Quelle excitation! A few days ago, Suji got the first-page feature in a Japanese dog magazine. The Aiken No Tomo profile offered insight into her past (rescued a little over a year and a half ago), ailments (some rear leg weakness), likes (treats and walks), dislikes (vacuum cleaners and loud noises), and her Instagram page (newoldpugsuji).
At the same time, she was being spotlighted as part of a dog rescue pop-up event in at one of the major Shinjuku department stores.
Had a meeting regarding the Untitled Awesome Project today. This one has me all kinds of excited for a two simple reasons: theme and tone. It’s something this prospective sci-fi series shares with three other shows I’ve done in the past, specifically: Stargate: SG-1, Stargate: Atlantis, and Dark Matter. Sense of fun? Check! Sense of humor? Check! Sense of family? Check! Read more
We’re three days out from the start of production on Dark Matter – and things seem to be moving along quite nicely. I mean, it’s still very early and I’m sure we’ll encounter a few bumps along the way but, right now, everyone is feeling really good about where things stand and what lies ahead. I have to say, it’s soooo much easier when you work with people who are not only good at what they do, but also genuinely fun to work with. As I’ve already mentioned, the vibe is reminiscent of Stargate – very positive, very confident, and very supportive.
This morning, Paul and I went on our daily walkabout of the standing sets: bridge, infirmary, underbelly, mess, training room, airlocks, quarters, and corridors. The lights are in, the monitors are up, and the screens are on.
Back in the (Stargate) day, this is what we used to refer to as a BLU –
Blinky Light Unit.
Afterwards, I finished my second pass on episode #112 and sent it Paul’s way, then jumped on the blue pages for episodes #101 and #102. Only small adjustments at this point: dialogue tweaks, losing the montage, and swapping out the description of the shuttle launch (replacing the retracting shell with a sliding bay door drop).
Stopped by the costumes department today to talk hair (head and facial) with actor Alex Mallari Jr. (aka FOUR) who was in for a costume fitting. While there, I spoke to our costume designer, the lovely Noreen Landry, about the Ferrous Corp. guard armor. We’ve envisioned a future where colonization of space has been spearheaded by multi-corps, major intergalactic players with the money and the resources to seek out new worlds. Oh sure, there are a few independent colonies out there (the Principality of Zairon and the Republic of Pyr come to mind) but, aside from the autonomous space stations and GA (Galactic Authority) outposts, much of colonized space is run by one of the major multi-planetaries:
The Mikkei Combine
And others we’ll get to know as the series unfolds.
Of course policing and protecting their territory requires some heavy, heavy muscle in the form of cruisers, destroyers, shuttles and, of course, soldiers (aka “corporate guard”). We’re trying to give each multi-planetary a unique look, from the corporate logos to color schemes. In the case of Ferrous Corp., we’re looking at red accents in the armour – and guns…
We will, of course, weather it down a bit to suggest some wear and tear.
This afternoon, we had our production meeting – our final big conference in advance of Production Day #1 – attended by 30+. Brandon Tataryn, our 1st AD, took us through both scripts, setting a torrid pace that saw us finish in about an impressive hour and a half!
Tomorrow, it’s all hands on deck for the hair/make-up/camera tests, the cast read-thru, the tone meeting, and the cast dinner! I’m going to get soooooooooo drunk…
For a guy who works in television, I watch surprisingly little television. Well, relatively speaking. In comparison to most, I watch what I consider a somewhat below average amount. In comparison to my friends like Martin Gero and Mark Savela, I hardly watch any at all. Not counting a few guilty “non-scripted” shows like Top Chef and the like, my t.v.-watching consists of: Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones, and The Walking Dead. I’m catching up on Louie, South Park and It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia on DVD and will download the second season of American Horror Story if/when it becomes available online. Oh, and I have been watching Modern Family, but that’s more Akemi’s show than one of mine.
All that said, I’d like to find a brilliant new series to watch. Something along the lines of past favorites like The Sopranos, The Shield, Arrested Development, Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, and Rome. The type of series that’s so good, so well-written, so well-directed, and so well-acted that you simply cannot wait to watch the next episode. I checked out other strongly reviewed shows, and came away decidedly underwhelmed. Some I found too slow-moving. Others I found offensively contrived. Still others were simply not my cup of tea. So I’m going to try my luck again with a new round.
I’ve heard great thing about each of the following. Which one should I start with?
As a big fan of The Sopranos, I had my eye on this organized crime period drama when it premiered back in 2010, but my initial enthusiasm was somewhat dampened by critiques from trusted sources. The consensus opinion of the early episodes: good, but slow. Slow? Life’s too short – and watching shows that make it feel longer aint the way to go. So I took a pass on this one. But since then, I keep hearing very good things. Apparently, once you get past the set-up, it’s riveting viewing.
I avoided this show because I’m not the biggest fan of Timothy Olyphant. He’s a fine actor, but I fear my intense dislike for the character he played in Deadwood could taint my enjoyment of this show. But my friend and former fellow Exec. Producer (on a show I honestly can’t remember working on), Alexander Ruemelin, swears by its brilliance. And, as wacky as that lovable German is, I do value his opinion…
Unlike some of the other shows on this list, no one I know has ever watched Archer. All the positive reviews I’ve read have come from online sources that call this animated series clever, controversial and, above all, hilarious.
This one has a lot of fans but the premise seems, quite frankly, a little dry. Still, Robert Cooper, another fellow whose opinion I trust, says it’s a damn fine show – although he warns it IS a soap opera. But that’s fine. In many ways so was The Sopranos.
Hmmm. At first blush, not my cup of tea, but this one comes highly recommended by my uber-caustic buddy Tara in Toronto. I can fault her taste in many things (hats for instance), but her sense of humor is dead-on…and, not so coincidentally, very similar to mine. So if Tara says Girls is worth watching, maybe Girls IS worth watching.
Another Alexander Ruemelin pick. And those who like it, REALLY like it – among them, my buddy Nige in Montreal. Then again, Nige also liked both Transformers movies so I’m not so sure…
Idris Elba is terrific and I’ve heard great things about this show, but I’ve yet to get around to watching it. Why? In the words of Scooby Doo: “I run row.”
Another Brit entry and another series no one I know watches, but everyone online seems to love. I’m sure more than a few of you have already checked it out. Thoughts?
I spent yesterday afternoon going through the various Art Department handouts I amassed over my time on Stargate. Sadly, not over my entire run on the franchise but mainly over those last four years – Atlantis’s fourth and fifth seasons, and Universe’s first and second. There’s a lot of interesting stuff – and some highly detailed schematics that might only prove of interest to the most diehard fans. Some episodes are well-represented with reams of supporting sketches and blueprints while others have only a single sheet or two to accompany the happy memories. All told, several hundred documents at least.
The plan, as outlined in a previous entry, is to package them by episode as fan giveaways. I estimated 40 at first but, including SGU, it’s closer to 80! Ultimately, as many of you have already pointed out, it would be nice to make this veritable treasure trove of Stargate information available to fandom at large. And so, before I get around to doing that giveaway, I’m going to have everything scanned and digitized so that someone (hint! hint!) can upload to a dedicated site where fans can peruse them at their own leisure – while the more ambitious of you can start work on building your own versions of the various sets. How’s that for an idea? “Hey, studio, we’d like to shoot the movie. No, we can shoot it for half the cost because we’ve already got the sets. They’re on loan from some fans…”
Continuing our trip down SGA memory lane with…
GHOST IN THE MACHINE (505)
Another one of Carl Binder’s infernal “ghost” episodes! Have to hand it to him though. He was damn good at them.
This one was bittersweet for a host of reasons, the chiefest, of course, being the fact that it marked the final appearance of Elizabeth Weir (in new replicator form, mind you). The original ending was a little more open-ended but, once were unable to secure Torri for a return appearance, it was decided to rewrite the script and offer closure to that particular storyline. I often like to think that, if things had turned out differently – IF the show had been picked up for a sixth season and IF Torri had been amenable to a return appearance – we could have found a way to re-introduce the real Weir to the Stargate universe. In my mind, Oberoth’s claim to have killed the real Elizabeth was an obvious lie. Why dispose of such a valuable asset, someone with such intimate knowledge of Atlantis and the Stargate program? It’s more probable that Oberoth kept Elizabeth in stasis at a secret location – only to perish with that knowledge.
Somewhere out there in the Pegasus Galaxy, Elizabeth Weir is waiting to be rescued!
A rare addendum. Came across this and thought it was too good to pass up. Art Department rendition of the ending/final VFX shot:
The other day, I was back in familiar territory, at The Bridge Studios, the former home of Stargate: SG-1, Stargate: Atlantis, and Stargate: Universe, present home of Once Upon A Time, and Brightlight Pictures the company producing the SF miniseries Paul and I are writing. I dropped by to get notes on the script, toss around some ideas for the second draft, and pick up a book that was sent to my old office. It was nice to see some familiar faces, like Bill the security guard –
And the gang in Admin –
– who were wondering when we’d be coming back. Well, soon. Hopefully.
I suppose it’s only appropriate that the visit to my old stomping ground coincides with my little trip down memory lane, reflecting back on Stargate: Atlantis’s first season.
