tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20064949460004042002024-03-19T02:49:26.626-07:00The Artist's SignatureJohn Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.comBlogger26125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-35225343780812247152011-08-06T13:11:00.001-07:002011-08-06T13:11:52.218-07:00More Cosmos than Cosmos?<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/05/arts/television/fox-plans-new-cosmos-with-seth-macfarlane-as-a-producer.html?_r=2">link</a>John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-59665162060587689842009-11-20T09:00:00.001-08:002021-07-26T07:34:17.628-07:00'The Artist's Signature' - Pages & Art<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTc72QnANWEjZe5aqQDHwlxnw7e3khTmS8z7y75IbPdpHk7utFznxUguW4DIxKuBUxuplTjl7QWWVySd4bCkKS3up14KAjhtmRNd1T7TE-FOJSvJo9id6eBR0Nz4eMfmvhPvIy77KdxPg/s1600-h/opening+shot+01.jpg"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTc72QnANWEjZe5aqQDHwlxnw7e3khTmS8z7y75IbPdpHk7utFznxUguW4DIxKuBUxuplTjl7QWWVySd4bCkKS3up14KAjhtmRNd1T7TE-FOJSvJo9id6eBR0Nz4eMfmvhPvIy77KdxPg/s640/opening+shot+01.jpg" /></a><br />
<br />
The above image is my<i><b> title plate/opening shot</b></i>. And the one below is the <b><i>beach of the imagination</i></b>. I often find that my concept art enhances my writing, and vice versa. <br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgz_S6mmRIMqC751PA_optexOdBYM_W9U91FBH9eYZzaxqa0wEFhdDdgWMfawBYctGGL_Ld3Kwpwmzed9r8ALVlKNQwyugNUFIdvoH_G6LVa5HEoDpb-kD9zpVgFlfJlFEtm6_itARS8nE/s1600/atoll+01.jpg"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgz_S6mmRIMqC751PA_optexOdBYM_W9U91FBH9eYZzaxqa0wEFhdDdgWMfawBYctGGL_Ld3Kwpwmzed9r8ALVlKNQwyugNUFIdvoH_G6LVa5HEoDpb-kD9zpVgFlfJlFEtm6_itARS8nE/s640/atoll+01.jpg" /></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/22808834/TAS-Online-01" style="display: block; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 12px auto 6px; text-decoration: underline;" title="View TAS Online 01 on Scribd">TAS Online 01</a> <object align="middle" classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=9,0,0,0" height="500" id="doc_404248263923399" name="doc_404248263923399" nbsp="" width="100%"> <param name="movie" nbsp="" value="http://d1.scribdassets.com/ScribdViewer.swf?document_id=22808834&access_key=key-1wr1i5onqrf4kcoxw02q&page=1&version=1&viewMode=list" />
<param name="quality" value="high" />
<param name="play" value="true" />
<param name="loop" value="true" />
<param name="scale" value="showall" />
<param name="wmode" value="opaque" />
<param name="devicefont" value="false" />
<param name="bgcolor" value="#ffffff" />
<param name="menu" value="true" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" />
<param name="salign" value="" />
<param name="mode" value="list" />
<embed align="middle" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" bgcolor="#ffffff" devicefont="false" height="500" loop="true" menu="true" mode="list" name="doc_404248263923399_object" play="true" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" quality="high" salign="" scale="showall" src="http://d1.scribdassets.com/ScribdViewer.swf?document_id=22808834&access_key=key-1wr1i5onqrf4kcoxw02q&page=1&version=1&viewMode=list" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%" wmode="opaque"></embed> </object> <br />
<br />
I have quite a bit more written than this, nearly two-hundred pages of script, with around fifty pages of background and techy stuff, not to mention a lot of concept art. I know two-hundred pages is a pretty long movie. But I write everything down, and toss the awful bits later. I have a solid beginning, and a terrific ending. I just need to flesh out the middle a little more and I've got a pile of paper that no one will ever look at twice.<br />
<br />
I think a movie should be a unified whole, both verbally and visually. I've worked out a way of incorporating pi into the basic design motif of the entire film. <br />
<br />
My take on a film version of 'Contact' is that the 'download' should constitute the body of the movie. Start with Ellie on the beach, more or less, visualize her unwound memories, and then return to 'reality' about three-quarters the way in. This allows far more freedom than a straight linear telling. I can jump around in time the way a mind at rest naturally meanders from place to place. <br />
<br />
It occurs to me that Zemeckis may have been trying to do exactly this with the eye 'pull out' and 'push in' at the beginning and near the end of the film. But subtlety is relative, and in this case is lost in background noise.<br />
<br />
Anyway, I think this material deserves better.<br />
<br />John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-66070531380608999542009-11-14T17:44:00.004-08:002021-07-26T11:16:14.293-07:00Contact Apologetics: An Open Letter to Whom it May Concern<div class="separator" style="clear: both; font-family: inherit; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_hXJRc4M_jwhT_Bynxqz7OCroKZ6YRokTiue2aJBbwR46iZEEwjGogGtxd0EMBXtpTUy5_qy5Huy39VNfguL0GXmkaHG6dkQdx3OrwQAOckVPgKECA0htxKn-reOUZLuRhUjZR8jYyFU/s1600/sagan+circle+002.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_hXJRc4M_jwhT_Bynxqz7OCroKZ6YRokTiue2aJBbwR46iZEEwjGogGtxd0EMBXtpTUy5_qy5Huy39VNfguL0GXmkaHG6dkQdx3OrwQAOckVPgKECA0htxKn-reOUZLuRhUjZR8jYyFU/s400/sagan+circle+002.jpg" /></a></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<span style="font-size: x-large;">T</span>o mark the anniversary of Carl Sagan’s 75th birthday, the big man was remembered publicly by those many people who worked with him and knew him best. I especially appreciate the personal remembrances as I have been a great fan of Carl Sagan since Cosmos in 1980. </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
But I am less appreciative of, and far more resentful and confused by the glowing references I heard regarding the movie Contact.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
So I’d like to ask a few questions…<b> </b></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<b>Is there a cut of this film of which I am unaware?</b></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
I love movies. I am aware that film crews shoot more scenes than appear in the final release. And owing to the flexibility of the market, director/writer/extended version cuts are often available with the original artistic vision restored. This is especially true of films with a richness of content that exceed the imaginative limitations of a studio.<br />
<br />
I’ve seen Contact a few dozen times now and I honestly don’t know what warrants such universal praise among Sagan devotees. Maybe it because he died too young and so close to the film's release and people are just being polite. <br />
<br />But it's been some time now and I have yet to see a re-edit, re-release, special edition, tenth anniversary, redeaux... something that would indicate this movie was anything but a lowest-bidder contract job. There are no deleted scenes, no penetrating commentary. No one bothers to deconstruct its hidden meaning, its symbolism, its camera-work, because there is nothing to deconstruct. No one cares because there is nothing to care about.<br />
<br />
What Contact lacked in content it made up for in superficiality. </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></div><div style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<b>Are there other people <strike>out there in the universe</strike> down here on Earth? </b></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
I was under the distinct impression from episode 13 of Cosmos that ‘We are one planet.' But the radio broadcasts in the opening scene of Contact are from almost exclusively American sources. </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
Well, are we one planet or not?</div>
<a name='more'></a><div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
Forget for a moment that the scale and position of astronomical objects in the opening scene is all wrong. Never mind the radio/TV signals themselves regress in time too fast compared to the passing astronomical objects. Forget all that. I know America is the greatest country in the nation, but is it also the only nation in the world? Is the message actually a person to person call intended just for the Americans? Or, do other people and cultures get to exist in this kitbash? Perhaps are other languages featured in the opening for the foreign film market?<br />
<br />
Of course not. </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
For pity sake, the rushing radio broadcasts in 'Who Speaks
for Earth' were multi-ethnic. You'd think Contact could at least get this one thing right. After all, it had already been done by the same author. </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
There is a sickening ethnocentrism in this film. The ‘in defense of science accuracy in film’ front might spot the logistical errors, but I've never once heard anyone identify the real problem.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
The very first scene ignores Sagan's philosophy that we are one planet. They get it wrong from the very first shot. </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<b>Are people inspired by this ‘heroine of science?’ Is Ellie Arroway an ideal inspirational figure for rational people everywhere? And… is she a beacon of hope that will steer the youth of our nation toward a career in the sciences?</b></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
I sure don’t see how.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
This movie teaches potential scientists and skeptics one thing…</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
If you’re curious about the physical world, if you dare to challenge conventional wisdom, if you’re lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time to make the most profound discovery in human history… you will be thrown to the wolves. And not even the beings who reached out to you will back you up. You’ll end up a paria and a laughing stock to everyone but the most credulous, and religious. </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
