Science destroys the world and the paranormal saves it

[Kernel Hapablap]

Just got back from the movie "Knowing" with Nicolas Cage. This is yet another movie that passes itself off as something "balanced" between science and religion. In truth, science is shown as the bringer of the doom, and the paranormal, in this case brought to you by psychic numbers, sets out to save us. Without spoiling, let me just say the whole thing could have been produced by the Discovery Institute. Of course, the underlying message was that there is Meaning and purpose to the universe. Why are so many Hollywood movies about learning "to believe", and that there is purpose? I can think of several possibilities.
1. Bad Hollywood writers
2. Religious agenda behind production
3. This is what sells a movie
4. This is what producers believe will sell a movie

Thoughts?

[rdaneel]

Oh, I would suspect it's 1 and 3.

On a positive note, there is The Skeptic (http://www.apple.com/trailers/independent/theskeptic/) coming out. I eagerly await to see how the protagonist will discover the truth with logic and reason without resorting to supernatural explanations.

Yeah right.

[shadron]

I disagree - it is number 3, exclusively. It is not hard to write good science into a movie; there are a number of people in youtube that do it for free, and the pros could probably do it without skipping a beat (of course, the amounts of work available to knowledgeable consultants would show a quick rise). The hardest part about script writing is creating real characters and plot situations; the truth in that is proven by he number of scripts that are dreck that don't consider science pro or con.

I'd like to believe it is number 4, but no, the evidence doesn't support it to the exclusion of 3.

[Kernel Hapablap]

Yes, I suspect number 3 is the culprit. Does this mean the general population is trying to find 'deeper' meaning, within a scientific context? Perhaps the interpretation extends too far.

Oh, I would suspect it's 1 and 3.

On a positive note, there is The Skeptic (http://www.apple.com/trailers/independent/theskeptic/) coming out. I eagerly await to see how the protagonist will discover the truth with logic and reason without resorting to supernatural explanations.

Yeah right.

I really hope you're right. It really depends on if the supernatural forces end up being supernatural, then the point would be "even skeptics should believe" or something stupid like that. There are some isolated bright spots out there. "The Illusionist" is one. Scooby-Doo is another. Recent tv series "mentalist" is 95% not claptrap, too. Too bad they're few and far between. What really gets me are movies like "I am Legend" which tack on a pseudo-religious message without any need from the plot.

[Lonewulf]

What really gets me are movies like "I am Legend" which tack on a pseudo-religious message without any need from the plot.

And are based on a story that they change unnecessarily.

But what about The Omega Man? I don't think they had a real "religious" message in the story... I mean, faith was a part of it, I guess, but the "vampires" were the dark ages types that were bringing down the modern world. If anything, it seemed practically anti-religious.

[hgc]

And are based on a story that they change unnecessarily.

But what about The Omega Man? I don't think they had a real "religious" message in the story... I mean, faith was a part of it, I guess, but the "vampires" were the dark ages types that were bringing down the modern world. If anything, it seemed practically anti-religious.


Hmmm, Charleton Heston as anti-religion icon. It's deliciously evil.


And speaking of the villians in this tale, let's take a loving look:

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_54349f66a2bcb281.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=16160)

[Lonewulf]

It did seem anti-religious to me, in a way.

The vampires acted the most like people did during the middle ages, in their actions and words. They loathed technology and blamed it on their problems. They were based on the words (blood?) of the head vampire, who acted entirely like a cult leader. They "convert" one of the characters, who's seduced into their way of thinking (somehow). Heston is the one last champion of science, and considers the vampires to be ignorant savages -- and let's face us, he has a good point. They are willfully ignorant.

Even if it's not anti-religious, there's a lot of allegories to make between it and medieval fundamentalists.

[Kernel Hapablap]

I haven't seen the Omega-Man. I'll have to check it out. Shame nothing more recent springs to mind.

[MG1962]

Just got back from the movie "Knowing" with Nicolas Cage. This is yet another movie that passes itself off as something "balanced" between science and religion. In truth, science is shown as the bringer of the doom, and the paranormal, in this case brought to you by psychic numbers, sets out to save us. Without spoiling, let me just say the whole thing could have been produced by the Discovery Institute. Of course, the underlying message was that there is Meaning and purpose to the universe. Why are so many Hollywood movies about learning "to believe", and that there is purpose? I can think of several possibilities.
1. Bad Hollywood writers
2. Religious agenda behind production
3. This is what sells a movie
4. This is what producers believe will sell a movie

Thoughts?