HOT ZONE (113)
Following three wide open, all-out, kick-ass episodes, we shift gears to something a little more…self-contained. When members of the science team investigating unexplored sections of the city fall victim to a frightening contagion, Atlantis enacts security protocols, placing itself under lockdown. It’s another great episode for McKay that lays the groundwork for future stories – first and foremost the introduction of the Asurans, the mysterious creators of the nano-virus, but also Rodney’s sister Jeannie (who will end up making a few guest appearances in the coming seasons).
Again, what really stands out for me in this episode is less the threat faced than the reactions of our heroes – specifically, John Sheppard. In the opening two-parter, it is suggested that he’s a bit of a rebel, a loose cannon who has problems with authority. In later episodes he shows great courage and determination in the face of danger and yet, at the same time, also demonstrates a frustratingly cavalier attitude toward his commander, Weir. In Underground, he goes over her head by making defacto deals with the Genii. And in this episode, he openly challenges her authority by ordering Sgt. Bates to disregard her orders. Ultimately, Sheppard gets his way and his actions end up making an already bad situation worse when his intervention allows the nano virus to spread to the mess hall and endanger the lives of everyone there. In the end, he puts HIS life on the line and his heroic actions save the day, but he is surprisingly unrepentant in his post-plague discussion with Weir.
WEIR: But you are not the one who decides what is and what is not a military situation. Now, both General O’Neill and Colonel Sumner warned me that you don’t respect the proper chain of command.
SHEPPARD: Well, sometimes I see a situation a little different than …
WEIR: No. Listen to me, John. Now, you endangered yourself and the lives of many others.
SHEPPARD: Because I thought it was the best course of action to take — and, by the way, I saved your ass.
WEIR: I know you did — but you have to trust me.
SHEPPARD: I do!
WEIR: Do you?
Sheppard is let off the hook (more or less) because he saves the day, but how different would his conversation with Weir have been had any of the individuals in that mess hall died? Should the legitimacy of one’s actions be contingent on their results? Please discuss.
My least favorite episode of the show’s five year run, probably the franchise’s seventeen season run. The story plods along at an unnervingly leisurely pace and the characters act – well – surprisingly out of character. Gone is the adorably curmudgeony McKay we’ve grown to know over the first half of the season, replaced by a miserable, humorless imposter. Our charming anti-hero, Sheppard, meanwhile, is transformed into a lovestruck schoolboy, picnicking on Atlantis and making the moves on a woman he barely knows. And when McKay calls him on it, Sheppard responds by almost throwing down with him. Dude, this is Rodney. Remember Rodney? The guy who saved your life two episodes back? The bulk of the episode is dedicated to entertaining the mysterious Chaya while McKay attempts to figure her out. Eventually, he learns the truth in a reveal that is at once strange and underwhelming. “Yep, I’m an Ancient.” (Cue shoulder shrug). “Let’s have cosmic intercourse.”
The episode is bookended by action sequences that, while exciting, don’t really make a whole lot of sense upon closer scrutiny. Why was the jumper attacked by darts in the opening? There was mention of a possible hive ship nearby but we never see it. And why is the planet attacked again at the end? Is it merely an enormous coincidence that the wraith just happened upon Proculus during the events of this episode (and while Chaya was away?)? Or have the wraith been demonstrating staggering patience by staking out the planet for generations, just waiting for an opportunity to strike?
Things bounce back in a BIG way in the next episode, Carl Binder’s brilliant Before I Sleep.
A reminder to cast your vote for your favorite Stargate mid-season two-parter for a chance to win some signed scripts. To ensure a fairer distribution of votes, I’ll be picking a random voter from the winning mid-season two-parter AND a random voter from one of the other nominated two-parters.
Last night, Akemi and I watched Misery. It was her first time, my…what is it now…twelfth? It’s my favorite Stephen King movie and last night’s screening further cemented it as one of my top ten favorite films of all time. Brilliant performances, a tightly plotted script, and some of the most excruciatingly suspenseful sequences ever committed to celluloid. Nowadays, most horror movies are simply excuses for extended visceral sequences that, after awhile, border on the cartoonish in order to satiate the appetite of an increasingly jaded audience. Misery, in comparison, makes masterful use of the “the build”, crafting unnerving, edge-of-your seat sequences that build in intensity, leaving the audience wondering what…when…where? And when the answer comes, it’s horrific and, best of all, unexpected. The race back to the room from the kitchen search, the vengeance denied by the hallway hesitation, the startled late night awakening to the looming beside visitor, the frustration of the spilled wine, the shocking shotgun blast, and the hobbling. Oh, the hobbling. We only really catch a glimpse of it, a fraction of a second when Annie swings her hammer and connects, but it’s damn effective. And I would argue that seeing her heft up the hammer and swing for the other foot, even though we don’t see it connect this time, is even more disturbing. The sequence is so unsettling that it has remained with me after so many other far gorier moments in horror filmdom have faded. Just a perfect movie.
Thanks to everyone who has weighed in with their concerns regarding my planned trip to Comic Con. Fear not, I won’t be sleeping on the streets of San Diego. Dark Horse Comic’s New Events and Community Manager, the super-lovely Kari Yadro, has assured me she’ll be able to swing my accommodations. Whether it’s staying at the hotel that Dark Horse has already booked or napping in Kari’s winnebago while she’s working, I think I’m covered.
Returning to my ruminations on Stargate: Atantis’s first season…
POISONING THE WELL (107)
This was my favorite episode since the two-hour opener. It offered a difficult moral and ethical dilemma with no easy answers and a wonderful emotional arc in Carson Beckett’s working relationship with Perna, the Hoffan scientist. I like my endings like I like my chocolate, bittersweet, so the conclusion to this one really resonated with me. The episode also delivers one of the most unwieldy, difficult to deliver lines in Stargate history with “One hundred percent cellular penetration in all five test inoculations”! Try saying that five times fast.
The captive wraith gets a name, Steve, only to die before we get a chance to know him. C’est la vie. Given the circumstances and his push to experiment on the prisoner, I found Sheppard’s “We’re gonna help you” assurance as Steve succumbs to the effects of the Hoffan drug altogether bizarre. If anyone would have adopted this conciliatory stance, it should have been civilian Commander Weir and yet even she sees the logic in Sheppard’s arguments, acceding to his demands for experimentation. When he first mentions it, she brings up the Geneva Convention to which Sheppard counters that if the wraith were at the Geneva Convention, they would have no doubt fed on the other participants. Good point. Ultimately, this enemy is not one that can be reasoned with. Short of discovering a way for them to gain sustenance without feeding on humans (and we’ll come to that later in the series’ run), it’s kill or be killed.
There are, of course, those pro-wraithers who point out that the wraith’s actions are dictated by survival instincts. They’re not evil. And, while that may seem true (although the obvious joy they take in torturing their prey suggests otherwise), I would point out that the Atlantis expedition and the rest of the humans in the Pegasus galaxy are simply fighting back, the result of their own survival instincts.
Given the fact the wraith target technologically advanced societies, it would make sense that certain civilizations would seek to disguise their accomplishments from the enemy. Enter the Genii. I liked them as a wildcard, a military society that could prove both friend and foe, depending on the circumstances. I also liked the continued clash between the civilian and military approaches on Atlantis, something we touch on in the previous episode but really comes to the fore here in the discussions between Weir and Sheppard. Again, Sheppard makes sense and Weir inevitably acquiesces to his game plan on the strength of his argument, but what is particularly interesting about this ethical clash is not the debate itself but the fact that Sheppard makes a unilateral decision on dealing with the Genii BEFORE discussing it with his defacto Commander. Not once, but twice!
Later in the episode, the Atlantis team comes clean about the wraith and warns the Genii that they were awakned as a result of their failed rescue op and subsequent murder of a queen. Well, yes and no. Certainly yes in their minds but one could make a very strong argument that the wraith would have been awakened regardless, not because of Sheppard’s actions on the failed rescue op, but because of the information the queen draws out of Sumner: the existence of Earth and the billions of humans just waiting to be fed upon. Of course, Sheppard wasn’t privy to the conversation and has no way of knowing that, while he may blame himself for the wraith’s early awakening, it’s likely that the wraith would have awakened anyway.
Cookie Monster would like to remind everyone that our Supermovie of the Week Club reconvenes tomorrow. Monster will be offering up his thoughts on Batman Forever, so make sure you watch it so that you can provide an informed opinion on his review.
Last year, I took us all on a trip down memory lane as I reflected back (and attempted to recall what details I could of) my seven seasons on Stargate: SG-1. Our journey began here (April 24, 2011: Days of Stargate Past – SG-1 Season Four!) and ended here (November 9, 2011: Ending my SG-1 trip down memory lane with Unending!). Along the way, we reminisced on the shipper controversy, Daniel Jackson’s untimely demise and fortuitous resurrection, and even offered some insight into ideas and scenes that never made the final cut. If you missed anything, just use this blog’s handy search function for the terms “memory lane”, “Days of Stargate past”, or “SG-1” and they should lead you to the appropriate entries between April 24 and November 9 of 2011.