It is not poignant to be trampled upon, ignored, marginalized, and made the object of ridicule. It’s just sad. The winner of this conflict between science and irrational vested interests is clearly religion and political opportunism. It pisses me off that Arroway is made a martyr in the film because she clearly has the tools to make a difference in the book. </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br />
But what does that matter when not even Arroway herself has the courage of her convictions. She's spineless in the face of political opposition, and she's embarrassed by her atheism. As a result she's easily crushed by the inquisition. She's left a slobbering cry baby whose only recourse is to make tearful appeals of personal revelation. </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
Who wrote this? Where's the thousand yard stare? Where's the Sagan I knew in Cosmos?</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<b>And what’s with the shitty dialog?</b></div>
<br />
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
I’m just spitballing here, but let me give it a shot…</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i>Joss: Do you believe in god, Doctor Arroway?</i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i>Ellie: No. </i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i>Joss: I beg your par...?</i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<i><span style="font-family: inherit;">Ellie: No, I most certainly do not believe in god. And before you ask I don’t believe in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny either. I'm a scientist. Science has revealed to us that the universe is a natural </span>phenomenon<span style="font-family: inherit;">. And that we're the product of eons of material forces interacting in nature. </span></i><br />
<br />
<i style="font-family: inherit;">Pause. Blank stare.</i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i>Fat Old Brit: Doctor Arroway, ninety-five percent of the world’s population believe in a supreme being of some kind.</i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i>Ellie: Are you suggesting that these important matters be decided by an opinion poll in People Magazine and not hard evidence?</i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i>Shock and dismay, followed by…</i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<i>Ellie: Okay… As a professional scientist I suppose I must remain neutral on this point because such a thing can never be absolutely proved or disproved. But as a free thinking woman with a heart and a brain and a mind I can tell you that I am a scarlet capital letter ‘A’-theist… Why? Because magic is for children. </i><i>Because blasphemy is character building. And because the only sacred truth is that there are no sacred truths.</i><i> But mostly, <b>mostly</b>, because I find the idea of compulsory love upon the threat of eternal torture inhuman and repulsive… <br />…Does that answer your question? </i></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">Was that so hard? </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<b>Who did Zemeckis have to frak to get this gig?</b></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
The director of this butchery, Robert Zemeckis, is a whore to special effects. To him every other consideration is secondary. He had absolutely no business getting near this material. Case in point: The mirror trick. Ooo, fancy. And pointless. It in no way contributes to, or advances the story. It's a gimmick. <br />
<br />
And how did Tom Skerritt, an otherwise fine actor, get away with emphasizing the title of the movie… in the movie? It's the laziest trick in the book and no director worth his salt would have allowed it. </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
Is it possible no decent director wanted this job because Sagan
insisted on being so close to it? I mean as good as he was, sometimes
the last thing a movie needs is a doting over-protective parent. Maybe, but probably not. This movie needed a Kubrick, or a Gilliam, or perhaps the film's original director, George "Mad Max" Miller; not a faux-Spielberg hack. </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<b>Who loves you, baby?</b></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
I love Carl Sagan. I love my cat. But Sagan was not so great that he could do no wrong. And my cat often barfs on my bedspread. Praise of Contact by the scientific/skeptical community is misplaced adoration of Sagan himself, and is dishonest. </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
I have to admit I felt it, too. I wanted to like Contact, badly. And not simply because this treatment is all I'm likely to get. My own pass of the material will probably never see an audience. I wanted to like it because Sagan himself supervised the project. I thought... Carl won't let me down. He never has before. And with Foster in the lead, how could it go wrong? Even now I can almost force myself to find some glimmer of meaning, of hope, of...</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
Nah... this was a hatchet job.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<b>What would Jesus do?</b></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
Who cares?</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div><span style="font-family: inherit;">
This movie is far too deferential to religion. Contact needed several punchup sessions to expose the absurdities of faith with humor, reason, and withering, blinding sarcasm when </span>necessary<span style="font-family: inherit;">.</span></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<b>Who cares?</b></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
I do.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">I care because Contact because Contact so clearly doesn’t care about itself. Movies ARE vehicles by which science and reason can be made exciting and engaging, but only if the movies are exciting and engaging. The mere fact that Sagan wrote it, and Foster starred in it, and Zemeckis directed it, and Druyan supervised it, and the geekoid elite worship it, is not enough.</span></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">This film is bad. This film isn’t important, because it doesn’t make itself important. Science is important because it improves human life and understanding. Film is important because it reaches people. Put the two together. <br />
<br />
This film could have stood next to 2001 (especially 2001), Solaris, Star Trek: The Motion Picture, The Day the Earth Stood Still, Blade Runner... really important classics that enrich life and advance culture. It could have been a film that endures and grows in importance over time. Instead, it's an 'instant classic,' in the style of instant oatmeal. <br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<b>Where’s the drama?</b></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
If Sagan was going for a Hypatia-like heroine, he should have gone for broke and found a way to kill her off, like I am. If he wanted to create family tension, better known as drama, he should have left the dead mother and dick stepfather in, like I am. If he wanted to end the film with an ending, he should have written... oh, I don't know... an ending, like I am.<br />
<br />
But Ellie can neither die or fade away into 'healthy grant' oblivion because she still has work to do. She has to find a way to redeem both herself, and the planet. The book aliens give her that. The movie aliens hang her out to dry.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
Where's the payoff? Where’s the redemption? So what if Joss and the blue-rinse brigade believe her? Big deal. In science, mere belief isn’t what counts, and in movies something actually has to happen.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
But there’s no ending, no clincher, no drama, just… For Carl, and roll credits.<b> </b></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<b>Where’s the science?</b></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
Remember that ‘gotcha’ moment when Joss asks Ellie to prove scientifically she loved her father, and Ellie just sits there staring back at him like a dumb shit? Yeah, I don’t get that. What kind of rationalist can't cut through that? Is this really what counts as an argument stopper in an alleged socially conscious science movie?</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
Who we love is a matter of opinion. Heliocentrism is not. Simple. Anticipating a counter argument is the writer's job. This should have been a slam dunk. </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
It is NOT the most important thing for each of us to search for our own answers to the big questions about the physical world. All answers to such things are not equally valid. This is Fox News pandering. </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
And another thing, there is no such thing as 'technology rights' when the technology is falling from the sky. The opening scene is logistically and ethnocentrically wrong. The first contact scenario is outdated. Instead of a cool space-based retirement home for Hadden, we get a rusty tin can; Mir. Instead of a faster than light journey through the galaxy, we get bounced around in a washing-machine spin-cycle. <br />
<br />
...And what the hell is going on with her face?!</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
You'd think a movie about big science might include a few big science ideas. Where's the cool stuff the aliens share about slowing down the expansion of the local universe. Where's the bit about the message embedded in Pi that would give the film a proper ending and a reason for being and reveal a larger mystery that really challenges our way of thinking and creates drama? Where are the geological and stellar-evolutionary timescales, the astro-engineering, the cosmic perspectives? Where's Hadden's great escape? And why don't the aliens tell us anything that we don't already know? Because in this hack job they're not aliens, they're gods. And gods never tell you anything that you can't figure out all by yourself.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
