies.

Number 6.
The characters. Holden--reluctant leader. Miller--jaded cop. Chrisjen--driven politician. Naomi--brilliant engineer. Amos--mechanic and bad-ass loose cannon. Alex--ice trawler pilot with a eye-brow raising past. The story begins with three story threads--Holden's, Miller's and Chrisjen's--that become closely interwoven as events unfold. Julie Andromeda Mao is a minor character who creates the glue for all the plot threads. Detective Miller, the cop from asteroid Ceres, is assigned to find her because a missing person report was filed by her fabulously wealthy father, and Miller ends up chasing her halfway across the solar system. Solving the case is not his primary objective. She is. Holden, a newly drafted Executive Officer on an aging ice trawler is soon on her trail too, but for different reasons. What happens to Julie Mao (no spoilers, but....OMG, wow!) will create huge political complications for Chrisjen. (Who, BTW, has one of the most spectacular wardrobes ever created for television.)

To get a better sense of these multi-layered personas, here's an introduction in the actor's own words.



Oh, and let's not forget Roci. More about her in Number #4.

Number 5.
Realism. The title of this clip is Zero G Gunfight. Two hundred years in the future no method of generating reliable artificial gravity has been invented yet. There's some gravity generated due to movement, such as thrust gravity, spin gravity, etc., but much of the time, it's just plain no gravity. So what do they do to avoid floating about? Two words. Mag boots. Sometimes the gravity cuts out unexpectedly--like in the middle of a firefight--and then they need to have knowledge of the laws of physics to save their butts. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. James Holden uses his head--and his boot--to work through this dilemma.



The production teams' devotion to realism was also highlighted in the Caltech panel. They actually have a person responsible to ensure the starfield shown in the background of the space scenes depicts the correct stars and orientation to the particular point in space where the action happens. Has anyone even thought of that before for a sci-fi television series?

Yes, amazing realism.

Number 4.
Attention to detail. Here's one example. What do you do after you inherit a Martian gunship from a vaporized destroyer? Disguise it. Stat! Starting with the transponder that identifies the ship.



James Holden explains that Rocinante means "work horse" in Spanish. But it also carries a meaning in popular folklore. Rocinante was the name of Don Quixote's horse when he went on his impossible quest and dreamed his impossible dream.

Coincidence? I think not. One of the episodes is titled Windmills.

Number 3.
Seamless science. Case in point--Flip and Burn: High G Ship Maneuver. They get the science right, but still make it suspenseful and fascinating. No, Virginia, "suspenseful science" is not an oxymoron, and you don't necessarily have to blow things up to make a scene dramatic. (Though there is plenty of that, too.)



This is one of my fave scenes to date (but there are probably too many to count).

So what's "the juice"? In the "Science Behind The Expanse" panel at Caltech, the writers explained that high G events such as what James Holden called a "flip & burn"--or flipping the ship around to fire the engines in a new direction, or merely to slow down by counteracting acceleration--refer to the heavy gravity produced by the thrust of a starship pushing the passengers toward the rear of the vessel. This causes the blood vessels to stress and capillaries to burst, especially in the eyes. "The juice" is a formula that makes the arteries and blood vessels more elastic during the time the ship is moving forward rapidly in space, exerting huge pressure on the human body. Fascinating stuff.

Number 2.
Sexy times! Yup. There's sexy times in the asteroid belt--some of it in Zero G. But sorry, no video! The only clip I could find was overdubbed with cheap porno music, so I'll spare you that. You may have gotten a glimpse of Holden's sexy times in the Number 6 characters video above. The relationship is short-lived, but very, very important for Holden's character and for an understanding of what drives him on this quest to tilt with windmills.

Number 1.
Expect the unexpected. This is the pivotal scene in the first episode that sets everything in motion. Our prime crew (James Holden, Naomi, Amos, Alex and the medic) is sent out in the Knight, one of the shuttles from ice trawler Canterbury (aka "The Cant") to investigate a distress signal originating from a derelict ship called the Scapuli.

They board the Scapuli to investigate and THEN...well, just see for yourself.



If you're not convinced by this point that you must see this show, then it's probably not for you. (Move along, move along...)

But to quote a few hundred thousand rogue belters, "Remember the Cant!"

____________________________________

P.S. I've reference the Caltech panel on "The Science Behind The Expanse" several times in this blog. If you're interested in viewing it, you can find it on YouTube (just click the title above to be linked). It runs about an hour and a half and discusses the Epstein drive and many other topics in more detail. Many thanks to fellow SFR author Sabine Priestley for bringing it to my attention in a Facebook post.

Have a great week!

THREE REVIEWS: DEVILS AND BELTERS AND WHALES, OH, MY!

Surprise! I’m NOT going to talk about STAR WARS today! I’ll leave that to True Fan Laurie on Monday, when I’m sure she will be eager to share her impressions of the new film.

Instead I have a few mini-reviews of some excellent film fare that is other-than-STAR WARS. Perhaps as a side benefit of SW mania, The Syfy Channel is on fire right now with a galaxy full of hot new suns being born every few months or so.

I mentioned the three-night mini-series CHILDHOOD’S END last week. Arthur C. Clarke’s apocalyptic tale fared well under the direction of Nick Hurran and screenwriter Matthew Graham. At least they did the story justice, despite a few minor tweaks, and stuck with the main premise of the book, as I remember it. In other words **SPOILER ALERT** no happy ending for humanity as we know it.The Big Reveal was great, with the aliens' horns, hoofs and tail in splendid display against a gape-mouthed human audience.  Despite a failure to do much with an important secondary character (a religious woman who struggles with the aliens’ presence) and a major slowdown in the second episode, I’d count this as a success.