While SG-1 was my first love (We were together for seven years!), my time on Atlantis proved equally memorable. The show was possessed of a similar tone in its mix of high adventure and humor, yet proved distinct in its exploration of Ancient mythology and an unfamiliar galaxy as seen through the eyes of a new set of heroes. Atlantis offered a sense of wonder and camaraderie born of isolation and constant danger. Whereas SG-1 could always go home at the conclusion of their adventures, the members of the Atlantis expedition (at least for those first few seasons) could only draw comfort from the city of Atlantis itself – and, of course, each other. It was unique and compelling yet, at the same time, comfortingly familiar. Nowhere is this more evident than in opening theme, composed by the late Joel Goldsmith, which is, at turns fresh, haunting, stirring and, throughout, discernibly Stargate.
Stargate: Atlantis wasn’t envisioned as a companion to Stargate: SG-1. It was intended to replace the long-running series. The only problem was, with eight seasons under belt, SG-1 wasn’t quite done yet. And fans (and the network) weren’t done with it either. And so, instead of passing the torch and seguing to a new Stargate series, we ended up producing both. In retrospect, it was quite a feat: 40 hours of television! Lesser productions can barely manage a third that output, but Stargates SG-1 and Atlantis delivered two fantastic 40 episode seasons before SG-1 took it’s final bow. It wasn’t easy, but it was certainly made easier by all of the enormously talented individuals who made it happen, from the office staff and crew to the cast and my fellow writer/producers.
That first season of Atlantis was special for a lot of reasons. Not only did it introduce viewers to an exciting new world, but it also introduced them to two equally exciting new writer-producers in Martin Gero and Carl Binder who would both make their debut’s in the show’s first year (with Childhood’s End and Before I Sleep respectively) before joining the staff and eventually leaving their notable marks on the 5-year production.
As for me – well, while our burgeoning writing staff (made up of series creators Brad Wright and Robert Cooper, my writing partner Paul Mullie, Damian Kindler, Alan McCullough, Peter DeLuise, Martin Gero, and Carl Binder) straddled both shows, spinning ideas and helping to break stories, there was a wavering demarcation between the two productions. While Paul and I wrote three episodes for SGA’s first season (Suspicion, Home, and Siege II), we were, for the most part, on Team SG-1, writing six episodes and (more importantly) producing more than half the show’s eight season episodes.
Still, as I said, the entire writing department was involved in all things Stargate. And, prior to the commencement of principal photography on the SGA series opener, Rising I and II, we were privy to exhilarating/frustrating/surprising/ultimately satisfying road to putting together the pieces of the puzzle.
And, one of the most challenging of these puzzle pieces was the casting. It may surprise you to know that, when it comes to producing a show, not everybody cares about costumes or set design or whether the script’s fifth act denouement is emotionally satisfying, but everybody – and I do mean EVERYBODY – has an opinion on casting. Studio and network execs, producers, hell, even your significant other peering over your shoulder as you screen the auditions on your home computer will want to weigh in. Of course, the more voices in the mix the more likely there will be disagreements. So it is with every production and Atlantis was no different. Different individuals envisioned these characters in very different ways and, as a result, consensus was only achieved after many auditions, calls-backs, heated discussions, and not-so-gentle reminders that our start date was drawing closer and we really needed someone to say the lines on camera.
To be honest, I don’t remember a whole lot about that whirlwind casting process, but I do recall:
The part of Carson Beckett was one of the first ones cast. The other producers were in Rob’s office, screening the first batch of local auditions when Brad called me in and told me to check out the guy onscreen. I hadn’t imagined Beckett with a Scottish accent but, after watching Paul McGillion in the role, I couldn’t imagine him without one. He’d brought something unexpected to the part and we all responded to it.
Elizabeth Weir was not an easy character to pull off. She had to be smart, confident and strong yet needed to exude a certain warmth and empathy we were looking for in the civilian leader of the expedition. When it came time to (re)casting the role, several established names were considered (one had her own hit show back in the day while another went on to break out on a hit show soon after), but it was Torri Higginson who managed to strike just the right balance and vault her to the top of the list.
The role of Teyla Emmagan was a tough one to cast. Like Weir, she needed to be a strong, empathetic leader. But she also required something even more important – quite literally, an other-worldly quality that made her unique. Although she may have looked human, Teyla was an alien and, as a result, we needed someone who could make use buy into her character, convince us and never make us doubt. Some equally excellent actresses auditioned for the role but, as good as they were, they were never quite able to achieve that gravitas Rachel pulled off with such seeming ease.
The role of John Sheppard was the second to last one cast. It came right down to the wire and there were several candidates in play. The character was originally envisioned as a good ole southern boy, so it only made sense that Ben Browder’s name was bandied about early. However, he was busy shooting Peacekeeper Wars. A number of other actors were considered (one went on to play the lead in a hugely popular show the following year while another made his mark as a handsome heart throb on another hugely popular series still on the air) but it was Joe Flanigan who won the part based on his ability to pull off the devil-may-care attitude Brad and Robert were looking for.
We come to the final role cast, a character who, in many ways, embodied everything Atlantis was about: exploration, discovery, fun, humor, and seat-of-your-pants-Holy-Sh&%-how-the-hell-am-I-going-to-get-out-of-this-adventure. And he almost didn’t make the trip to Pegasus. Originally, the casting call went out for a completely different character, an earnest young doctor who would lend the team much-needed medical support on their off-world ventures. Unfortunately, no one could agree on who that actor should be. If the casting of Sheppard went down to the wire, then the casting of this final role went a step past it. Finally, days away from production, Robert Cooper had an idea: Forget the doctor character. Why not use an established character from SG-1? How about Rodney McKay? We all loved the thought of McKay being part of the expedition but others weren’t sold. They found him annoying! Hell yeah, but he’d be sooo much fun to write for. Rob got on the phone and pointed out that the character had come a long way since first being introduced way back in SG-1’s 48 Hours. He’d evolved, going from annoying jerk to endearingly irritating. To this day, I’m convinced that they weren’t totally convinced but, with production poised to commence, relented, I suppose figuring they could just replace the character somewhere down the line. No one, even those of us who loved the idea of having the endearingly irritating Rodney McKay on board couldn’t have predicted how hugely popular the character would become.
Whew! Didn’t expect the intro to be this long. In the next few days, we’ll start getting into the actual production as I offer hazy reminiscences and insight into the individual episodes. So, buckle up and keep your arms and legs inside the ride as we begin our journey down Atlantis memory lane…
I’m finalizing my Comic Con plans. I will be there, of course, in support of my SF comic book series, Dark Matter, but would be happy to chat macarons, pugs, french bulldogs, oh, and Stargate while I’m there. I’ve already heard from some fans who’ll be there. Anyone else?
Rather than take up needless space with my blah-blah-blah, I’m making this intro short and sweet so that we can move on to today’s special guest blogger, Stargate Atlantis physics consultant Mika McKinnon. Enjoy this fun and incredibly informative Q&A and, once you’re done, be sure to check out the video at the bottom of this entry for a Carl Binder-led tour of Stage 3. Over to Mika…
I tried to group your questions by theme — what can I say, scientists are a bit obsessed with classification!
Section One: What does the physics consultant do?
Smiley_face06 writes: “Joe told us that you’re the show’s “physics consultant,” and while that seems fairly self-explanatory, will you explain what kind of things you do?”
Green writes: “As a physics consultant what all do you look at? Do you only deal with the science of the stories or have you been asked to look at the logic of certain stunts or fights that are on Stargate Atlantis? ”
I work for the Props department. My job is to deal with any of the props that have visible-science components — white boards with equations, notepads that McKay is frantically scribbling on, sheets of paper with scratch work strewn around the floor, that sort of thing.
To me, one of the (many!) things that sets Stargate apart is the attention to detail (like making sure x-rays are right side up and equations are real), and my job is just one of doubtlessly many consultants who get pulled in to make that detail consistent across the show.
Enzo Aquarius writes: “Hello Mika! Have there ever been times where you told our favorite writers to rewrite part of an episode script due to a physics-related error, or are you consulted before anything related to physics are written down overall?”
For the episodes I’m involved with, I get the scripts about a week before filming. I read through them with an eye for the non-obvious science or painful flaws and pass those comments through the Props department to the directors. Sometimes there are minor adjustments to accommodate my comments, sometimes scientific accuracy takes a back seat to practicality and artistic license.
There’s an example of this type of overlooked-science in an upcoming episode. The script did a fantastic job sketching out the real science for a disaster scenario, and I passed back some comments about visually-distinguishable science that wasn’t explicitly mentioned (ie, “A scientist would notice it wasn’t there.”). Specifically, if you cool down air it can hold less water, so the water condenses out and it gets foggier. If a place gets cold, scientist-viewers would think it was odd if it wasn’t also foggy, but fog also has a huge visual impact on mood. My job in reading the scripts is to point out the science to the directors, but it’s directors’ decision on if they want to incorporate it or not. Keep your eyes peeled in these last few shows to see if you can spot the scenes I’m talking about!
Lolli writes: “Are any of the equations we see in the episodes on white boards and such real? or are they gibberish? Who comes up with them? Thank-you for taking the time to answer our many questions!”