'When we're alone, we get lonely.' Really? That's what a billion years of evolved intelligence taught you?</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
And why is Ellie left, like so many alien abductees, with nothing but a fanciful story? Do extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence? Not in this movie they don't. We get the claims all right, but no evidence to back them up besides eighteen hours of static that get buried in bureaucracy. Static begets static. Ellie isn't Hypatia, she's Betty Hill. </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
Sagan has turned his wonderful story about real contact with extra-earthly beings into an elaborate alien abduction hoax. Cover-up, suppression, conspiracy theory... we can do better than this.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<b>Where’s the rest?</b></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
That’s exactly what I thought the first time I left the theater, and I still think it. Were so many of the more interesting concepts in the book so cerebral as to be unfilmable? I don't think so. But maybe Sagan did. I think he actually tried very hard to pick an aspect of the book that would be most accessible and deliver the greatest punch. He just picked the wrong one.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
'Do science and faith share common ground?'</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
No.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
Next.<b> </b></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<b>For Carl, or for us?</b></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
In my view Carl Sagan’s greatest legacy is honesty; scientific, historical, religious and political honesty. I gather he had a tremendous ego but I doubt he ever considered himself above criticism. Sagan is the last person for whom I wish to express feelings of anger and disappointment. But this movie appeals to our worst instincts of baseless belief and suppression of ideas. In the end Ellie is not ennobled, but defeated.</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
I hate this movie and am astounded by critics who applaud Contact as an example of scientific realism... as if that were the only measure of success. </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
So Sagan only wrote one novel before he left us. Sorry, but that’s all we get. That novel was made into only one movie, so far. And that too, is all we get. Is that sufficient reason to coddle it and pretend it is what it isn’t? I feel the very people who ought to know better are suspending too much disbelief. Carl Sagan gave us so much. What do we owe him in return? </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
How about a little honesty?</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br />
<object height="340" width="560"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KEeBPSvcNZQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" />
<embed allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" height="340" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KEeBPSvcNZQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560"></embed></object></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<object height="344" width="425"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/VJqcenhb3yo&hl=en_US&fs=1&" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" />
<embed allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" height="344" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VJqcenhb3yo&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425"></embed></object> </div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<object height="340" width="560"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/qGSv-uZCOyY&hl=en_US&fs=1&" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" />
<embed allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" height="340" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/qGSv-uZCOyY&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560"></embed></object> </div>John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-46840917629352202592009-11-07T06:38:00.002-08:002021-07-26T11:43:24.160-07:00Happy Carl Sagan Day!<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_6krlWGXIKk-gv9It4BkMJErGfpMNYMyT_aDCZggWFlDuqKLUupfRp_OfXgXovXSj-Oqy-PQvvPP0mk7cSwkBznYsvzTA9_szPm-DaSySbryd3Gv_SoKKKMyKIZT_ItPs1twjU4xbc_A/s1600-h/cosmos+titles+02.jpg"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_6krlWGXIKk-gv9It4BkMJErGfpMNYMyT_aDCZggWFlDuqKLUupfRp_OfXgXovXSj-Oqy-PQvvPP0mk7cSwkBznYsvzTA9_szPm-DaSySbryd3Gv_SoKKKMyKIZT_ItPs1twjU4xbc_A/s640/cosmos+titles+02.jpg" /></a><br />
Today marks the First Annual Carl Sagan Day... observed two days before what would have been his 75th birthday. <a href="http://www.carlsaganday.com/">Official observations will be held in Florida.</a><br />
<br />
Besides the novel Contact, Cosmos is to me the best of his public works. So nerd up, gather some friends, and watch your favorite episode to celebrate the life of this very important person.<br />John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-21665787915224421552009-11-02T14:13:00.001-08:002021-07-26T19:45:03.554-07:00CARL SAGAN DAY<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkEnb8_6wzhv8mHG2utLOIQPufE-N6F-yrfxSzsqJ8XfvSk5Xf13cBVtZwgTnVfm5uqVt50XzlJyALep5TPybptX-wVEvBIo8CCUzP05cci8RDvyV_V53aRJ-qlgp9hoNgOI2v8WTUTYg/s1600-h/contact+cover+03.jpg"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkEnb8_6wzhv8mHG2utLOIQPufE-N6F-yrfxSzsqJ8XfvSk5Xf13cBVtZwgTnVfm5uqVt50XzlJyALep5TPybptX-wVEvBIo8CCUzP05cci8RDvyV_V53aRJ-qlgp9hoNgOI2v8WTUTYg/s640/contact+cover+03.jpg" /></a><br />
The first annual 'Carl Sagan Day' will be observed on <a href="http://www.carlsaganday.com/">November 7th, 2009</a>... two days before what would have been his 75th birthday. I wish I could go.<br />John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-15728807140592611992009-10-25T14:54:00.001-07:002021-07-26T11:20:17.465-07:00Apparent Brightness<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDwahDjjNHN4Mps1PmCps5Sw_oRCPXQlLvs0mJFmSGKWHchhIZKli4xsynCvsKRUe1_pwowAhuKIuAJ-JUEZ7VHQke_2b7E4J0qHO5DhcwJjVqDRkCrpW9SJYN9ZE9ENRddQ0S69qXlms/s1600-h/title+1+of+4.jpg"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDwahDjjNHN4Mps1PmCps5Sw_oRCPXQlLvs0mJFmSGKWHchhIZKli4xsynCvsKRUe1_pwowAhuKIuAJ-JUEZ7VHQke_2b7E4J0qHO5DhcwJjVqDRkCrpW9SJYN9ZE9ENRddQ0S69qXlms/s640/title+1+of+4.jpg" /></a><br />
So as not to be accused of being all ass kissy about Kubrick, let me point out a longstanding peeve. The aperture of a camera must be wide open to capture faintly visible objects like background stars. But when a bright object like the day side of the moon, and particularly the sun, is in frame, the aperture is nearly closed and the chance of those very dim and distant background stars registering is nil.<br />
<br />Are you listening, you idiot moon hoax 'I can't see stars in the Apollo footage' ass hats?<br />
<br />
For as long as there's been celluloid, there has been an assumption of audience stupidity by film and television studios that wrongly perpetuates the convention that stars are always visible in space. But in space, light is<i> </i>not just relative, it's <i>very</i> relative. It's ironic that this Hollywood falsehood lead to such a monumental misunderstanding of real life.<br />
<br />
<i>'I know the real footage of the moon landings I saw was faked, because the faked footage of the moon landings I saw looked so real... obviously.'</i><br />
<br />
In 2001, Kubrick either didn't know he was doing anything wrong, or went along with it for the sake of his little movie.<br />
<br />
It's a minor detail and not really worth mentioning. But I went ahead anyway and made these illustrations to show how 2001's opening shot should have looked...<br />
<br />
The background stars would be visible behind the eclipse of the moon until the instant the sun breaches the horizon. At that moment the stars would vanish, owing to the new camera setting which requires a smaller aperture so that details on the moon can be seen. Otherwise the moon would be washed out and the sun too bright. Think of exiting a darkened movie theater on a bright sunny afternoon. The eye constantly adjusts to differing degrees of light. <br />
<br />
Also, a crescent would advance along the top of the moon as it descends out of frame. Same goes for the Earth...<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPN0HGQIv3E4f-eXtzR4T_6aAojwLPgjwcESXhY86iLBQP5LZbm1YK79a409WGV4xw1hjIFc0OtTO4x2j9tKzJ9zf4jluXzYXpe-NJtXUAoIxpMrPQp4l4GKue-WjldkvNsSwZo6YVkAs/s1600-h/title+2+of+4.jpg"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPN0HGQIv3E4f-eXtzR4T_6aAojwLPgjwcESXhY86iLBQP5LZbm1YK79a409WGV4xw1hjIFc0OtTO4x2j9tKzJ9zf4jluXzYXpe-NJtXUAoIxpMrPQp4l4GKue-WjldkvNsSwZo6YVkAs/s640/title+2+of+4.jpg" /></a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTQ0jlzhlHq_WfsBDO_x1Xa7ZO8CPtEfi9guRz0oTwo2WlPulQKcd_BXYwIJccx-uE9LccESHSh3NVwo9raTUfT_AuNOCEz9vzV_6CxSOurTEPPO_I8p5uBZ7WGDRjbG_9Hpbyimt0pog/s1600/title+3+of+4.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTQ0jlzhlHq_WfsBDO_x1Xa7ZO8CPtEfi9guRz0oTwo2WlPulQKcd_BXYwIJccx-uE9LccESHSh3NVwo9raTUfT_AuNOCEz9vzV_6CxSOurTEPPO_I8p5uBZ7WGDRjbG_9Hpbyimt0pog/s640/title+3+of+4.jpg" /></a><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTQ0jlzhlHq_WfsBDO_x1Xa7ZO8CPtEfi9guRz0oTwo2WlPulQKcd_BXYwIJccx-uE9LccESHSh3NVwo9raTUfT_AuNOCEz9vzV_6CxSOurTEPPO_I8p5uBZ7WGDRjbG_9Hpbyimt0pog/s1600-h/title+3+of+4.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2Vhe9C6kq_NUIo7kVm9V47_gUa9MH5Nr3azTP77l3Gl4jVZZbgoDS09NakCJB8iQ_W-gMvdLdXAMGTsoi311l4kPLG3WM_osOIK5nduxIa9kHQaZRitbQ5NT1SR1zJ6sAFMSI-wM1ZUI/s1600-h/title+4+of+4.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2Vhe9C6kq_NUIo7kVm9V47_gUa9MH5Nr3azTP77l3Gl4jVZZbgoDS09NakCJB8iQ_W-gMvdLdXAMGTsoi311l4kPLG3WM_osOIK5nduxIa9kHQaZRitbQ5NT1SR1zJ6sAFMSI-wM1ZUI/s640/title+4+of+4.jpg" /></a><br /></div>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHdFt-x99jGI-mE89MyEnu60MHgI6iHQdWmZaqld1X0K3cLZ-a_Q7DgIEZ71wR8AkklwzLNvCPCx98zHLZSOWWFaNY4yAXLK2E2Zd0Y29o_7Kyex88hoaz-1yRyxT7pxCzMztq5_7CSf0/s1600-h/title+3+of+4.jpg"></a><br />John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-53317975440608201312009-10-20T18:38:00.003-07:002021-07-26T19:38:36.393-07:00Life... in Pictures<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhcIO8QfvSC9AtfQry7jSgpRBB8ydSREN0jKUA91-WSJ3LtTkK8D4LXiJg5osifQuneQ9ZWRdXN4rKyrJgq54q1ht5XGGeavuR0BJYT5e4tqMEtsvBoYQp_QarNg6TNqavHPEk37G-h1D0/s1600-h/monolith+01.jpg"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhcIO8QfvSC9AtfQry7jSgpRBB8ydSREN0jKUA91-WSJ3LtTkK8D4LXiJg5osifQuneQ9ZWRdXN4rKyrJgq54q1ht5XGGeavuR0BJYT5e4tqMEtsvBoYQp_QarNg6TNqavHPEk37G-h1D0/s640/monolith+01.jpg" /></a><br />