But, oh, boy, the show that followed it? Wow! THE EXPANSE is gritty near-future SF noir at its best. Earth is unified and prosperous under UN control. Mars is colonized and powerful under military rule. Earth and Mars are on the brink of war. “Belters,” unorganized and scrambling for every credit, mine the asteroid belt for ice and minerals. They’re caught in the middle. Water and air are resources worth killing for and conflict is inevitable. Add a rich, rebellious Earth girl who disappears under strange circumstances, a down-on-his-luck Belter detective hired to find her, what’s left of a Belter ice crew snatched up by a Martian cruiser and OOOH, YUMMY! Even if the effects, acting and writing weren’t so good, I’d be in. But they are! If you missed the show’s premiere, you can binge-watch the first four episodes on Syfy OnDemand.

My final mini-review is not about science fiction at all. It’s not about romance either. But it is about the writing process, in a way. And also Chris Hemsworth.

In 1820, the whaling ship Essex out of Nantucket, Rhode Island, was stove by a whale in the literal middle of the Pacific Ocean and sank, leaving its captain, first mate and several crewmen stranded in three small boats. The phrase “stove by a whale” means not much to us in this day and age. No whale has yet tried to attack any of the little boats that cruise along observing them off the Pacific coast or in Hawaii. But this whale, said to be from 85 to 100 feet long, made a run at a wooden ship of roughly the same length and knocked a hole in the hull, then came around, got up to speed and did it again, smashing the timbers to pieces. The ship’s crew had just enough time to salvage a few essentials—sails, water casks, hard tack—before the Essex went under.

At the time of the attack, the whalers of the Essex were hunting in a pod of whales—females and their calves, males circling the outside. Was this the alpha male protecting the pod? (Not that whales are known to have alphas.) Or, as these God-fearing men thought, was it the wrath of God himself, vengeance for some wrong they had done?

IN THE HEART OF THE SEA, in theaters now, directed by Ron Howard and starring Chris Hemsworth as a heroic—and thoughtful—first mate Owen Chase, tells the story of the Essex, with a little dramatic embellishment. But not as much as the original dramatic license taken by one Herman Melville, who adapted the tale in 1851 for his novel Moby Dick, or the White Whale. What makes Melville’s adaptation an epic literary masterpiece, rather than a fascinating story of survival against nature, is how he translated the experience of these particular men into something universal about humanity.

I’ve read part of the book that IN THE HEART OF THE SEA is based on (I’d like to finish it, too!) and it’s intriguing as history. But Melville’s novel is transcendent. The beginning—“Call me Ishmael.” The ending—“Only I am left to tell the tale.” The characters—Ahab (who will forever look like Gregory Peck to me), Starbuck, Queequeg, Pip. The description of the whale—white as the snow, with a notch in his tail and a wrinkle over his brow, crisscrossed with scars and the remnants of harpoons where he’d been struck before by lost whalers, and he corkscrewed as he breached. (All of this is noted in the new film, too, by the way—a nice touch.) And the theme, drummed into generations of high schoolers—man vs. God and the results of that defiance. 

Ron Howard’s device in his film is to have Melville pull the story of the Essex out of the youngest survivor of the disaster, now grown old in Nantucket. He’s heard the story and become obsessed with writing it. But by the end of the old man’s tale, Melville has seen the elements that will make his novel what Nathaniel Hawthorne later called “the American epic.” The irony is that the book sold poorly in Melville’s lifetime, a critical success, but a commercial failure. The white whale sank him, too.

So, enjoy your weekend at the movies, STAR WARS fans! If you can’t get into the show, you can always go next door and see IN THE HEART OF THE SEA or stay home and binge-watch THE EXPANSE. 

The next two Fridays bring us Christmas and New Year’s Day, so I won’t be posting again until January 8, 2016. Enjoy the holidays, everyone!

Cheers, Donna

ANXIOUS FANS--DISTRACT YOURSELF WITH CHILDHOOD'S END!

Of course the SF world is all atwitter with the upcoming release of the new STAR WARS movie on December 18, but The Syfy Channel has something to keep fans distracted while they wait for the Big Day. Starting Monday, December 14 at 8:00 p.m. EST and running for three consecutive nights, the network adapts Arthur C. Clarke’s classic SF novel Childhood’s End for the small screen. 

Take a look at the trailer HERE:

 

This tale of “beneficial” aliens who create a Golden Age of peace and prosperity on Earth, only to exact a terrible price, was Clarke’s first successful novel, published in 1953. It has been the inspiration for numerous other stories, teleplays and movies, including CHILDREN OF THE DAMNED in 1960, and Clarke’s own 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY in 1968. (Some might include any film showing massive motherships hovering over the cities of the world, or any episode of STAR TREK that kept populations somnambulant under a computer in that count.) It has become a solid pillar of the genre, a must-read for any science fiction newbie.

I first read the book as part of a course taught by my SF mentor and philosophy professor, Dr. Scott Crom, at Beloit College. I remember gasping, then laughing in delight, when I got to the Big Reveal of the novel. (No spoilers here. If you haven’t done so, you’ll have to read it for yourself, or watch the mini-series!) Suffice it to say, Clarke—like my favorite, Rod Serling, and others of his day—only served to encourage my basically suspicious nature. Be careful what you wish for, they said, and trust no one!

Clarke’s idea has been reworked so many times it is no longer new. Perhaps it wasn’t even new in 1953. But his expression of it was shiny enough to earn him a Retro Hugo Award for Best Novel nomination in 2004.

The novel has long been considered impossible to film, largely because of its ending, I imagine. And The Syfy Channel may not be the best venue for an adaptation. The network’s creative efforts are uneven, at best. Still, I am excited to see what they will do with this favorite of my early SF reading years. And, besides, what else is there to do while we wait for December 18?

Cheers, Donna