Yes, they are real. Sometimes it’s work from current papers on related topics blended together (like in “The Last Man,” the equations are a mix of transversable black hole physics, solar flares, and some Asgaurd variables), while other times it’s laying out foundational equations from a field and then I play with them (like in the upcoming “Brain Storm”).
If you check out the boards in the background of the Control Room, it goes through a whole logical structure from string theory through meteorology giving the context of the exceptions to the standard laws of physics required by the storyline. Later on the problem-solving darts through a whole lot of different fields including astrophysics and computer science using equations from the painfully simple to the ridiculously complex in an effort to find a solution.
Jean writes: “Have you ever been on set to watch an episode being shot?”
Yes. Any time there are actors writing equations, I’m there. This is particularly true when there’s erasing, re-writing, and problem-solving going on. One of the more amusing aspects of my job is coming up with plausible mistakes to correct — after all, we can’t have McKay making errors that a first-year physics student would catch!
ytimynona writes: “The actors (particularly Amanda Tapping and David Hewlett) always sound like they know what they’re talking about when they spout technobabble. Do you go over the concepts with them before shooting those scenes???”
Actually, pretty much everyone who sees what I’m writing wants to know what it means, so the odds are high that not only do I end up going over the concepts with the actors, the director, the assistant director, the lighting guys, the sound crew, the props folks, the extras waiting by the sidelines, but I’ve occasionally walked in to hear the guys who were hanging lights teaching the freshly-arrived special-effects crew what a set of equations means. If we had a few more seasons, I wouldn’t be surprised if the entire Stargate gang could pass the Physics GRE with flying colours!
Sachi writes: “Since both their characters play astrophysicists, Amanda Tapping and David Hewlett carry the bulk of the physics technobabble on Stargate. Did you ever help them with their lines and do you feel they did a good job portraying physicists?”
I haven’t met Amanda Tapping, but I’ve helped David a few times with his handwriting for all the symbols used in math. He’s really curious, and likes to learn all about the equations he’s writing instead of blindly copying.
I do like them both as physicists. There are certainly people that bright and the personalities range from the most sociable of creatures to truly eccentric caricatures, so I can imagine Carter and McKay existing in the world. Try people-watching in San Francisco in early December when the American Geophysical Union rolls into town and you’ll see exactly what I mean.
antisocialbutterflie writes: “I know in science that it is how you say it as much as what you’re saying. Do you have to consult during shooting as well as script writing?”
Yes, I’m there during shooting (but I’m not there during script writing). The technobabble is so smooth I’ve never needed to make a comment on it, but sometimes I interrupt to teach Greek handwriting.
Idonotlikegreeneggsandham writes: “What do you think of characters like Sam, Rodney and Zelenka as representations of people that work in your field (in terms of both personality, intelligence and attitude toward science, as well as their willingness to join top-secret scientific/military contingents on the other side of the universe fighting off seemingly indestructible life-sucking aliens with laser-guns, with unknown funky flashing gadget computers for assistance and the knowledge that they could die at any given moment)?
Yup, they’re pretty much part of the world of physicists.
Although I’ve met many pleasant, well-adjusted people in physics, there are days I wonder if there’s a certain freedom granted from understanding the fundamental nature of the universe that lets people embrace their own eccentricities. Read a biography on Nikola Tesla and you’ll walk away marveling both at his brilliance and the unapologetic uniqueness. (Sorry, no specific book recommendation, but Spider Robinson does a great job using him as a fictional character…)
As for the last bit, have you ever seen a geek with an unknown funky flashing gadget? All the rest of it — the indestructible, the life-sucking, the alien (but not the laser-guns, those count as funky gadgets) — that would be totally unnoticed in the face of a new toy to explore. It’s not so much that I believe physicists as a whole are remarkably brave so much as abnormally and ridiculously focused to the extent of just not realizing the danger posed by reality. XKCD has a great “http://xkcd.com/242/” one-glance definition of the scientist that sums it up: curiosity is a powerful motivator.
Terry writes: “Do you give the writers new ideas on things to write about?”</I>
ytimynona writes: “How much input do you have in the “technobabble” that we hear? Do the scripts say “insert technobabble here” or do the writers have a decent grasp of the majority of the physics concepts in the show?”
Montrealer writes: “Are you responsible for any of the techno-babble on Atlantis? The fans need someone to blame/praise.
Jean writes:“Which to you find yourself doing more often as a physics consultant for Stargate: “Dumbing down” the dialogue so that a lay audience can understand the concepts being discussed, or inserting more scientific terms to make the dialogue sound more technical? I guess it has to be a balance of the two, so that any discussion sounds realistic and plausible yet at the same time is understandable to a non-scientific audience.”
Chevron7 writes: “Do any of the writers ever challenge you over things you may have questioned?”
Idonotlikegreeneggsandham writes: “I know that on almost every film and television series, particularly on Stargate, the writers see scripting as a continuous process and are constantly updating, editing and changing their stories. My question is, when throughout that process do you start to advise them on the scientific aspects of it? Do the writers begin to ask questions as soon as an idea pops into their heads, or do they wait until, say, a first or second draft to ask you to go over it?”
Smiley_face06 writes: “When in the script process do the producers consult you?”
It’s all the writers! I’m really curious to see what sort of books are hiding on their reference shelf or if they just had fantastic science teachers. I work for Props, so I don’t make any changes to the scripts. Although I can’t accept credit for the technobabble, I’ll bask in the glow of your appreciation if you start mentioning my lovely handwriting on the white boards…
Likewise, the producers are all a bunch of clever punks who know so much science that they don’t need me.
I would love to get the chance to chat science with the writers one day. At the end of Season Four I was getting teased that I’d have to put together a series of introductory lectures on current events in science, but no luck yet. Then again, considering how many questions I get from the cast & crew, it’d probably be the best-attended class I ever taught!
Nika writes: “What is one of the weirdest requests you’ve had from the writer’s team?”
Again, nothing from the writers, but the props department once asked me for several meters of equations. Many times in my life I’ve been asked for equations to solve specific problems, and I’ve frequently been asked for ones on certain topics or involving specific variables, but never before have I been asked for equations by length!
Chevron7 writes: “Do you consult on things on Stargate other than scripts? e.g. Proper lab techniques etc.”
During “The Last Man,” someone asked me if it was realistic to have McKay in his fleece moose-pajamas while scribbling on white boards, to which I could only respond that every house I’ve lived in has had at least one giant white board for the past ten years, I don’t bother getting out of pajamas at all on homework days, and my fleece pajamas have polar bears on them.
Idonotlikegreeneggsandham writes: “Do you only consult the writers, or have you ever been involved in aiding directors, actors, VFX, SFX, production designers etc. on, for instance, how something would really explode, what that level of energy would, in reality, do to the human body, how to deliver a particular line, or what a prop or set dressing should actually look like?”
Not officially, but everyone on set is irrepressibly curious. This means that if I’m around, someone is bound to ask me what it would “really” be like. Sometimes it’s the directors, sometimes it’s the sound guys. Mostly, it’s simple curiosity, but occasionally it’s to make sure the science is close enough to be realistic. When I first started, most people I talked to on set were surprised to learn that they were doing a better job on the science than they thought they were.
Idonotlikegreeneggsandham writes: “What was the script that gave you the biggest headache – either in terms of how persistent a writer was in including a partcular part, or how complicated a particular physical concept was?
It doesn’t show up on screen, but any episode where the science isn’t behaving properly will leave me with an unshakable urge to search out some sort of silent explanation for what’s going on (folks pointed some of those moments out in the questions in Section Four). A packet of air is undergoing huge pressure changes without changing shape? To keep PV = nRT, the temperature is fluctuating right along with it but our heroes are too tough to cringe when handling barbecued corn so they won’t flinch now. A black hole is more massive than the star it collapsed from? There must have been some dark matter destabilized by the transition that added to the mass. Really. At least, that’s what I think very, very loudly when watching!
antisocialbutterflie writes: “Have you ever had to shoot down an entire script idea because the science is in no way feasible?”
Montrealer writes: “Are there any occasions that you have to remind a writer that Atlantis is a SciFi show instead of a fantasy show?
Idonotlikegreeneggsandham writes: “Have there been any scripts (you don’t have to mention any names!) that have come across your desk where the science “fact” has been so totally off the mark that you’ve told the writer to go away and drop the story completely or entirely re-write it? And what were the concepts that they… uh, “got wrong”?”
Nope, I suspect that happens hidden away in the writer’s corral. If something ever did pop up, it would be more my job to find a silent explanation for what was going on to make it plausible and then work that explanation into the equations so motivated and curious geeks can spot the hints explaining how it’s not so far-fetched after all.
Idonotlikegreeneggsandham writes: “How much leeway to you tend to “give” the writers with their scripts? Do you draw any “DO NOT CROSS, WILL BE CRUCIFIED BY SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY” lines, and have there been any broadcast episodes that you’ve been completely “against” because of scientific inaccuracies?”
Again, these decisions are made way before scripts get to me, but in my opinion the science community as a whole embraces science fiction. The complaints I hear are never over the big exceptions like teleportation or faster-than-light travel; it’s more an irritation at unscientific details that are unnecessary to the plot.