I don't think I can ever adequately express the feeling I had the first time I saw '2001: A Space Odyssey.' <br />
<br />
Tenth grade, 1982. My English Lit teacher showed us a horrid, non-letter boxed, pan&scan version on a twenty-four inch TV to kill the last few days before Christmas break. Despite the lousy format, I was floored.<br />
<br />
I remember having seen a few photo stills of 2001 in my various scifi/special effects genre books, but they never engaged me, flat as they were. Without music, I guess, and motion, they had no depth. <br />
<br />
Our teacher couldn't stuff the whole film into a fifty minute class. But on first viewing he managed to get to the flying bone transition before the lunch buzzer rang. I was hooked. I couldn't wait to get to school the next day.<br />
<br />
I've seen it a hundred times since. But strangely, when thinking back on my first few viewings, I had the distinct impression of having seen the film in black and white. Maybe my brain misinterpreting its starkness, and desaturated my memory. When I watch it now I am often surprised by the amount of color it contains. <br />
<br />
I don't ever remember feeling a lot of empathy for a Kubrick character (Spartacus aside). Kubrick doesn't do that. I am always very interested in what they're doing. But how they're feeling doesn't leap off the screen and into the audience. It stays up there. <br />
<br />
There's an imaginary narrative at the beginning of each chapter of the book 'Galaxies,' by Timothy Ferris. It describes a relativistic, near-light speed spaceship journey across the universe. The explorers outlive the Earth and Sun, not to mention their loved ones, by trillions of years as they plow through intergalactic space toward the edge of the ever expanding visible universe. That's how 2001 made me feel. Lost in the void... in a good way. <br />
<br />
After we finished the movie I went to the school library and found the book upon which it was based. I tore through it, and everything else I could find by Arthur C. Clarke. I didn't realize it at the time, but while Clarke certainly contributed, he wasn't actually the person responsible for the visual mind trip that was the movie. It was Stanley Kubrick who made this thing possible. Watch, <a href="https://youtu.be/ApEh9Sm4BR0">'A Life in Pictures,' </a>which beautifully details his technique. <br />John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-76523271642511963642009-10-20T14:44:00.001-07:002009-10-25T16:41:38.007-07:00Symphony of ScienceIn the tradition of Sagan...<br />
<br />
<object height="344" width="425"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/XGK84Poeynk&color1=0xcc2550&color2=0xe87a9f&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1">
</param>
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true">
</param>
<param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always">
</param>
<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/XGK84Poeynk&color1=0xcc2550&color2=0xe87a9f&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object><br />John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-41128430937249049542009-10-19T18:47:00.000-07:002009-10-25T16:46:25.127-07:00The Persistence of Memory<b><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCltTbRZQwYoXeF29SDchbC2YXJ-Mf6f1nWMz2A0D9JoqXHWeusaqA9HFSqJtzFThkMt0c4svxo8EJs_AE9e2i408uh4Y4RCNg2ANOEIiLuO3fCbZC-f4hScAaifSORprZnayfPFgmP10/s1600-h/persistence+01.jpg" style="font-family: "Courier New",Courier,monospace;"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCltTbRZQwYoXeF29SDchbC2YXJ-Mf6f1nWMz2A0D9JoqXHWeusaqA9HFSqJtzFThkMt0c4svxo8EJs_AE9e2i408uh4Y4RCNg2ANOEIiLuO3fCbZC-f4hScAaifSORprZnayfPFgmP10/s640/persistence+01.jpg" /></a><span style="font-family: "Courier New",Courier,monospace;"> </span></b><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Nick Sagan <a href="http://nicksagan.blogs.com/nick_sagan_online/2006/12/dad.html">remembers</a> his father. </span><br />John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-70321983884309041502009-10-13T07:39:00.000-07:002009-10-25T16:48:20.451-07:00Celebrating Sagan: Carl Sagan ten years on - Contact film/book differences<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_1MOG_Y6BhTDzLdYUXWUIUHCVwGk9nw0r_KNkgE1nKkGWtpRHujSF1125-q7lMiWe18QHK7ype3Jtfx9DavZ6InwwyDLNSGcWeNtf7tQMXzZF_sDX6RggDCbjFr8M-eUNESE_T14Aei8/s1600-h/base+001.jpg"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_1MOG_Y6BhTDzLdYUXWUIUHCVwGk9nw0r_KNkgE1nKkGWtpRHujSF1125-q7lMiWe18QHK7ype3Jtfx9DavZ6InwwyDLNSGcWeNtf7tQMXzZF_sDX6RggDCbjFr8M-eUNESE_T14Aei8/s640/base+001.jpg" /></a><br />I love <a href="http://celebratingsagan.blogspot.com/2006/12/carl-sagan-ten-years-on-contact.html">this guy.</a><br /></div>John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-17770885935952191612009-10-11T08:31:00.001-07:002021-07-26T11:45:19.062-07:00pbd<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpK1IEc-XYPbXuN5q5BCFfwvv7PPsGt-W_ok5aXuAsbccoyp3lKq4icX3NFJVR-5E-53loaT8JnZWpG3XntwXdqNxwlOBq8sy3ezRkI8IYHp-gHP1_ImY2NS1zvIdJ5UdXhkZc-0wEfqI/s1600-h/ray+of+light+01b.jpg"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpK1IEc-XYPbXuN5q5BCFfwvv7PPsGt-W_ok5aXuAsbccoyp3lKq4icX3NFJVR-5E-53loaT8JnZWpG3XntwXdqNxwlOBq8sy3ezRkI8IYHp-gHP1_ImY2NS1zvIdJ5UdXhkZc-0wEfqI/s640/ray+of+light+01b.jpg" /></a><br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
...exhale... </div>John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-77544636348690577922009-10-05T20:24:00.001-07:002021-07-26T11:48:50.638-07:00To Catch a Phrase...<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEih6qP-uxYUTpp5Jw8UAPu1cthz5OJbBGVq2MjMarofbqSJHEw1LtjXay5vgB9E0cQEffnIqBONnefzAYfe83Bx_wSaeGVEYln0SziGuYL0JiLqdmc5kS2o7_mLj8xMKIarEzLwXfNkoss/s1600-h/soti+004b.jpg"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEih6qP-uxYUTpp5Jw8UAPu1cthz5OJbBGVq2MjMarofbqSJHEw1LtjXay5vgB9E0cQEffnIqBONnefzAYfe83Bx_wSaeGVEYln0SziGuYL0JiLqdmc5kS2o7_mLj8xMKIarEzLwXfNkoss/s640/soti+004b.jpg" /></a><br />
</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
I don't get it...<br />
<br />
Sagan could turn a phrase better than anyone. Need proof? Watch Cosmos. He had an economy of speech, no doubt honed by years of classroom lecture, that communicated, and endeared, and endures... and simply made you want more. <br />
<br />
And yet there isn't a single memorable quote in the entirety of Contact... except for one. <br />
<br />
'Seems like an awful waste of space.'<br />
<br />...awful ...waste ...of space.<br />
<br />
Isn't life just like a box of chocolates? <br />
</div>John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-37281170321462676752007-11-10T16:27:00.003-08:002021-07-26T11:52:11.651-07:00Sunrise, Mars<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiR0e8Sdg7Q5zFzhIxdaGdlsoNsTLJBRnBtUfyBoBLI9R-diQSBwtRB7pqCx0L_BXuUJvmC8-NtqD5CAENAWGl-5odRGHD8QelKIOj-Ul3O2b7baU8vK0cxZ_d_1Tq4jBsV9iFwYfG214/s1600-h/sunrise,+mars+01d.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5134058323751900002" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiR0e8Sdg7Q5zFzhIxdaGdlsoNsTLJBRnBtUfyBoBLI9R-diQSBwtRB7pqCx0L_BXuUJvmC8-NtqD5CAENAWGl-5odRGHD8QelKIOj-Ul3O2b7baU8vK0cxZ_d_1Tq4jBsV9iFwYfG214/s400/sunrise,+mars+01d.jpg" style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" /></a></div><div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
I'm not sure why I made this... I guess I was inspired by <a href="http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap050620.html">this </a><a href="http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap050620.html">Spirit photo</a> of a Martian sunset. And I always liked those early twentieth century 'cigar' shaped rocket ship designs so often used on pulp space novel covers and in Bugs Bunny cartoons. <br /></div>John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-84806872853810291512007-10-02T10:27:00.001-07:002021-07-26T12:02:41.494-07:00The Muck Knows<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiH2RLRbD6RCUn9Va1lI5wcDO56yCt_aoad2Kicu20Ja0AEwZpszgOdOf-mLZAGCXKcAV293imARR59iTxn6W5Fzyf8kiCrojkeN3LOPLjqFZCeMgxm6PBD9jc97ObRtWmxi9fdnzlSFW8/s1600-h/in+conclusion+02.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5117529095766816530" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiH2RLRbD6RCUn9Va1lI5wcDO56yCt_aoad2Kicu20Ja0AEwZpszgOdOf-mLZAGCXKcAV293imARR59iTxn6W5Fzyf8kiCrojkeN3LOPLjqFZCeMgxm6PBD9jc97ObRtWmxi9fdnzlSFW8/s400/in+conclusion+02.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" /></a></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">Knowledge flows up from the muck, not down from on high. We know what we know because we earned it, through hard work. Not because it was whispered in our ears by angels. We earned what we know individually and collectively. <br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br />
