Interview with Prometheus writer Jon Spaihts on io9

[Xavier Onassiss]

I've heard this stated before, but Jon Spaihts says it very well here:

 

The stereotype that a lot of science fans have about science fiction movies is that the science is the first thing to go out the window in favor of cool ideas or whatever. How do you find ways to keep the science at least plausible?

 

For too many filmmakers, "sci fi" means "anything goes." Which leads in turn to arbitrary chains of events, or story rules that feel inconsistent or muddy.

 

Story flourishes under constraint. The more scientific limits you keep in place, forcing yourself to work within real rules, the more authentic your story will feel. I always fight for scientific rigor. Not just because I'm a huge geek, which I quite definitely am, but because I believe it makes for better stories.

 

...and I've often had similar thoughts about SF writing in RPGs.

 

Discuss.

[L. Marcus]

Re: Interview with Prometheus writer Jon Spaihts on io9

 

... I wanna see this movie so much I can taste it ...

[RexMundi]

Re: Interview with Prometheus writer Jon Spaihts on io9

 

I've always thought, that the more Control you have over what you are trying to write, the better it will turn out. It's easier to write something on a piece of paper with nice lines and margins then to write the same thing on a blank slate with a piece of chalk.

 

So much like the Interview goes, have to agree strongly.

 

~Rex

[Christopher]

Re: Interview with Prometheus writer Jon Spaihts on io9

 

I've always thought' date=' that the more Control you have over what you are trying to write, the better it will turn out. It's easier to write something on a piece of paper with nice lines and margins then to write the same thing on a blank slate with a piece of chalk.[/quote']

Easier for you as writer/gm certainly. But if there is no consistent logic, it's really frustrating for the reader.

It's like the detective story where you get presented all the evidence, then the character finds the last piece - but it is not shown and you have to wait for the "the killer is" scene or the entire logic is based on a fact that nobody but Sherlok Holmes knows.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Interview with Prometheus writer Jon Spaihts on io9

 

I agree and disagree at the same time.

 

I agree about consistency. It is key in all stories. It is almost impossible to tell a cohesive story without consistency.

 

I don't think you have to adhere to real science to maintain consistency though. The writer needs to make sure they make up the rules to their "universe" and stick to them once they have done so.

 

I also think the term "Science Fiction" is applied to far too broad of subject matter. Much of what is termed "Sci-fi" is actually Fantasy. Space Opera is a great term for most sci-fi movies like Trek, 'Wars, Bab5, Galactica etc, but the general populace has no idea about that term, so the moniker of "sci-fi" has stuck, even though it is inaccurate.

[RexMundi]

Re: Interview with Prometheus writer Jon Spaihts on io9

 

Still though, common sense dictates that you will get a Better CyberPunk story let's say, if you stick to an outline roughly equal to Blade Runner or the Novel NeuroMancer, and not go running off into the cornfield with comic book style nano whatzits and or incorporating fantasy elements such as Magic and what not. I guess I like my Ice-cream to remain separate distinct flavors and not just random spaz on paper or screen.

 

~Rex

[Guest dr. strangelove]

Re: Interview with Prometheus writer Jon Spaihts on io9

 

I've heard this stated before, but Jon Spaihts says it very well here:

 

 

 

...and I've often had similar thoughts about SF writing in RPGs.

 

Discuss.

Absolute agreement. I love science in my SF stories. Stores where science is just used to justify flashing lights and explosions sucks.

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Interview with Prometheus writer Jon Spaihts on io9

 

Absolute agreement. I love science in my SF stories. Stores where science is just used to justify flashing lights and explosions sucks.

...Right; Star Trek and Star Wars are horrible franchises and should never have been started.[/deadpan]

[RexMundi]

Re: Interview with Prometheus writer Jon Spaihts on io9

 

...Right; Star Trek and Star Wars are horrible franchises and should never have been started.[/deadpan]

 

Heh, that made me laugh. Honestly I tend to point at Star Wars and go, Awesome Fantasy. Star Trek, well I'm one of those TOS fans with about Half of the Next Generation tossed in as likeable. Despised DS9 and Voyager, Liked Enterprise until they started churning out generic rehash episodes.... *shrug*

 

I guess my preferred visual SF elements are Harder SF. Loved Babylon 5. Loved Batllestar Galactica (old series and new) with the exception of a couple of episodes. The More Science in it, even if it's just Rubber Science the more I like it. The More things that look like Machines, the more "functionality" the more I like it.

 

Doesn't mean I don't get a kick out of some great Space Opera or the like, I just like my SF more Defined, and that means creating and sticking to the Outline and placing limits on certain things.

 

~Rex

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Interview with Prometheus writer Jon Spaihts on io9

 

I'm more interested in the plot and characters than devices and blinking lights.

[RexMundi]

Re: Interview with Prometheus writer Jon Spaihts on io9

 

Oh me too, but if there is some solidity behind the blinking lights, then I am Happier.

 

~Rex

[Sougen]

Re: Interview with Prometheus writer Jon Spaihts on io9

 

Personally, I just like my SciFi to be fun and entertaining. I guess I'm the weird one around here because I don't come with many other pre-conditions.

 

I'm not a fan of camp - no matter the genre- and Star Trek TOS struck me as being too much like that. I did like TNG but the lack of consistency and the last moment techno bable bits did annoy me. Enterprise was good for a lot of itself, but it did start to get a bit repetitive. B5 was one of my favorites; not because of its use of techno babble and whatnot, but because it had a consistent and progressive plot that took time to develop characters you felt you could fully invest in. This is also why I liked StarGate. But the eventual run on of mega villains and convoluted techno blah got to me. The reboot in Atlantis was also good because even if they used techno babble, it felt like we were part of it. That it came at a good time in their reasoning. All in all, a good show.

 

A lot of the harder scifi out there doesn't grab my attention because it really wants to focus on the strictness of how we understand physics now, and not on the compelling human story wrapped up in it. IT leads itself well to stories of person despair, distress, and the un-yielding environment we are all caught up in, but not much else, IMO. All the other story ideas don't really need the hard sci-fi. It doesn't seem to add to the value - just let certain people geek out about how 'realistic' it is. But to be honest, it is fiction. Its not even 'based on a real story' kind of fiction, it is whole clothe fiction. So, I'm okay with it as coming off as fiction. It shouldn't be ashamed of itself so much as to try and hide itself in the vestiges of 'believe-ability', only shine in the realm of 'compellingness' and 'relatability". ^^

[Narf the Mouse]

Re: Interview with Prometheus writer Jon Spaihts on io9

 

Plus, it it exceedingly unrealistic to think we now know most of what we'll ever know.