[extropy-chat] Future friendly movies

[Giu1i0 Pri5c0]

Yes, AI has at least a friendly view of AIs. But I do not consider it
as a "great" movie.
A great transhumanist movie would be based on a great plot in a
believable and well researched future scenario, with a good script and
good actors, a human story, and of course a positive view of future
radical technologies.
Cryptonomicon is a very good book, but I don't see much transhumanist
content in it. As Stephenson has said on occasions, it is really a
historic novel.
Haven't read Fallen Angels.
My current favorites for transhumanist movies are The First Immortal
and Down and Out in Magic Kingdom.
But any good story with a human angle and set in a rear-singularity
world with uploading technology would do. A series would perhaps be
even better than a movie in terms of impact.
G.



On 8/6/05, Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I concur. Such movies should also, besides portraying science and
> transhumanism positively, show the true dark underbelly of luddism. One
> movie I think actually did this quite well was "AI", which portrayed
> the AI boy sympathetically and humanity and its fears of AI negatively.
> 
> I have long thought that the Larry Niven/Jerry Pournelle novel "Fallen
> Angels" would make a good transhumanist movie. Neal Stephenson's
> "Cryptonomicon" would do well also.
> 
> --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 <pgptag at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > I have long been persuaded that the best way to promote a positive
> > and
> > hopeful attitude toward future developments in science and technology
> > is
> > through movies. Apparently the idea has been taken up by the US
> > establishment.
> >
> Slashdot<http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/05/1413200&from=rss>:
> >
> > *According to the New York Times, the Pentagon is funding classes in
> > screenplay writing for 15
> >
> scientists<http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/04/movies/04flyb.html?ex=1280808000&en=b35c2085878bcf51&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss>.
> > The idea is to encourage kids to go into science and engineering
> > through
> > mainstream media and thereby presumably bolster long-term US national
> >
> > security. While it sounds like a lot of fun for the researchers
> > involved,
> > and anything that stems the spiral of the US into a culture of
> > anti-intellectualism is a good thing in my book. Will glamorizing
> > science in
> > the movies make kids pay better attention in chemistry class?
> > *In the New York Times
> >
> article<http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/04/movies/04flyb.html?ex=1280808000&en=b35c2085878bcf51&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss>the
> > idea is using movies to make science sexy again so that American kids
> > chose technical careers and replenish a pool of US experts on
> > technologies
> > for national security. Professional scientists and science
> > communicators are
> > asked to contribute to film making as they are the ones who can
> > develop
> > realistic future scenarios: "to reconcile the cinematic suspension of
> >
> > disbelief with the scientific method and with their basic purpose of
> > bringing accuracy to the screen".Teaching screenwriting to scientists
> > was
> > the brainstorm of Martin Gundersen, a professor of electrical
> > engineering at
> > the University of Southern California and sometime Hollywood
> > technical
> > adviser. Recently, he was asked to review screenplays by the Sloan
> > Foundation, which awards prizes for scientific accuracy, and found
> > most to
> > be "pretty dismal," as he put it."My thought was, since scientists
> > have to
> > write so much, for technical journals and papers, why not consider
> > them as a
> > creative source?" Dr. Gundersen said.
> > I believe the same concepts can be used to promote a friendlier
> > attitude
> > toward radical, "transhumanist" scientific advances and their
> > deployment in
> > society through technological (and legal) developments. We need
> > movies set
> > in believable and "accurate" future scenarios and with a positive or
> > at
> > least non-threatening view of future technologies such as radical
> > life
> > extension, Mind Machine Interfaces (MMI), and eventually mind
> > uploading.
> > I think Matrix was a horrible movie as it had a very dark atmosphere
> > and
> > made viewers actually scared of the future. There are many excellent
> > science
> > fiction novels that could be turned to good pro-science,
> > "transhumanist"
> > movies. I am sure we can help the movie industry with ideas and
> > scenarios.