Science has reduced religion to a kind of 'insert god here' proposition whenever the remaining faithful are confronted with a scientific mystery. And since science has effectively pushed that insertion point back to the beginning of the universe, the only remaining place a believer can put god is behind the big bang itself.</div><div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br />The only thing we'll find behind nature, is more nature. </div>John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-16277435556786515542007-09-21T15:55:00.001-07:002021-07-26T12:16:11.297-07:00Wormholes<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrV7sGXQDvvin5VqmJVnS2_A-HHu6ETHAoTBurgZN801EnEhZjcC1KdlvTTQisnmORq4y7oySdL5dKUp2ZWnMsYWzUlEkSqSpq0Cfpr3PDFdfDVQXcsUKwGBQMjKHMkYMYhdhQSmQsIoo/s1600-h/wormhole+03.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5116069403886630386" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrV7sGXQDvvin5VqmJVnS2_A-HHu6ETHAoTBurgZN801EnEhZjcC1KdlvTTQisnmORq4y7oySdL5dKUp2ZWnMsYWzUlEkSqSpq0Cfpr3PDFdfDVQXcsUKwGBQMjKHMkYMYhdhQSmQsIoo/s400/wormhole+03.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" /></a><br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
The wormhole journey as portrayed in Contact is a cheap thrill ride unworthy of the material.<br /><br />OK... So the pod drops through the center of the popcorn machine and into a wormhole aperture. Great, with you so far... But the red flashy-crap, followed by a star-field, followed by being sucked into some kind of funnel/vortex/tunnel thingy doesn't work.<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br />Here's how it should have gone... The machine should have been more like the one in the book where a stationary pod is surrounded by a device that generates a pucker in spacetime to which an awaiting wormhole nozzle can attach. The wormhole itself is an invasive sphere which envelopes a local area of spacetime; the space enclosing the pod when the machine reaches full power. Through a window, a passenger would see her surroundings instantly change from departure point to destination without ever experiencing a tunnel. <br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br />Yes, Sagan used tunnels in the book. But I think he included the tunnel adventure more for entertainment than scientific value. I don't know.<br /><br />In the book the pod is completely encased, which conveniently doesn't allow an outside observer to see anything. But the popcorn machine works around this problem by having the walls become transparent within Ellie's line of sight? What the hell? This only adds too the notion that she's nuts. </div>John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-44335704048473135812007-09-21T13:20:00.002-07:002021-07-26T12:20:09.917-07:00The 'Popcorn' Machine<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqhQn1P35TvpUV_iaZx3XqQxq5H55zeTGdqlNo53ORvSU-eHg7MgE2k1hJfn7i5AremC4ug-lMGSI1OP2Be6eiL7f_jVvAyK9XpkuP5GUBXBbbqEKXh5QYIdYQjUK6vs56Dp6bHPsKAf4/s1600-h/machine+03.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5117190639458989778" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqhQn1P35TvpUV_iaZx3XqQxq5H55zeTGdqlNo53ORvSU-eHg7MgE2k1hJfn7i5AremC4ug-lMGSI1OP2Be6eiL7f_jVvAyK9XpkuP5GUBXBbbqEKXh5QYIdYQjUK6vs56Dp6bHPsKAf4/s400/machine+03.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" /></a><br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
I’ll give the producers credit for one thing... representing the Machine as a large open air device was a good idea. It was visually interesting, and it implies a technology that was extra-worldly. But the details are all wrong and it is too complicated.<br /><br />The novel states that the Machine is not a wormhole generator, it doesn't have to be. The Aliens already have wormhole generators. They can fashion a hole through to us easier than transmitting the means for us to go to them. All they need from us is the destination, a specific time and place through which they can enter our space. All they need from us is a 'here,' and a 'now.'<br /><br />The Machine is the last piece of the wormhole puzzle, the final and simplest link in the functionality of the wormhole network. Its only purpose is to make a small dent in spacetime to which an awaiting wormhole nozzle can attach. The Machine is only a spacetime marker.<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br />It could have been anything, but for proper dramatic reasons Sagan chose a device that has 'weighty energy' for his novel. And because international cooperation was a major theme in his life he also made it hard to build, forcing humanity to work together, more or less. The movie Machine satisfies these goals in some ways, but not in others.<br /><br />I like the rings. They have power through sheer size, and I like the way they resemble an electron shell. But the other more dangerous elements of the Machine are a transparent effort to manipulate the audience. For example, the fireworks display when the Machine fully activates is just a lot of noise. Maybe it's there to distract us from the complete lack of interesting dialog or a satisfying ending.<br /><br />The drop/catch mechanism, the needless conflict over the inclusion of a chair, the goofy thing where Ellie's face peels itself off her head, the pod becoming transparent in her line of site and the child-Ellie face substitution have no intellectual justification. They are a discontinuous assemblage of unrelated nonsensicals. <br /></div>John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-24811529697590476032007-09-20T10:05:00.001-07:002021-07-26T12:24:09.993-07:00Scriptology<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZYwtObjBczeWHOwVcHH9_RzULQdPps2myqOfo6ImWzpJbNSvODJkHN0w39HcMh0wsFoWzlevsg_E9cL8gaHHngnPFIAdgcU6IN9ckdZvvR0d20Fye9fVbsvTT8gyqGxTJIeNu6eOrJ9g/s1600-h/script+03.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5112360340890844530" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZYwtObjBczeWHOwVcHH9_RzULQdPps2myqOfo6ImWzpJbNSvODJkHN0w39HcMh0wsFoWzlevsg_E9cL8gaHHngnPFIAdgcU6IN9ckdZvvR0d20Fye9fVbsvTT8gyqGxTJIeNu6eOrJ9g/s400/script+03.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" /></a><br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
I've discovered a version of the <a href="http://www.imsdb.com/scripts/Contact.html">Contact script</a> dated September 8, 1995, credited to Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan, among others. This script is essentially what appeared on film.<br /><br />So… I guess I can no longer pin all my dislike on the director/producers. It pains me to say this, but my problem with this movie is Carl Sagan. <br /><br />Many artists have difficulty translating their work from one medium into another. If you enjoy reading Sagan’s books you know this guy simply could not touch lightly on any subject. It just wasn’t in him. He had to explore everything inside and out and three days from backwards. Of course he had to make certain concessions for the popular media, but he always managed to do so with clarity and effectiveness. In the bookish freedom from practical constraints on length he could be concise in message. In book form Sagan was finite, yet unbounded.<br /><br />Film, however, is very different. Extraordinary films require extraordinary screenplays. The screenplay format forces you to do one of two things: write a condensed book, or write a movie. A screenplay is its own species, related to a book in DNA only. Where the book is the fossil, the screenplay is its living, animated descendant.<br /><br />I think the screenplay, as a process, was fundamentally at odds with Carl Sagan. The physical limitation of a hundred and twenty pages must have felt suffocating to him. He couldn’t fit that big brain of his into that small a space. So instead of translating his work into film by penetrating its internal bureaucracy, Sagan simply gutted it.<br /><br />He touched on the religion v. science conflict too lightly and with no rebuttal. He removed most of the dramatic potential by simplifying Ellie’s family structure. He took out all the good stuff: the wit, the skepticism, the cosmic perspective, and worst of all, the conclusion.<br /><br />The inescapable irony is that Sagan probably would have been much more comfortable writing Contact as a television mini-series as it was originally conceived by he and Francis Ford Coppola. It could have been ten hours long. It could have been another Cosmos, and me and a hundred million other people would have loved every minute of it. <br /><br />Of course Sagan was not a filmmaker. The filmmakers, however, are filmmakers, and they should have known better. They made a film based not upon Sagan’s wonderful book, but on his wholly inadequate screenplay.<br /><br />I doubt Foster (didn't have to), or Zemeckis (did have to) ever read the book.<br /></div>John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-42810853880632479732007-09-19T14:02:00.004-07:002021-07-26T12:41:16.596-07:00The God of Hollywood<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPPyGNFGEOMS5e50CRA86gZ15vWg-d3JjWqpB7-hxUl6it2pM9p5F_gvNIjAoC8lX56iRMZG-Qxd9Uz3sQ7D53385McNaZTf2v3coDLivOu9uTCxjOt2_AIeMVoVr74Fl5CH0jDIAknlM/s1600-h/holywood+04.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5117335014784644866" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPPyGNFGEOMS5e50CRA86gZ15vWg-d3JjWqpB7-hxUl6it2pM9p5F_gvNIjAoC8lX56iRMZG-Qxd9Uz3sQ7D53385McNaZTf2v3coDLivOu9uTCxjOt2_AIeMVoVr74Fl5CH0jDIAknlM/s400/holywood+04.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" /></a><br />Contact, the movie, is a thing where the only standard of evidence worth noting is human emotion. Contact, the movie, is a courtroom drama, where ones embarrassing moments count as empirical evidence. Contact, the movie, is a place where anecdotal evidence and conjecture will get you laid... Not necessarily a bad thing in itself, but it shouldn’t be the end product of this story.<br /><br />Contact, the movie, is a bouquet of pretty flowers, that smell bad.<br /><br />Contact, the movie, is a one-hundred and fifty-three minute long version of 'The Price Is Right.' You want an actual ending? I'm sorry, you've overbid. <br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6K1bP6nQ5XpPqiiFt-MiTxkhRC_rUeL3y5XLTZyPw6D2QSD7iNY_-wB7aCMnkv5U7-BtRSsWMCFuA6it0Svjs0t5KTZJhWDKZIZyTs0ixn9Gwb7cqXenhuLSdLYa8T0A-SBuE5aPRX6U/s1600-h/The+Price+Is+Right+01.