BatesianMimic writes: “Have you found that the scripts that cross your desk need quite a lot of work before they resemble something that could remotely resemble actuality. Also, would you call your job creative science interpreting, or something else?”
I consider this a science outreach job. When I’m on-set, I’m doing outreach by answering questions and providing a real-life example of a friendly, articulate scientist (I hope!). By providing real equations in the shows, I’m doing outreach by ensuring curious viewers have a starting-point to explore unusual applications of known science. To me, science fiction is an amazing outreach tool for science education, acting as an inspiration and providing the freedom to explore science beyond textbooks.
Assorted questioners asked: “Which writer or producer is the most or least science-competent?”
I’ve never really kept track, but I think I’ll start. Maybe I’ll award “Congratulations! You pass scifi science 101!” certificates at the end of the season…
Section Two: How did you get the job & do you work for other shows?
Thornyrose writes: “How did you land a job as consultant on Atlantis?”
NOLA-Lib writes: “And, how did you get your job?”
ytimynona writes: “How did you get the job as physics consultant???”
In Season 3, Stargate asked the physics department at UBC for a string theorist, and no one was responding. When I heard about it, I didn’t apply as I was a lowly geophysicist (scientists are weird in their hierarchy — I do practical things so I’m lower down than the purely theoretical) but I insisted that Steven Conboy, a string theorist at Green College, call in. He worked for a season, then left town. He forgot to tell Stargate where he went so they came looking for him at Green College. By this time I’d talked to Steven enough to realize that Stargate really needed just a physicist and not specifically a string theorist, so I jumped at the chance as soon as I heard. I’ve been working for them ever since, and I make sure they always know how to contact me.
Henry writes: “How did you get this awesome job? The Physics Department here at UBC sometimes mention jobs like yours when explaining “what you can do with a Physics degree” but they never tell us how to do it!”
Mine! It’s all mine!
When Steven moved out of Green College, my room mate inherited his armchair, and I inherited his job. I guess that means the recommended technique for getting this job is to be at the other end of the phone when Stargate comes calling for me if I’m out of town…
Cat4444 writes: “How do you become a physics consultant for a TV show, anyway? Did you put up your hand and say, “Hey, guys, over here! Your physics are flawed, and I can fix them for you!” Did the producers come to you looking perplexed and asking if something they wanted to do was feasible? Or did they make you take the ignominious step of having to fill out an application form, do the interview bit, then wait to hear whether you’d gotten the job?”
I stepped in when the previous consultant moved on. I called in, and was at work the next morning. I know poor Andrash was inundated with phone calls but I don’t know how or why he picked me. After my first day I guess Evil Kenny liked my work because they kept calling me back.
Terry writes: “What led you to become a consultant on a tv show?”
As for why I took the job, what fan would possibly resist? I love scifi, and I think it’s a wonderful tool for getting people to think critically about science. If the folks putting Stargate together want help getting more accurate science into their show or hiding easter eggs for the science-geeks in their audience, I’m all for helping any way I can.
Astrumporta writes: “Were you brought on board because of your physics knowledge or was that a skill that came to use later?”
Forget that whole story about Steven; what really happened is that Joe decided that McKay should have a super-long scarf a la “http://www.doctorwhoscarf.com/” Dr. Who, but patterned in binary like that one in “http://www.knitty.com/ISSUEwinter06/PATTbinary.html“, so they brought me on as an extremely geeky knitter with a habit of accidentally memorizing ASCII binary code. It was only after Baba-lou was buried in an avalanche of weird food resulting from a catastrophic collapse of leftovers from Joe’s videos and I managed to rescue him using only the power of physics, 46 pool cues, and some gaffers tape, that they decided to use my physics skills for the greater good of Stargate. After my very first day as a physics consultant I was nearly fired on account of unrealistically neat handwriting, but after a severe scolding I managed to throw away years of conditioning and learned to scribble messily enough to impersonate the scrawl of a genius.
At least, that’s how I remember it.
Terry writes: “Do you consult for other productions?”
Henry writes: “Do you work on other sci-fi shows too?”
Not yet, but with all the scifi in Vancouver I can hope! At the moment I need to mostly be a student, but once I finish my thesis maybe the executive producers will smile down on me for more gigs.
Sachi writes: “How long have you been a physics consultant for Stargate and do you also act as a consultant for any other TV series or movies?”
Cat4444 writes: “Have you been the physics consultant with SGA since the beginnning, or did you come on board later?”
Later. I’ve been doing occasional episodes in Seasons 4 and 5. In season 3, it was string theorist Steven Conboy, and I don’t know who was doing it before that.
Cat4444 writes: “Did you consult on any of the SG-1 episodes also?”
Cat4444 writes: “Did you have to stomp on any colleagues to get the job as physics consultant?”
Nope. To the contrary, I originally passed up applying for the job in favour of a friend, and when I eventually got it some of my friends on the more mathematical end of the physics-spectrum helped make sure I was sufficiently up to speed on my string theory to qualify.
I haven’t ever witnessed stomping in physics (or in science at all). Most experiments these days are far too large for any one person to do, and the entire process of research is building on each other’s results, so the culture is pretty collaborative. Maybe I’ve been lucky, maybe people just like to play nice in front of me, but the cooperative vibe (instead of competitive) is one of the aspects of both science and Stargate that draw me to them.
Section Three: Who are you?
Van fan writes: “What is your background in science?”
Bailey writes: “For Mika, do you have a formal education in physics or is it mostly a fascinating hobby for you?”
ytimynona writes: “What is your degree in???”
I had an amazing high school physics teacher, and my first formal introduction to astronomy was in 2000 at the Summer Science program in Ojai where they had me submitting asteroid orbital determinations to the Harvard-Smithsonian Small Bodies Institute.
I have an undergraduate degree from University of California at Santa Barbara in physics with a strong emphasis on astrophysics. I was part of a large research lab investigating the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation. The Cosmic Microwave Background radiation is the static of the early Universe, and from observations of it we can look at the beginning of the Universe and figure out what shape it is and how it’s going to end. Charles Seife’s “http://www.penguin.ca/nf/Book/BookDisplay/0,,9780142004463,00.html” Alpha and Omega is a good popsci book on the topic. (Bill Bryson’s A Short History of Nearly Everything, although great on some topics, goofed up enough small stuff in the cosmology section to keep me cringing.)
I am currently working on a graduate degree in geophysics at the University of British Columbia. I started off my research looking at volcanoes on Mars, but now I’m researching landslide runout (if you know a landslide is going to happen and it’s too big to stop it, landslide runout is figuring out where’s it going to go, how far, how fast, and how deep so you can try to not build there). It’s a bit of a switch to go from the end of the Universe to volcanoes on Mars to landslides on Earth, but they are all disasters on different scales.
Outside of school, I’ve worked a lot of jobs in science education and outreach, from developing programs at the local planetarium to interning with the American Institute of Physics in Washington, DC.
Henry writes: “Did you know this was what you wanted to do while you were in school?”
Well, since I’m still in school…
I’ve been a hardcore scifi fan and science-enthusiast from a very young age, and downright obsessed with space since elementary school. I’ve taken every scifi related course at every opportunity I’ve had, and even designed and taught classes on the science of scifi. I didn’t plan on getting a dream job, but I’m certainly happy it happened!
Nika writes: “Consulting on Atlantis seems like a fabulous job to have! But it must not take up all your time. Do you teach anywhere else or consult on other projects?”
Thornyrose writes: “How big a part of your daily life is working on Stargate? Do you maintain another full or part time career?”
I get called in on an episode-by-episode basis, and for any episode I’m called I usually spend a day or two in advance helping prepare props, and a few half-days on set. My daily life is that of a graduate student (I’m writing my thesis right now; with a bit of luck in less than 100 days I’ll officially be a Master of Disaster!), so I take classes, do research, attend conferences, and teach undergraduates when I’m not working on Stargate.
Chevron7 writes: “Are you interested in writing science fiction at all?”
There are days where I wonder if my thesis counts as scifi, but I really hope my committee doesn’t have the same doubts! Beyond that, I have no literary aspirations.
Trish writes: “As a physics person, what do you like to do for fun? I’ve seen some of your colleagues at Disney Hollywood Studios in Orlando on the Tower of Terror making things *float* during the ride. It’s very cool to see. And yes, I’m serious! Whole groups of them come to Disney and perform experiments throughout the park.”
Yeeeaaaah, I’ve done that! There’s a whole group over at the webcomic xkcd that has “http://xkcd.com/chesscoaster/” photos of science geeks playing chess on roller coasters</a>, and I’ve been tempted to submit my own photo. I admit I do a lot of stupid physics tricks like balancing salt shakers on spilled salt crystals (the cubic crystals make it easier than balancing on sugar) at restaurants or shattering racket balls with liquid nitrogen.
In contrast to my academic love of disasters, my hobbies almost all focus on creation — arts and crafts of all varieties. I was amused to discover I wasn’t the only one knitting and crocheting on-set, but as it’s a quiet, portable hobby, there’s quite a circle of yarn-tanglers hiding among the crew.
And just in case my advisor is reading, “Landslides! I eat landslides, sleep landslides, and model them in my dreams. There is no fun without mass movements in isolated regions!”
Section Four: Tell us about the science! And scientists!