What movie did you go and see

There is a clear connection that previous alien encounters on Earth had been mis understood as being angels etc etc. SO I really dont see where the paranormal angle comes into it

[Marduk]

There is a clear connection that previous alien encounters on Earth had been mis understood as being angels etc etc. SO I really dont see where the paranormal angle comes into it[/QUOTE]


yes but that connection is pseudo historic and itself a phenomena of marketing, go check out the past activity of most of the authors championing that claim, they all have a background in journalism, none have a background in history. the movie we're discussing here for instance doesn't link to non generic aliens who have been misidentified in the past as angels, but to fundemental christian dogma

[ziztur]

I find it funny that religionists seem to wail frequently about how Hollywood is anti-religion.

They are equally anti-reason, science and logic. Mystical crap sells.

[dahduh]

I disagree - it is number 3, exclusively.

Maybe that's a bit simplistic. This is what humans are psychologically primed to like:

1. A story with a plot involving motive
2. Characters with whom one can identify
3. Circumstances that provoke reactive emotion (suspense, uncertainty, accomplishment...)
4. Moral dilemmas that engage one's ethical judgment

Brew up anything with those ingredients and you've got something that will 'sell'.

So why so many plots based around 'belief'? Perhaps because of the following simple formula: Joe has a challenge. He is encumbered by doubt. He must believe to pull through. But there's evil at work challenging his belief. Will he make it? Hang in there, Joe! Yes, he does it, Hooray, good for Joe!

Even a movie like "Contact" follows that basic recipe, even though it is far more subtle and ambiguous than most. It's presumably much easier to just build the plot around the basic prejudices of Joe Public.

[Wowbagger]

It could also be (adding to the list in the OP):

5. Top-Down Thinking.

Those who see the world in a top-down perspective, will tend to see order and purpose in the Universe: God, or something else, is at the top, and everything trickles down from that.

Those with a Bottom-Up approach are more likely to recognize chaotic systems, and lack of higher purpose in the Universe. Everything just emerged from laws of physics, etc.

[Safe-Keeper]

Without having spent any time studying this, I view it as a culture phenomenon. If we lived in a society dominated by sceptics who enjoyed solving mysterious puzzles in the dark the way our society currently enjoys seeing the solving of whodunnits, you'd have films with explanations of supernatural phenomenon. But that's not what people want - they're after films where actual ghosts produce the sounds in the darkness, so that's what they get.

[dudalb]

You think "Knowing" is bad, just wait until Emmerich's film on 2012 comes out.....

[Erigena]

Yes, I suspect number 3 is the culprit. Does this mean the general population is trying to find 'deeper' meaning, within a scientific context? Perhaps the interpretation extends too far.



I really hope you're right. It really depends on if the supernatural forces end up being supernatural, then the point would be "even skeptics should believe" or something stupid like that. There are some isolated bright spots out there. "The Illusionist" is one. Scooby-Doo is another. Recent tv series "mentalist" is 95% not claptrap, too. Too bad they're few and far between. What really gets me are movies like "I am Legend" which tack on a pseudo-religious message without any need from the plot.
I generally go to the movies to be entertained. I don't rely on them as a source of fact so I don't think it's a big deal if they blend science and religion for entertainment purposes as long as its not portrayed as fact.

I can't remember where I saw the interviews, but the since the induction of the television show CSI, some lawyers and expert witnesses indicated that as a result of shows like that, juries are expecting evidence to be presented in that manner, even though the show is fictional. I have not seen any evidence to support this, but there are a lot of people who can't seem to separate fact from fiction.

[Kernel Hapablap]

I go to the movies to be entertained, and I was 'entertained' but much of "Knowing". However, when the underlying current or theme is based on pseudo-science or just bad science, it takes the fun out of it. For example, I have no problem watching laws of physics get broken in a movie like "Wanted". It is fun, after all.