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5391376501932015490" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6K1bP6nQ5XpPqiiFt-MiTxkhRC_rUeL3y5XLTZyPw6D2QSD7iNY_-wB7aCMnkv5U7-BtRSsWMCFuA6it0Svjs0t5KTZJhWDKZIZyTs0ixn9Gwb7cqXenhuLSdLYa8T0A-SBuE5aPRX6U/s400/The+Price+Is+Right+01.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 167px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 400px;" /></a><br />OK, that was a cheap shot. Let's class it up a little bit. Why not 'Carl Sagan's Contact ~ The Fragrance?'<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXBjhlit5vN3vP0BFT1Qu7JA3qgXbyNdygdCaBdlt4HZ9Rjmh7QqIBNWaf9mKKrXneLu1ex5VtHRduQleo-7HvCRA0vd0yTPUFrmwIqMka1spxkqYo4ffr9hLRvy7xpEQCo_fs3eN2p0I/s1600-h/the+fragrance+01.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5391378123303419970" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXBjhlit5vN3vP0BFT1Qu7JA3qgXbyNdygdCaBdlt4HZ9Rjmh7QqIBNWaf9mKKrXneLu1ex5VtHRduQleo-7HvCRA0vd0yTPUFrmwIqMka1spxkqYo4ffr9hLRvy7xpEQCo_fs3eN2p0I/s400/the+fragrance+01.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 167px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 400px;" /></a><br />Bzzz, wrong. How about something in between... 'Carl Sagan's Contact ~ The Musical?'<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPcFRc8OdB1nNkBtPS3yGYlcgyExQzXv_i4LFk776S1VZFmShsRgKWXegeVdcn-MLU3rs36t8DRC2cbE8cKvhzRH7Sg388GP7DmZZ6RpzjrTwBok3eCoHHzP2u1qnYAnFYP2vfa8BVZN4/s1600-h/musical+contact+01.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5391379142805285058" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPcFRc8OdB1nNkBtPS3yGYlcgyExQzXv_i4LFk776S1VZFmShsRgKWXegeVdcn-MLU3rs36t8DRC2cbE8cKvhzRH7Sg388GP7DmZZ6RpzjrTwBok3eCoHHzP2u1qnYAnFYP2vfa8BVZN4/s400/musical+contact+01.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 400px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 308px;" /></a><br /><a href="http://www.centerstagetheatre.com/plays.html?ID=Contact">(October, 2009: Yeah, they really did it.)</a><br /><br />The book is filled with intrigue, history, genuine human emotion and grand motives by inscrutable, yet entirely real higher powers. It soars. It has a social conscience and a reason for being. It releases energy and comes to more than the sum of its parts.<br /><br />This movie, on the other hand, comes to nothing. <br /><br />The most glaring absence is of course the wonderful book ending where Ellie finds scientific proof of an intelligence that predates the universe. One might argue that this is too complicated for a movie. And I agree, but only insofar as it is too mathematical in nature. This concept only needed to be translated into the more visual medium. But instead it was simply dropped. And I do not think this is merely a case of expedient story telling. There is a more insidious force at work here.<br /><br />The faithful hijacked this film and made it theirs. This movie celebrates the peculiar religious notion that the unknowable is a form of pure knowledge. What is wrong with this film is what is wrong with religion, where the meaningless question becomes an argument from authority. 'But <i>who</i> made the pretty flowers?'<br /><br />So instead of discovering proof of a higher level of existence, our impotent heroine, Ellie (a.k.a., the poor little atheist girl) is left floundering in self-doubt. This is because religious people hate proof. They hate it to such a degree as to disallow evidence of their own argument.<br /><br />In the end the protagonist becomes a thinly veiled TV evangelist complete with very public and tearful appeals to belief. She might as well be wearing a pink, cotton-candy wig and Spackle makeup. The producers of this film have cloaked ignorance in sentiment.<br /><br />And that's not all they did. Crimes against art have here been committed. In the hands of these filmmakers the term 'science fiction' has taken on a completely unintended, and loathsome meaning. It has become an oxymoronic, grotesque parody of itself. One might as well classify this movie as 'religious fact.'<br /><br />'The world is what we make of it.'<br /><br />Yes, it is. When we are children. But adults are not permitted the childish luxury of making it up as they go. To paraphrase Sagan, at some point we must abandon our most cherished beliefs in favor of cold hard reality. The universe is no fairy tale. Sagan never pandered to children the way this film panders to the childish adults who still believe the universe is just a metaphor for a struggle between quarreling super beings. He gave it to us straight without appeals to mysticism.<br /><br />Science and religion are not equal partners. There is no common ground between them, with the possible exception of using science to deconstruct the evolutionary imperative for religious belief. Beyond that science destroys religion. It kicks its ass. Sagan knew ancient fairy tales and modern science can never be reconciled, although he hedged his bets in public. But this rotten 'movie' gives the same weight to miracles as it does physics, perhaps more. It panders to the mob in the name of salted butter and soda pop.<br /><br />I often hear people say that a movie can never be as good as the book. Boloney. Kubrick, among others, could do it because he knew the formula. Here's the formula: a movie is not a book. It doesn't have to be and it shouldn't ever be. What it does have to be is original to its own unique medium. Find an element of visual interest within the story and let that be your guide to translate the entire work.<br /><br />In this regard Sagan handed the producers the key to this particular enterprise on a silver platter, and they missed it entirely. Within the last chapter of the book lay the movie. And again, the reason they left out this proof is because the truly faithful despise proof. To prove god exists negates faith.<br /><br />The subtitle, instead of 'A Journey to the Heart of the Universe,' should have read, 'Don't Confuse Me with Facts.' This film is terrible. It is a complete surrender to abject unthink.<br /><br />It abandons science. It embraces religion.<br /><br />It's a betrayal.<br /></div>John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-52272125305375605352007-09-13T22:06:00.002-07:002021-07-26T12:42:41.067-07:002 is yellow<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5116994174769968802" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgx__RIbUxRyJ64xl11g0TWPnyRy-e8nlDsi32t0CY9MEMMm_rB5QEmjK1hM6VycLVuPI4RTD_Wg_9l-jgISSNWTnHpKfFeHl3V8SRJCmcQmmupZhs7Y9bwfAhB6Jfc741O-Gy6Llf2uag/s400/2+is+yellow+02c.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" /></div><div style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></div>John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-77048830325670006192007-09-13T16:26:00.001-07:002021-07-26T12:45:54.666-07:00The Brave One<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqriFCpJfPKt4niujk6ImhNNCrBAJHJRmp5YlnjlTIAIwZr21U9lclBmLyt1ONb3tNeptn94rOH14bjDmZ0odHenHSRro-lEJhBolN7MhlzAtu2CNt5aaQlef6cps-7ZDe3E8d26O2MsI/s1600-h/foster+01.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5112321175084072290" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqriFCpJfPKt4niujk6ImhNNCrBAJHJRmp5YlnjlTIAIwZr21U9lclBmLyt1ONb3tNeptn94rOH14bjDmZ0odHenHSRro-lEJhBolN7MhlzAtu2CNt5aaQlef6cps-7ZDe3E8d26O2MsI/s400/foster+01.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" /></a><br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
Jodie Foster is a fine actor. She is not responsible for her performance in Contact. She was given a terrible script and worse direction. She was strapped into a useless chair, within a gilded cage, and shot into space. <br /><br />Foster was handed a character who apparently has undiagnosed multiple personality disorder, completely unfitting for the story. One minute she's a powerful, independent feminist, the next she's wallowing in self-pity and pandering to the stupidity of the mob.<br /><br />And why the hell is this bitch crying?<br /><br />Did you see the 'final statement' scene in the wonderful film, '<a href="http://pro.imdb.com/title/tt0208874/">The Contender</a>?' Senator Laine Hanson (Joan Allen) wins because she is unyielding in her principles. Hanson's statement should have been Ellie's statement, practically verbatim, before the machine selection committee in Contact. </div><div style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></div><div style="font-family: inherit;">Instead... whimper.<br /><br />Ellie is embarrassed by her atheism. Why? Because the last thing this movie wants is a strong nonbeliever with the courage of her convictions. The point of this movie is not science, or even skepticism; it is to buttress the weird religious idea that doubt and uncertainty are where god live.<br /><br />He's there. He's waiting for you. You just have to concede his unknowability. At the end of this fucking movie reason and evidence and truth are suppressed by the inquisition. The bad guys win. And we lose.<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Extraordinary movies require extraordinary screenplays.</span><br /><br />What's a fine actor to do with a screenplay that isn't worth the paper it's written on? Answer: Cash your check and move on to something better.<br /></div>John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-53634114008969550652007-09-13T13:19:00.006-07:002021-07-26T13:07:33.029-07:00Who are we?<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSxgg-jb-mS6tfPnx4TGhqFqH7Itc2DFpb1DzEI3dYOl1HlGC-v5lUOQn1f3Y58OMHwcTIcXtRdOdWK0lEdlmnguEAZpS2BWK5Y3IUGeAdEJkBWpEJeccmLOxDqJG1_Kie_ZkpDh5twfM/s1600-h/who+are+we+01.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5109786431205571154" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSxgg-jb-mS6tfPnx4TGhqFqH7Itc2DFpb1DzEI3dYOl1HlGC-v5lUOQn1f3Y58OMHwcTIcXtRdOdWK0lEdlmnguEAZpS2BWK5Y3IUGeAdEJkBWpEJeccmLOxDqJG1_Kie_ZkpDh5twfM/s400/who+are+we+01.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" /></a><br />