Many of your questions asked me about my views on science, science fiction, and how they fit together. So before I answer the questions, a quick intro:
Science is in a process of continual revision. We’re pretty sure about some things (like the Law of Gravity — I’m willing to bet that if I drop my computer it’s going to fall), but if new evidence to the contrary shows up we’re willing to revise them. This is what I love about science: we’ve got good scientific explanations for the sun coming up each morning, and I have direct observation of it rising most days (I live in Vancouver; some days, we never see the sun), but if it were to not come up tomorrow scientists would collectively shrug and go, “Whoops, guess we need a new model!”
I think that scifi is the “What if…” of science. It’s a way to explore what would happen if this law here were tweaked, if this worked that way instead, if faster-than-light travel were possible, if Earth had no moon, what would the consequences be? To me, good scifi is any time the differences are laid out very clearly in the beginning and the story evolves consistently within those different rules; no laying them aside when it’s awkward or adding in a new exception at the last minute to resolve things.
Gate Geek writes: “How difficult is it to keep in mind ‘artistic liscense’ when it comes to going against what we know about the workings of the universe in a science fiction show?”
When it comes to scifi, I’m happy with any clearly-articulated exceptions to the normal workings of the universe as long as the story then continues inside those rules. I only get grumpy when it seems like the manner in which the scifi universe works is changing every third scene. Stargate is very good about consistently playing by the rules they laid out — once something is explained as an exception to normal real-world science, it will always function in the exact same way.
Montrealer writes: “Did the previous SG-1 episodes and earlier Atlantis episodes have any Physics issues that could be politely called inept today? Is that why your position on Atlantis was created?”
I don’t know why the science consultant was created, nor if there was one prior to season 3 of Atlantis. Overall, Stargate is really good at being consistent.
To me, it’s fine if the science evolves to resolve previously-unanswered questions that were the basis of a “what if…” for a work of scifi. Hal Clement’s “http://www.orionbooks.co.uk/MP-34096/Mission-Of-Gravity.htm” Mission of Gravity, with the Whirligig World essay at the end exploring orbital dynamics, is a a beautiful example of this — Clement guessed wrong in the science to explain a particular set of observations, but because he was so clear and consistent with his physics within the explanation, it’s still really good scifi.
Green writes: “How much of what science is covered in an episode is true and how much is, though based in science, nearly improbable or unconceivable at this time? ”
Jean writes: “What percentage of the show’s physics is actually grounded in real science (if any)?”
Sachi writes: “What aspect of the science in the Stargate universe do you think is closest to reality, ie. wormholes, phase-shifting, hyperspace generators, and which is the furthest?”
I can’t give exact percentages for real science vs the exceptions for Stargate. Some of the improbable or inconceivable or currently-technically-unbuildable stuff required by the story includes:
– We can create large, stable transversable wormholes with the Stargates.
– Faster-than-light travel is possible through hyperspace.
– Limited telepathy is possible through an evolved form of insect-hive-mind
– Energy weapons are possible
– Shields are possible
– Artificial gravity
Real science shows up any time there isn’t an explicit exception — the orbital dynamics (planetary drift requiring updating of the Stargate network, types of orbits, etc) and stellar evolution (for the most part) are better explained than I’ve seen in most introductory astronomy classes. Although I haven’t read it cover-to-cover yet, it looks like Michio Kaku’s “http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl/9780385520690.html” Physics of the Impossible is a really good science of scifi read in that it splits the sciences up by levels of improbability. The author is a string theorist so he knows his physics and is a bit more flexible on what’s possible than the anti-string-theorist people.
Thornyrose writes: “Also, how much time do you spend researching or studying something to decide on its plausibility, or how to suggest how to tweak it to fit the story’s need?”
As much time as it takes! For the most part the science falls within what I’m already comfortable and familiar with, so my research is reading journal articles to see if there’s something I can adapt. It generally works out to roughly half my time in research and half my time physically working with the props and being on site.
Thornyrose writes: “Besides physics, what related disciplines are you called upon to evaluate in the job?”
I once had a professor tell me that a squirrel was just applied biophysics. Physics is the art of solving problems, so biophysics is learning enough biology to figure out what solutions are possible, and astrophysics is learning enough astronomy to frame the problem. My colleagues frequently tease that the only thing left to do once you complete a physics degree is to add a prefix so you can do something useful (in my case, previously “astro-” and currently “geo-“).
I’ve used a lot of astrophysics, some meteorology, some string theory, a bit of cosmology, a tiny smidgen of computer science, and a whole lot of bits and pieces that fall under “science” for lack of any better category.
Although it isn’t strictly required for the job, I do have to call upon pretty much the entire realm of science when I show up on set. I swear that when the crew hears I’m coming, they all run home to research obscure new discoveries or dust off old unanswered questions and quiz me with them! It’s a great deal of fun, and means that between takes I can end up discussing anything from the aerodynamics of dragonflies to the ramifications of discovering perchlorates on Mars.
Bailey writes: “Do you like dealing with and thinking of ideas that have no current basis in reality but that might someday come true?”
Yes! The “What if…” aspect of scifi is why I love the genre.
NOLA-Lib writes: “As a geologist, myself and a bunch of other geo-scientists watched “the Core” and made fun of the obvious mistakes or fanciful “science”. I wanted to tell you that I have found very little (geologically speaking) to be able to make fun of Atlantis.”
For the fans who are unfamiliar with it, “The Core” is a Hollywood Disaster Movie about humans mucking up the core of the Earth and a team of brave scientists going down to fix it.
At the moment I’m actually a geophysist, and I have giggled about “The Core.” They did have a geoscience consultant that they seemed to listen to at least some of the time. The general outline is good and most of the exceptions are either pretty tongue-in-cheek (unubtanium! love it) or artistic exaggerations; the only bit that drives me nuts is when the details were screwed up. Saying Hawaii is at a plate boundary was so unnecessary that it drove me completely crazy! Why, oh why, didn’t they say they’d popped out of a hot spot? Grrr… Still, I suspect the audience comes out with a better understanding of basic geology than most students of geology 101 — the “crust is tiny, mantle is big, core has two parts” demonstration is more memorable than most lectures.
It’s the attention to detail that really makes Stargate stand out for me. I can’t imagine the people I’ve met making silly mistakes like the plate-boundary/hot-spot one.
Zoniduck writes: “Is there any bit of bad science that made it into a finished episode which you find irritating enough to rant about it?”
Terry writes: “Do the scientific inaccuracies ever drive you crazy?”
In my view, Stargate is good scifi that plays within its own rules without cheating, so nope, the scientific inaccuracies don’t drive me crazy. In general with scifi, the only time it bothers me is when there’s unnecessary inaccuracy (like saying Hawaii is at a plate boundary in “The Core”) or when a show cheats by changing the rules at the very end to resolve a story.
Chevron7 writes: “I like the website “Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics”. What’s the most glaring scientific error you’ve ever seen in a movie?”
A lot of science errors I’ll excuse as the exceptions necessary for a story, or artistic license to keep things interesting, so the only ones that are really jarring for me are the totally unnecessary small stuff. The Core’s Hawaiian plate boundary obviously drives me nuts, but it’s also things like sticking a volcano in Los Angeles. The plate boundary type is all wrong for volcanos and there are no hot spots nearby. They could have easily used Seattle and at least been in the right geologic context! Hmph. Of course, when it just gets overwhelmingly error-filled, a movie can cross the invisible threshold (like Disney’s “Black Hole”) and leave me to speechless.
Mike writes: “So, Q1 – given that we know a stable wormhole requires a huge amount of power to maintain, and that running high power usage functions (like the Atlantis shield) even drain a ZPM module, how is the power integrity of very long distance wormholes maintained (say between Pegasus and the Milky Way)?”
The lore says that the dialing device of the outgoing gate provides the power, so I think that power management systems are also hardcoded into the dialing devices. As Earth uses a computer that ignores a significant number of the possible gate control & monitoring signals, Earth might not have the most efficient of solutions. Although McKay (or in one instance, the Wraith) can sometimes manage to reprogram some functions of a dialing device, no one messes with the power management without a really good reason.
Mike writes: “Q2 – in the same vein, how come no one outside SGC ever noticed the power drain taken by the Cheyenne Mountain Stargate when operating?”
There’s nothing to explain this in the explicit lore that I know, but my silent explanation is this:
The SGC has some hefty generators on-site, and NORAD does help camouflage the operation. There is a dedicated power grid room on level 25 which controls the power usage for SGC (particularly the Stargate since Earth lacks a DHD). There have been some pretty sparky moments when gate activity is fluctuating.
Of course, I like to think the good folks at Stargate Command are considerate enough of their neighbours (and desiring enough of not contributing to rolling brownouts that would attract attention) to have normal gate operations timed for off-peak hours.
Green writes: “What are your feelings on time travel?”
Mike writes: “Q3 – How are timeline paradigms avoided where someone goes back in time to “correct” the timeline, which must then in itself mean that the original change to the timeline must happen again, because the timeline has been corrected so the original opportunity to change it must occur again…”
I actually have a pretty long answer to this and I saved this set of questions for last with the intention of finally writing up what I’ve been arguing in classes for a while, but I’ve already gone over time in writing (that thesis, it beckons!) so I’m passing for now. Maybe in the post-thesis world Joe, will get a spontaneous extra-post from me just about time travel!