"Knowing", and other movies like it, always seem to be driving home a "spiritual" message that can be downright subversive. Let me elaborate: Sorry in advance for spoilers, I do not know how to add that spoiler doohickey.
Nick Cage "discusses" free will and determinism to his "science" class. This discussion is the basis for the themes of the rest of the movie. His first mistake is equating determinism with purpose. Scientific determinism can simply mean that the future state of particles in the universe can be known theoretically if you know the current state based on the unchanging laws of physics. This does not mean "God" or "purpose", at least to most real scientists. 2nd, Nick Cage says the other possibility is that we all arose through the random gene mutations of natural selection. Arrghh! If there is one thing Dawkins has taught me it's that there is nothing RANDOM about natural selection. Geez.

Okay, maybe I'm nitpicking, but here's the thing (spoiler). At the end of the movie, he is suddenly "certain" that there is an afterlife, and why? Because some ******* aliens were able to tell the future about our doom and didn't bother to warn us except by putting a bunch of numbers in a crazy girl's head? Aliens that just happen to have wings like angels and just happen to seed humans on a new planet in Adam/Eve utopian style!???!!! Excuse me while I gag in my seat.

I take it back... "knowing" isn't typical hollywood claptrap, it goes a step further. There are definitely varying degrees to which movies bastardize science and glorify faith. This is one of the worst, as it tries really hard to seem science-savvy, but is really quite the opposite.

PS. Telling the future through numbers counts as paranormal, doesn't it?

[Erigena]

I go to the movies to be entertained, and I was 'entertained' but much of "Knowing". However, when the underlying current or theme is based on pseudo-science or just bad science, it takes the fun out of it. For example, I have no problem watching laws of physics get broken in a movie like "Wanted". It is fun, after all.

"Knowing", and other movies like it, always seem to be driving home a "spiritual" message that can be downright subversive. Let me elaborate: Sorry in advance for spoilers, I do not know how to add that spoiler doohickey.
Nick Cage "discusses" free will and determinism to his "science" class. This discussion is the basis for the themes of the rest of the movie. His first mistake is equating determinism with purpose. Scientific determinism can simply mean that the future state of particles in the universe can be known theoretically if you know the current state based on the unchanging laws of physics. This does not mean "God" or "purpose", at least to most real scientists. 2nd, Nick Cage says the other possibility is that we all arose through the random gene mutations of natural selection. Arrghh! If there is one thing Dawkins has taught me it's that there is nothing RANDOM about natural selection. Geez.

Okay, maybe I'm nitpicking, but here's the thing (spoiler). At the end of the movie, he is suddenly "certain" that there is an afterlife, and why? Because some ******* aliens were able to tell the future about our doom and didn't bother to warn us except by putting a bunch of numbers in a crazy girl's head? Aliens that just happen to have wings like angels and just happen to seed humans on a new planet in Adam/Eve utopian style!???!!! Excuse me while I gag in my seat.

I take it back... "knowing" isn't typical hollywood claptrap, it goes a step further. There are definitely varying degrees to which movies bastardize science and glorify faith. This is one of the worst, as it tries really hard to seem science-savvy, but is really quite the opposite.

PS. Telling the future through numbers counts as paranormal, doesn't it?
I see your point, but that's why it's fiction. I wouldn't want to limit the creativity of an artist because he/she doesn't adhere to the rules of science. As I said, provided they don't portray it as fact, I don't see that this would constitute a poor entertainment experience. If the acting is awful or there was no continuity, then to me it has earned the "bad movie" title. Regarding the forced spiritual message, just because the movie is trying to make a point, doesn't mean I have to buy it.

[YeahDude]

People love a fairy-tale. They need purpose and meaning in their lives. ANY disruption to that and they get all panicked.

[Kernel Hapablap]

Well this may well be true, I think there is an untapped market in Hollywood for movies of a skeptical nature. I think the key is to use disillusionment as the crux for the pay off. Movies with surprise endings can often be very powerful. If the 'surprise' is that it was all an illusion, I think people can appreciate such cleverness. Think "Shawshank Redemption", but instead of breaking out of jail, he's breaking out of church!

[Erigena]

People love a fairy-tale. They need purpose and meaning in their lives. ANY disruption to that and they get all panicked.
There are more lambs than skeptics and it wouldn't matter if they added a disclaimer to the movie saying that they manipulated science to fit their fictional storyline. Some will believe it anyway.