</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
Within the story of <a href="http://pro.imdb.com/title/tt0118884/usercomments?filter=hate">Contact</a> is a framework for understanding our place in the grand scheme of cosmic evolution. But in this particular work I don't think Sagan took some of his previously established ideas far enough. I'm talking specifically about our impending 'singularity.' <i><b>Now before you get that look on your face, I have no idea if such a thing is even possible. But I think the concept could be very useful in this story. </b></i><br />
<br />
The term singularity is borrowed from astrophysics, where it defines the center of a black hole; a point between relativity and quantum mechanics where our understanding of physics breaks down. But the newer definition I refer to is in the context of the evolution of intelligence.<br />
<br />
Singularity is a massive discontinuity in history, a point in our near future where prediction breaks down due to the acceleration of change in our world. In other words, as the rate of technical evolution accelerates to infinity our ability to predict the future drops to zero. Super intelligence is one possible result. Death is another.<br />
<br />
It amazes me that even before there was a word for it, Dr Sagan sensed intuitively what is now termed the singularity. The word was coined (applied?) in 1981 by retired San Diego State University professor <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vernor_Vinge">Vernor Vinge</a>.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>
"Here I had tried a straightforward extrapolation of technology, and found myself precipitated over an abyss. It's a problem we face every time we consider the creation of intelligences greater than our own. When this happens, human history will have reached a kind of singularity - a place where extrapolation breaks down and new models must be applied - and the world will pass beyond our understanding."<br />
</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
-- Vernor Vinge, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/True-Names-Other-Dangers-Vinge/dp/0671653636">True Names and Other Dangers</a>, p. 47.<br />
</div>
</blockquote>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br />It's a great idea. One ready for exploration in science fiction. Sagan touched upon the notion of the emergence of a global consciousness in The Persistence of Memory (Cosmos, episode XI). So he was certainly aware of this idea when he wrote Contact. But he left it out. The concept of ultimate life v. death was a recurring theme in his public work, especially in the context of nuclear war. But maybe the specific idea of singularity hadn't quite congealed in his mind, and so he couldn't connect it to his story. At any rate, I think this is a loss that can be corrected postmortem. Singularity theory provides a motive for the aliens to contact us. (More later...)<br />
</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br />
For a far better explanation of the singularity I refer you to <a href="http://www.pivot.net/~jpierce/staring_into_the_singularity.htm">Staring Into The Singularity by Eliezer Yudkowsky</a>, and <a href="https://intelligence.org/">The Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence</a>, (click on Overview). These guys are bent on making it happen as soon as possible. <br />
</div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<br />
OK, back to us...<br />
<br />
If you consider singularity theory carefully you will understand that humans are the end product of natural selection, but not of evolution as a whole. Natural selection has taken life as far as it can, to intelligence. We can probably evolve farther through natural selection, but the point is we don't have to. <br />
<br />
Agent Smith from The Matrix was right in comparing us to a virus. But this demeaning insult doesn't take into account our macroscopic (compared to a virus) brains. Sure we reproduce like crazy and run riot over our environment, just like a virus. But our brains, not our sex drive allowed this to happen.<br />
<br />
Because our brains give us a huge advantage, other large organisms simply cannot compete with us. Micro-organisms are still a legitimate threat, but we're gaining on them fast. A virulent outbreak of Ebola may yet have a chance to get us, but not a pack of wolves. In fact the only large animal we still have to fear is ourselves.<br />
<br />
So we are not in equilibrium with the rest of life on Earth. We kill other species and whole environments on a par with the greatest mass extinctions. And any means we posses of destroying ourselves will almost certainly take a big chunk of the biosphere with us. Natural selection would never, by itself, allow a species to proliferate to the point of endangering all life. So what did? <br />
<br />
Right now on Earth 'Externally Self-Optimizing Selection' is the name of the game. With our large brains, eSOS created a global civilization. Our brain and its ability to manipulate the world outside our bodies has no equal on Earth. Wagon wheels, fishing poles, computers (especially computers), cars, airplanes, frozen foods, nukes, mousetraps; all are evolving at a previously unheard of rate. The key point being that none of them are having sex.<br />
<br />
Of course eSOS begs the question... What happens when 'external' becomes 'internal?' When Internal Self-Optimizing Selection, iSOS, begins to recursively self-improve our genes and our very minds (or the surrogate minds we create), singularity may be knocking on our door.<br />
<br />
In the real world, as in the fictional world of Contact, we humans occupy an extremely narrow, and highly volatile zone between the invention of radio astronomy and super-intelligence. The way I see it there are only two possible outcomes... Give me singularity or give me death.<br />
<br />
Does anyone else see the potential for a great movie? <br />
</div>John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-82570774879618352682007-09-07T09:15:00.001-07:002021-07-26T13:19:38.373-07:00The God of Contact<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg1MbL09ce3vJyuEYa6g5MwZOlOk5U4jJ1mvuIqtu3umsRtFCHNIhgylpJyGaUmPdkeAHDeaD9yrRDa_Foo_uab9GpNxzmEImwVRfQkTOzgQRTwguOq-EGsVNAihRNjPNdCXYSMwUyYz0c/s1600-h/arches+02e.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5112741860664289634" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg1MbL09ce3vJyuEYa6g5MwZOlOk5U4jJ1mvuIqtu3umsRtFCHNIhgylpJyGaUmPdkeAHDeaD9yrRDa_Foo_uab9GpNxzmEImwVRfQkTOzgQRTwguOq-EGsVNAihRNjPNdCXYSMwUyYz0c/s400/arches+02e.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" /></a><br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
Let's face it, uber-atheist Carl Sagan's only novel contains a god.<br /><br />There's nothing wrong with exploring the idea of god in a work of fiction; look at the Bible. And as much as the fundies want it to be, this doesn't make him a true believer in his heart of hearts. It's not an admission of anything except that he wanted to consider how such a being, if she/he/it exists, might reveal themselves to us. It's a thought experiment.<br /><br />But the good scientist must also ask the obvious question... Where did god come from? In Contact, Carl Sagan, more the writer than the scientist, finds an answer. Between 'god always existed' and 'god never existed' is a vast middle ground that is ripe with story potential.<br /><br />At first glance, the god of Contact seems more a god of Einstein in that he's the disinterested, non-interfering initiator of the universe. He set up the parameters and the speed limits. And then he said... so long. But Sagan added an element of true revelation to his story. Before god took off for parts unknown, he left a clear, unambiguous sign of himself; an artist's signature. He hid it in the very simplest form in nature, the circle, where it waited to be discovered. God knew that someday someone would emerge to find it. Or maybe he didn't know. Maybe he's performing an experiment of his own.<br /><br />This entity, whatever he is, must reside completely outside the substrate of the universe as we know it, in a place where the most ubiquitous form in nature, the circle, is a construct. We can't imagine such a place. But to paraphrase Sagan, why should we expect our experience to have any relevance in this area. Our senses evolved in here, not out there. We just need to recognize the signature as a unique, nonrandom sign of intelligence. And to do that all we need is a moderately large brain and an imagination; the clear tools of our future upward mobility.<br /><br />The god of Contact poses some interesting questions. Sagan stated in the book that the circle is not merely a signature, but the beginning of a message from the same extra-universal being. So I ask... if he can communicate with us, may we someday be able to communicate with him?<br /><br />The Vegans sent a message down to us. In doing so they pointed the way up to a higher level of being. They gave us access to the larger universe, and a way out of our selfish fatalism. The entity who wrote the message in pi did something similar to the Vegans it seems to me. He sent a message down to them pointing the way up and out of the universe into an even higher level of reality. So as information flows down, scientific advancement flows up.<br /><br />If humans can evolve up to the level of the Vegans, and then up again to the level of the pi-being, do we not then become that which created us? In this fictional universe, do we create ourselves every time we contemplate the circle?<br /><br />When discussing religion I think the only useful way to approach god is to embrace paradox; but only as art, never as science. The truth is our existence is not owed to paradox. This god is no more real than any of the others.<br /><br />Carl Sagan wrote a work of fiction. In fiction he could roam the universe and imprint whatever conjectures he wished upon it. His manuscript was submitted to a publisher for sale to the public for the purposes of entertainment. It was not submitted to a scientific journal for peer review. In Contact, Sagan could answer the question of where god came from in a very circular way. He combined both western and eastern religious motifs with a very original flare.</div><div style="font-family: inherit;"><br /><b style="font-style: italic;">Contact is an origin myth. </b></div>John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-62633306456781637802007-08-30T08:59:00.002-07:002021-07-26T13:25:42.574-07:00The Invasion<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZ3DEtz5z8F7wYyxNciR4ixp4ciyDO_eO3HreUQ8xSDr8d3cf_PN7CDuHSmQUTig8PWOrmW7IK6h7PaqtbV73CaUxSDDjLCjAmzeFnxQ1Ks_4zb7RDXFJUo1mGSPmFkBY0DaZ0fhgA4q0/s1600-h/nicole+02.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5104524245410811346" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZ3DEtz5z8F7wYyxNciR4ixp4ciyDO_eO3HreUQ8xSDr8d3cf_PN7CDuHSmQUTig8PWOrmW7IK6h7PaqtbV73CaUxSDDjLCjAmzeFnxQ1Ks_4zb7RDXFJUo1mGSPmFkBY0DaZ0fhgA4q0/s400/nicole+02.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" /></a></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