Terry also writes: “Have you ever met a scientist as arrogant as McKay is portrayed?”
Yes, many. Anyone who goes through physics has a bit of ego. For the most part it’s a really collaborative, supportive field but there are the odd mavericks who think they’re smarter than the rest of us. Sometimes they are smarter, sometimes they aren’t. However, the number of really brilliant scientists I’ve met who go out of their way to teach, mentor, and support new scientists far out-numbers the arrogant ones.
Narelle from Aus writes: “Have you ever read a script that had a plausible application in real world and thought “Hey, I could get rich off this?” If so, which episode and what was it? And do you need a business partner?”
I think my only option here is to remain suspiciously silent…
Narelle from Aus writes: “What research do you need to do to stay up to date with scientific theories?”
That’s a really hard question to answer. Technically, I don’t do any research with the express intention of keeping up-to-date, but my daily life involves a lot of interaction with new science.
My family has a culture of reading most kindly described as “compulsive literacy,” so I find myself reading assorted scholarly publications, plus the usual spread of popsci books for fun.
Most of my social interactions at the moment involve talking with academics about what they’re researching. This means that casual dinner conversation often covers new theories in the pre-requisites for the rise of culture, neat factoids gleaned from someone’s literature review, or someone complaining about a glitch when applying new laser measurement techniques to unstable rock slopes. If you’re ever in Vancouver looking for a geeky night out, try stopping by Green College at UBC for dinner and immerse yourself in all the graduate students; you’ll see what I mean.
On top of that there’s my own day-to-day research on landslides, fluid dynamics, and numerical modeling, and letters from old classmates telling me about their current research, and suddenly I’ve probably spent half my day learning about all sorts of new things without actually meaning to do so.
antisocialbutterflie writes: “How do you stay abreast of the new physics discoveries? Do you have favorite journals to read?”
Gate Geek writes: “Do you keep up with the latest findings in science? And have you ever been so taken with one of those finding that you wanted to work it into a show in some aspect? Or just had to share with anyone in earshot?”
I keep up with a lot of recent findings in many different fields, but certainly not all discoveries in all fields! I haven’t had the chance to bombard the writers with neat science to integrate into their work, but I certainly encounter all sorts of cool science that has me bubbling over to everyone around me. Luckily, the people around me are not only used to that, but look forward to it. It’s amazing how often a stray tidbit of information from one field can spill over to usefulness in something seemingly totally unrelated!
Cat4444 writes: “In the first SG-1 episode, Apophis came through the Gate at the SGC with some of his Jaffa, grabbed a Sergeant, then he and the Jaffa turned around and walked back through the Gate without it ever having shut down. In later episodes it was established that Gate travel is one-way only, so . . . how did Apophis do that?” [snipped, see the original comment for the full question]
It’s from before my time so I’m not responsible for the science of this one, but in my mind I see it as special gate. I think the gates were built to be one-way to prevent accidents and that Apophis disabled those safeties.
NOLA-Lib writes: “I don’t have much physics experience but do you consult with other scientists when the show delves into different sciences?”
Yes, but in a very generalist sort of way since I can’t tell them any details about an un-aired show. A typical conversation ends with “I can’t actually tell you what I’m doing yet, but I promise it’s neat, I promise you’ll retroactively brag about having helped, and I promise it is in no way illegal or immoral!”
Idonotlikegreeneggsandham writes: “How often do you come up against scientific queries or discrepancies that you don’t know how to solve, and have had to go to other specialists to get an answer? Who else do you tend consult, and who do you go to most often?”
As a physicist, I wouldn’t say that I don’t know how to solve something so much as it’s sometimes faster to ask around for specialized references… (McKay isn’t the only one with Physics Ego!) Mostly I end up doing science-gossip with former classmates who are used to playing with problems without needing an explanation or context for why I’m looking at a particular situation. My most-frequently-pestered (for Stargate and for my thesis) list are Chris McKenny, who is doing low-temperature physics & Chris Coakley in computer science at UC Santa Barbara, and Ryan Carroll over at CERN.
Van fan writes: “Have you ever been contacted by someone high up in the food chain of science and physics, NASA or the US National Science Foundation or Canadian equivalent, who pointed out some mistakes, big or small?”
Several of my old classmates have scattered around the globe and some of them are in the big organizations (CERN, NASA, Los Alamos Lab, etc) and take glee in noticing the details I’ve included. Although they haven’t noticed anything so far to poke fun at me for goofing up, I’m sure they’d take equal glee in that. I also have a few mentors tucked away in NASA and JPL who know what I’m up to these days, and get a kick out of watching episodes I’ve worked on.
I’m actually not sure if someone wanting to point out a mistake would know who to contact. My name isn’t in the credits or mentioned in commentaries (that I know of). Although, of course, there aren’t actually mistakes in the science so much as explanations that didn’t make it on air.
Green writes: “If Rodney McKay and John Sheppard were dropped from a sky scrapper at the same starting height, northerly wind of 2mph, considering the collection of each individual’s fanbase, which character would be caught by the mass of fans waiting below first?”
Fully-clothed or topless Sheppard? I’m confident that this detail would substantially impact the results.
Green writes: “What currently new science theory have you paid the most attention to or are you most excited about to this date?”
I really enjoy working with disasters because the science is fairly straight-forward (it doesn’t take a machine the size of a small country to study them) and the impact of figuring things out has a significant and directly beneficial impact on society.
Inside physics, I like working with fluid dynamics because to me, the math is really elegant. Of course, I might be influenced by how incredibly charismatic every fluid dynamics professor I’ve encountered is — the latest one could best be described as a genius Hugh Grant with a wicked sense of humor.
As for the biggest unsolved-problem pet project I like to daydream about: planetary dynamics. We have theories on how planets form, but the more exoplanets we discover, the more apparent it is that current theory just doesn’t cover the whole spectrum of possibilities. Also, the math for orbital dynamics is beautiful and can really elegantly explain complicated observations like the cracking on Europa’s icy crust.
Chevron7 writes: “Apart from your job, how does your Physics knowledge help you in day to day life? e.g. Do you always win at billiards?”
Did you know that the largest annual convention of physicists has actually been banned from returning to Vegas? Like most of my colleagues, physics has probably helped save me from making inexcusably bad bets.
I am ridiculously poorly coordinated, so physics hasn’t helped much with sports. I do appreciate the lovely interaction of mass and radius when swinging poi, and the glory of understanding torque has saved my pride when I would have otherwise resorted to finding muscular assistance.
Trish writes: “I’ve actually never taken a course on physics! I bought a highschool set on it (thru saxon) and couldn’t believe how much math was involved. I’m more of the artistic type of person and I also studied psychology in college. I would love to know more about physics and was wondering if there is a good physics book out there for dummies that you would recommend. I want to be able to help my children with their physics homework. They are NOT getting out of learning this subject.”
I think that discussing scifi is a great way to foster an interest in science. What was real? What wasn’t? Of the parts that are neither clearly real or fake, how could you justify them? If we lived in a universe where the exceptions presented were real, what would the other consequences be? Where are there holes in the story from failing to stick faithfully to the rules that were laid out? Did they miss a prime opportunity to explore one of the exceptions? Scifi is marvelous for inspiring idle research projects that accidentally teach a whole lot of science.
My favourite science book for general audiences for the past two years is John Clagues and Bob Turner’s “http://www.bcminerals.ca/files/educational_resources/000235.php” Vancouver, City on the Edge. It’s an introduction to the geologic setting of the lower mainland, a few interesting field trips, and a nice explanation of a wide variety of geohazards. Plus, the images are really clear and nice.
For more advanced physics, Richard Feynman has a continuing reputation as an excellent physicist and educator for good reason (plus his “http://vidyaonline.org/arvindgupta/surelyjoking.pdf” autobiographies counter the geeks-are-dull stereotypes), so checking out the Feynman Lectures on Physics is highly worthwhile (any university he visited should have videos of him presenting that you can watch).
Tango writes: “Who’s responsible for “A Matter of Time” having so much brilliantly accurate technobabble yet still making the oh-so-common mistake of thinking that the gravity of a black hole is in any way different to the gravity of the star that formed it? (For the non-physicists reading, a black hole is only different because you can get closer to it without actually crashing into it, at the same distance, it’s exactly the same as anything else with that mass.) It’s one of my favourite episodes for clever, realistic science, but that one detail always bugs me.”
…yeah, it’s always the details that stand out, isn’t it? I’m willing to accept big exceptions from the normal laws of physics (time travel! hyperdrive!) but then you play consistently within that for good scifi. When I hit things like this, I pretend that maybe the shock wave of collapse destabilized the orbits of enough smaller masses to change the density distribution, and this has a cascading effect on destabilizing more small masses, and more, and more, until the whole system is thrown out of equilibrium. Improbable, but not impossible!
But see! This is why they should let me read the scripts earlier.
Astrumporta writes: “Have you read The Elegant Universe by Brian Greene? It’s a cool book about string theory etc.”
