14 DAY TRIAL // According to a new study presented by a panel of scientists this month, it would appear that representing science in Hollywood blockbuster films might make for an efficient way of inspiring the next generation of physicists, mathematicians, IT experts and biologists to pick up science.
The panel that made the presentation was itself composed of such experts, but also from media experts and representatives and filmmakers. The conclusions were presented in San Francisco, at the 2010 annual fall meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU).
But the group wanted to make their position known from the get-go – they are not in agreement with those who say that Hollywood should accurately represent scientific principle, and not produce films where such data are stretched, to say the least.
The representation of various phenomena doesn't need to be textbook accurate. Just consider the black hole that appeared in the latest Star Trek movie. It defies most of the things we know as facts about such structures, but it looks appealing, and may therefore get some interested in astrophysics.
According to the panel, the role of science in movies should be to plant the seeds of curiosity in children watching the silver screen, and perhaps make them interested in finding the answers to some of the questions that are posed all by themselves.
“It's not an educational medium, it's an emotional medium. Kids get turned on by the emotion,” said at the conference SETI Institute astronomer Seth Shostak.
The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence has been dedicated to finding signs of extraterrestrial life, and of establishing means to communicate with aliens, for decades. The Institute is located in Mountain View, California.
Speaking about “The Day After Tomorrow,” the 2004 climate change-related movie, Emory University physics professor and panel moderator Sidney Perkowitz explained that “it actually changed people's minds about global warming.”
According to Shostak, what really matters is getting kids hooked to science. It doesn't really matter if the premises of the movie, and the way it portrays science, are relevant, and in tune with reality, or not.
Some panel members said that even the most inaccurate depictions of principles in movies can be a step forward, in the sense that discussions and debates ensue among audiences right away.
“Even if a film or media product is not very accurate, that becomes a teaching moment. So there's room for everything,” Singhal explained.
The director of the movies The Core and the Charles Darwin biopic Creation, Jon Amiel, was also a member of the panel. He said that movies should in fact show “the huge, endlessly exciting mystery that's inherent in all scientific exploration,” LiveScience reports.