Nicole Kidman is very pretty and certainly talented, but I think I like her mostly because she was in a Kubrick film. That always rates special appreciation for me. Then again I'd give Slim Pickens a foot massage for the same reason.<br />
<br />
I'll give Kidman this, she's a whole person in this movie. And that makes her completely unlike the split personality, spineless panderer portrayed by Jodie Foster in Contact. <br />
<br />
The use of all that current news footage of Bush, Iraq and whatnot in The Invasion didn't bother me nearly as much as the use of President Clinton in Contact. There's a huge difference between a relevant real life addition and a gimmick. The moment Zemeckis saw real-life Clinton's Mars microbe news conference he just had to have it in his movie. Don't bother asking whether it actually enhances the story. Who cares? It steals importance and credibility through association with some other important event. Use it!<br />
<br />
The Invasion added a suitable, current events background that enhanced the story. This is global invasion after all. We need a sense of the before and after. The use of current media creates a viable alternative history within the film. In Contact, Clinton is just so much Gump.<br />
<br />
I do wish this movie had taken the time to slow down a little. They started out fast, and that's fine. But I needed more breaks, a little more emotional closeness between the principles. The dinner table conversation foreshadowing the conflict felt very fresh and smart. It definitely helped the ending and the film as a whole. But I think the period right before Dr. Bennell pulls the trigger should have been longer, more reflective. The entire movie was logistically set up for that scene, but it felt too rushed to me. More emphasis was placed on the following chase scene. A proper rest will always naturally enhance a crescendo. It just didn't have quite the emotional climax I needed.<br />
<br />
I have an idea. In the final chase scene Bennell could have plowed through a city block long mob of changelings. It would have been a better contrast to the lone woman in the tunnel and would have emphasized her cross-over to the darker side of raw animal instinct. It could have been an admission of guilt, as it were.<br />
<br />
And please, more Law&Order, and less CSI. If they'd left those stupidass red corpuscle close-ups out I might have been happier with the happy ending. <br />
<br />
The Invasion did get under my skin a little. My natural facial resting state has never been so stoic.<br />
<br />
And regarding the dismay I hear on those horrible, vapid morning talk shows over how serious it is... it's serious... it is. It's the serious, smart side of scifi. What's your problem? You mentally retarded, fucking hairdos on 'Good Morning Ameriduh' didn't complain about the much darker 28 Weeks Later being 'too serious' for a summer flick. Did ya? Huh? No!<br /></div>John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-51515196927693611202007-08-28T11:41:00.001-07:002009-10-25T17:00:23.958-07:00Orange<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQAQenmBkZKOIYvYp5R4JYtZD1aUPsO9eZhGlGgTO8dW2RPkMxuLbG7mkRovePD87ldjY7Rkn3wPFD6U0hoEGbD64PqVCngPJS4YhUkQpjDrZWuj7gCUeS6gF0PjzpDFvQ2TmFDfwEBhA/s1600-h/DSCF1467b.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5104558978811334178" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQAQenmBkZKOIYvYp5R4JYtZD1aUPsO9eZhGlGgTO8dW2RPkMxuLbG7mkRovePD87ldjY7Rkn3wPFD6U0hoEGbD64PqVCngPJS4YhUkQpjDrZWuj7gCUeS6gF0PjzpDFvQ2TmFDfwEBhA/s400/DSCF1467b.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" /></a><br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<span style="color: black;">I got one fairly decent, low-res photo out of last nights light show. </span><br /></div>John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2006494946000404200.post-29431064907935718222007-08-28T05:15:00.000-07:002009-10-25T17:00:43.999-07:00Eclipse<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPvn4cwNeLr5F66agP919jbm6B6pOjjXkRMUaXaVlXJHhLAVokkCzD3sTrTwUj-A9mDRamPL15M4A9rQFXwBFqvKnxXaPhHXkDQIToWYOV5Z9P0yyspY4RiOqlGmzIXuShww8Y0R_RkIY/s1600-h/eclipses+01d.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5222306332453056594" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPvn4cwNeLr5F66agP919jbm6B6pOjjXkRMUaXaVlXJHhLAVokkCzD3sTrTwUj-A9mDRamPL15M4A9rQFXwBFqvKnxXaPhHXkDQIToWYOV5Z9P0yyspY4RiOqlGmzIXuShww8Y0R_RkIY/s400/eclipses+01d.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" /></a><br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<span style="color: black;">We had a great view of the lunar eclipse from Denver this morning.<br /><br />It was raining </span><span style="color: black;">around eleven </span><span style="color: black;">when I walked home from work, thinking I might miss it. But t</span><span style="color: black;">he night turned out cool and clear a few hours later, just in time for the show. </span><span style="color: black;">I even woke up without an alarm. I got out my camera and snapped a few pictures.<br /><br />After totality there wasn't much to do but wait for the moon to reemerge, so I opened Photoshop and started playing. Thinking </span><span style="color: black;">earth might look even more bazaar than the moon during a total eclipse I imagined this series of pictures.<br /><br /></span><span style="color: black;">Ambient light during such an event is the name of the game. The earth is much larger than the moon, and so will completely obscure the sun. </span><span style="color: black;">I think </span><span style="color: black;">the solar corona would also be blotted out </span><span style="color: black;">if one were dead center of the shadow, but </span><span style="color: black;">I'm not sure.<br /></span><br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<span style="color: black;">I think the most interesting feature would be a bright ring caused by the bending of sunlight through our thick, movable feast of an atmosphere, into the shadow zone. </span><span style="color: black;">Unlike the rough, airless horizon of the moon</span><span style="color: black;"> the atmospheric ring around earth would be like a smooth reddish halo. </span><span style="color: black;"><br /><br />During such an eclipse one could observe </span><span style="color: black;">every sunrise and every sunset on our tiny little planet, simultaneously.</span><span style="color: black;"><br /><br />I think the stars and city lights might still be visible, depending on the relative brightness of the ring. </span><span style="color: black;">And the background stars might be very bright as well, or not. I've never been shot into space, so I don't know.</span><span style="color: black;"><br /><br />I modeled this fake picture, minus the rings, after this amazing photograph </span><span style="color: black;">taken by our collective robot, the Cassini space probe</span><span style="color: black;">, <a href="http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap061016.html">in the shadow of Saturn</a>.</span><span style="color: black;"><br /><br /></span><span style="color: black;">As the sun reemerges, a 'diamond ring,' similar to that seen during a solar eclipse on Earth, would appear. </span><span style="color: black;"><br /><br />The solar corona would rise first...</span><br /></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit;">
<span style="color: black;"><br /></span><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqzwlMFI1yfbZoHsl5IeiqwAIi7FDRUkIUHwLMOC1BaHGvP8chs5GBZI9gAY3nb8WQzs0eKBicbckZpHfWtgt3_LtzcCjlx3XDtoDP0hx8A4avuxkL0ilNMOCoQcQYE93Fq1bqolg507g/s1600-h/earth+eclipse+03b.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5104598818927971986" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqzwlMFI1yfbZoHsl5IeiqwAIi7FDRUkIUHwLMOC1BaHGvP8chs5GBZI9gAY3nb8WQzs0eKBicbckZpHfWtgt3_LtzcCjlx3XDtoDP0hx8A4avuxkL0ilNMOCoQcQYE93Fq1bqolg507g/s400/earth+eclipse+03b.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" /></a><span style="color: black;"><br />...followed by the ultra-bright disk of the Sun.<br /><br /></span><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfwamemeZFvdKhqEH0tPN3a0L6mhDTOAA5K_kAsp1P7QCCTvzY3FjnRGt1F6Mds1fGL2__ChXQkwm3Y0r70Gg0o2vy8pk-f15TPGvp8J1ws-lCWwad893vIfb51lYhfrjt67IwB-aH8Dk/s1600-h/earth+eclipse+02c.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5104598634244378242" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfwamemeZFvdKhqEH0tPN3a0L6mhDTOAA5K_kAsp1P7QCCTvzY3FjnRGt1F6Mds1fGL2__ChXQkwm3Y0r70Gg0o2vy8pk-f15TPGvp8J1ws-lCWwad893vIfb51lYhfrjt67IwB-aH8Dk/s400/earth+eclipse+02c.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center;" /></a><br /></div>John Kennellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948350858075933463noreply@blogger.com1