Massachusetts! Home to the Purple Shamrock and the Corrib Pub! Sorry, this has nothing to do with the thread.

[Kernel Hapablap]

Regarding the forced spiritual message, just because the movie is trying to make a point, doesn't mean I have to buy it.

True, but often movies portray agnostics, atheists, and skeptics as if there is something wrong with them that needs to be fixed. "Knowing" being an example. This just frustrates me. Although, I will admit that perhaps I am overly cynical and irritable when it comes to movies. I often find it difficult to "turn off" my critical thinking, especially when a movie is taking itself too seriously.

[Erigena]

True, but often movies portray agnostics, atheists, and skeptics as if there is something wrong with them that needs to be fixed. "Knowing" being an example. This just frustrates me. Although, I will admit that perhaps I am overly cynical and irritable when it comes to movies. I often find it difficult to "turn off" my critical thinking, especially when a movie is taking itself too seriously.
I agree with you that agnostics, atheists and skeptics are portrayed as though we can't see something because we refuse to look for it, but there is room in Hollywood for a skeptical viewpoint, it just hasn't been explored in the entertainment world as thoroughly.

I guess, I'm not too concerned with whether or not other people think I'm broken when I know they can't provide the evidence to support that opinion or any evidence to support their delusions.

This is slightly off the mark, but when my Dad saw the movie "There's Something About Mary" he remarked that is was the stupidest movie he'd ever seen and he didn't understand the appeal. I asked him if he laughed when he watched it. He said yes. I said, than it served its purpose.

[Safe-Keeper]

I can't remember where I saw the interviews, but the since the induction of the television show CSI, some lawyers and expert witnesses indicated that as a result of shows like that, juries are expecting evidence to be presented in that manner, even though the show is fictional. I have not seen any evidence to support this, but there are a lot of people who can't seem to separate fact from fiction.For another, even more serious example, I saw a speech by a Human Rights Watch representative who said that when HRW held focus groups talking to torture supporters, one thing came up again and again as a justification for torture: the television programme 24:covereyes. She then went on to explain to the audience how 24's "ticking time bomb" scenario is completely unrealistic, but really... it's a TV fiction series! Is it that bloody difficult to grasp that just because something is necessary in a fictional reality, that doesn't mean it's necessary in real life? If Jack Bauer had massacred a village "for the greater good", would people all of a sudden support massacres, too? Truly shocking.

At the end of the movie, he is suddenly "certain" that there is an afterlife, and why? Because some ******* aliens were able to tell the future about our doom and didn't bother to warn us except by putting a bunch of numbers in a crazy girl's head? Aliens that just happen to have wings like angels and just happen to seed humans on a new planet in Adam/Eve utopian style!???!!! Excuse me while I gag in my seat.:boggled:

True, but often movies portray agnostics, atheists, and skeptics as if there is something wrong with them that needs to be fixed.They also seem to take some sort of perverted glee in seeing us get killed off.

[ArmillarySphere]

You think "Knowing" is bad, just wait until Emmerich's film on 2012 comes out.....

To be released in December 2011?

:p

[Kthulhut Fhtagn]

The last tv show/movie that was friendly towards skeptics was Scooby Doo. And even then they eventually felt that they had to throw people who wanted real monsters a bone.

[Harpyja]

I thought I warned you people... didn't I write a post somewhere?

It was awful. My boyfriend (raised Jewish, possibly agnostic) and I (atheist) went to see it. We all thought the movie had the air of $cientology-woo to it.

[gumboot]

It's number 3). Even if you could make an argument that one of the other points was true for a specific movie, unless 3) was also true, it would not become a common feature of films.

Others have covered this, but it's simple. Most people, when they seek storytelling, want a fairy tale. They don't want to experience a mirror of the real world. The real world is boring, mundane, and familiar. It lacks excitement.

I predict, as the world becomes increasingly scientific and rational, fantastical and paranormal orientated stories will become more popular.

[tyr_13]

I find it funny that religionists seem to wail frequently about how Hollywood is anti-religion.

They are equally anti-reason, science and logic. Mystical crap sells.

You forgot anti-original IP, anti-believable human interaction, and anti-paying writers.

Wait, that's the video game industry too. My bad, I was overly specific.