Yes. I was down in Santa Barbara, and there are a whole bunch of friendly and remarkably articulate string theorists at the Kavlar Institute of Theoretical Physics who liked to chat with all the new physicists-in-training. I didn’t get to meet Brian when he was in town, but some of the physicists interviewed for the movie-version were kind enough to hold a Q&A for the undergrads.
Astrumporta writes: “As an engineer who has spent several days converting some data from one XML format to a different XML format, I would have to say the engineering aspects of Stargate are (even) less realistic than the science. Have you ever reminded the writers that you can’t build a huge space ship in 2 years, or connect a laptop to an alien computer in 2 minutes?”
I accept that for the purposes of a story, pretty much any show (scifi or otherwise) is going to require the special exception of “incredibly nice hardware interoperability.” In a related “Gee, real life just ain’t that easy,” I wish I could format my thesis in whatever McKay uses for data-entry because his screens always look much more readable than what I end up with in LaTeX.
Subarbanite writes: “What do other physicists think of your working on the show? Is it like when musicians write screenplays (and other musicians think they’ve sold out)? Or are people jealous? Do you get other physicists admiring your work? What volume of fan mail do you get?”
Many scientists (especially physicists) are total scifi geeks. I once worked in an astrophysics lab where I swear every woman there except me was writing a romance-scifi-space novel (and that lab was more than half women). So it’s not so much “sold out” as it is “Queen of Geeks.” See Henry’s query on how to get this job, or Gate Geek’s comment for the general sort of response I get.
Shirt ‘n Tie writes: “What did you think of the latest CERN particle-accelerator experiment?”
Namiko writes: “I think someone asked you this before (or a variation of it), but do you wait for the writers to consult you on a script, or do you sometimes brief them with the Coolest New Thing in Science? For instance, I know that gate travel and wormholes and even puddlejumpers are awesome technological advances, but I’m kind of surprised that Rodney hasn’t mentioned the Large Hadron Collider at all, even if to brush it off as too “primitive” and therefore not worth his time. I mean, I’m giddy with anticipation at what we could learn from the LHC, and I’m the most amateur of armchair scientists.”
I’ve never caught McKay reading through a copy of “Science,” so maybe he’s just so caught up in the Pegasus Galaxy that he really just doesn’t keep up on latest advances over here in the Milky Way. I wouldn’t be surprised if he only heard about it when they start getting results & it shows up in briefings.
Gate Geek writes: First off, Wow, I admire your job. Lots. I’m an amateur astronomer,work in a planetarium and do as much public outreach in astronomy as possible. It was a comment in a science fiction show many many years ago about plasma physics that got me interested in astronomy and science.”
Thank you, I love my job.
You aren’t the only one inspired by scifi. There are now countless science-of-scifi books, blogs, and articles that point out all the flaws in the science, but very few embrace scifi as inspiration to study science. I know it was the countless episodes of Star Trek in my childhood that first sparked my interest in space, and even now when I start getting grouchy over failed experiments I retreat into scifi to recapture the wonder and endless possibilities.
KK226 writes: “It seems like a lot of people have questions about the scientific integrity of science fiction, my question is coming from the other direction – do you think any important scientific discoveries have come from ideas generated from science fiction? And, do you have any guesses as to ones that could come from Stargate? Is there anything about creative and likely non-physics minded folks imagining an alternative reality that frees it from some of the constraints of the scientic method and, occasionally results in something new, amazing and scientifically valid?”
There’s a special that pops up on Discovery fairly frequently about science that’s been inspired by Star Trek (including flip-phones). I think the glory of the scientific method is that nothing is considered sacred, and all theories are subject to revision no matter how long they’ve been around. As for the influence of scifi on science, I think it’s a really effective method of inspiring people to study science in the first place. This is based on informal feeling rather than hard numbers, but most of the scientists I know can remember some scifi from when they were young starting them on the path of obsessive curiosity.
Gate Geek writes: “Maybe you might not be able to answer this, but I’d be interested in your opinion….how do you think science fiction shows like Stargate can encourage viewers to take a greater interest in science and astronomy?”
I think scifi can inspire curiosity. I think that laying out possibilities can drive people into working to make some part of the vision real, or to explore the boundary between fact and fiction. People seem to remember stories better than facts, so if real science is necessary for the plot of an engaging story, it will probably be a more effective teaching technique than sitting in classrooms listening to dry lectures. When I used to teach my practical science fiction course, the students who started out being a bit scared of science walked away with at least an understanding of how the process worked and how to identify what was real and what wasn’t, while the students who were going to be professional scientists finally felt like they could do something fun and interesting with what they knew instead of being tied to textbooks all the time. It seems like every time I go to the bookstore I see yet another popsci book outlining the science behind another popular scifi series, and although at times the titles make me laugh I am happy to see the trend. If a fan’s curiosity to know everything they possibly can about a show leads them to accidentally learn introductory physics, I’m all for it!
Section Five: What’s it like?
Trish writes: “[D]o you have a *funniest moment* while being a consultant for Stargate?”
It’s too lively to pinpoint one funniest moment, but a surreal one:
I was sitting in a stolen producer’s chair next to Martin Wood with him cracking jokes while the crew bustled around us setting up for the next shot when suddenly above the noise a yell rings out: “Astrophysics! I need Astrophysics over here!”
Zoniduck writes: “So, how jazzed were you to meet Bill Nye and Neil deGrasse Tyson?”
I didn’t get any prior notice to get excited in advance, but I was thrilled to discover them on set. The crew takes a great deal of interest in what I do (I probably spend about a quarter of my time on set explaining what all the equations mean in layman’s terms) and I know scientist-viewers will get a kick out of my equations later, but it was a unique experience for me to have immediate feedback from people who instinctively knew what I was scribbling everywhere. They were both incredibly friendly and supportive.
Someone asked (in comment back when that photo was on the blog) about how Bill & Neil felt about the science of Stargate. They both had a complete blast on set, were a bit nervous entering a world outside their science specials, and were very enthusiastic about the story. Yes, we giggled about a few parts of the script, but I think most scientists accept the “what if…” principals that underlie scifi.
Idonotlikegreeneggsandham writes: “[I]s it fun to work on the show?”
YES! Yes, yes, yes, yes, and YES!
Everyone is really friendly and curious, and I feel like I’m using all this stuff that I learned in classrooms for something interesting (okay, my research lets me do something useful, but there’s no way I’m applying quantum mechanics to landslides!), and that, in some small way, I’m helping make the magic happen.
The crew keeps me on my toes with their far-ranging curiosity, so I get a chance to play with all aspects of science. One day, I found myself giving an abbreviated biology lesson to identify the genders of Beckett’s turtles in the morning, and discussing the fashion habits of physicists in the afternoon.
I really appreciate just how much everyone looks out for me — since I am on set so rarely, I don’t always know my way around or where to tuck myself when everyone is bustling about setting up the next shot. The crew are always willing to point me in the right direction, let me peek over their shoulders at monitors, lend me headphones to eavesdrop on the action, or join me in quietly knitting while waiting for the director to call us over. If they’re free, absolutely everyone is willing to teach me a bit about what they do; it has been an amazing experience.
It’s also a blast to actually be in the city of Atlantis. I remember how, omy very first day they took me on a tour of the set. I was feeling overwhelmed by actually seeing the Stargate, and we’d gone into a side room where I perched on the only available non-floor surface while they explained what they needed from me that day. That’s when it dawned on me… I was in John Sheppard’s bed. I don’t think I’ve ever blushed so hard in my life.
Section Six: Questions that Defy Classification
Bailey writes: “Also, was the character Miko (Letters from Pegasus) named after you in some fashion?”
Not that I know of. I’d place higher odds on her being named for director Andy Mikita
Terry writes: “Have you ever wanted to have a walk-on role on Stargate?”
Yes! Last time I was on set people kept asking why I wasn’t one of the extras writing equations, so maybe they’ll give me a call before the season closes. (Poke, poke, Joe.)
Gate Geek writes: “Who gets to choose those great Hubble images (I assume they’re Hubble) that I occasionally see in an episode?”
I’m not sure, but I’d guess someone over in Set Decorations, unless the images are handled by the actors, in which case it would be Props, or if they are computer-generated, then it’d be Special Effects. No matter which department they come from, the director would have final say on which images are used.
Terry writes: “[D]o you watch the completed episodes of the show?
Yes. I only see the script and the days filmed when I’m on-site, so the final episode is often a total surprise to me. Unfortunately, being a starving student means I can’t actually afford any of the channels showing the most recent season, so I’m always a year behind everyone else.
Jean writes: “You must be the envy of your peers – are many of them sci-fi geeks (fans)?”
Yes, yes I am. It is the most consistent way I get revenge when old classmates in California taunt me about the constant rain in Vancouver.
Many of the people I know are scifi geeks, although even then ones who aren’t think it’s a pretty neat job. I used to teach a class on the science in science fiction, and my former students are slightly awe-struck.
Jean writes: “Are you sworn to secrecy re spoilers for the show?”
Nope, but I think that’s probably just an oversight so I act like I am anyway.
Thornyrose writes: “I think you have one of the coolest jobs on the show, and I appreciate all the work you put in trying to keep the show as scientific as is possible and still provide entertainment.”
Thank you! I love this job, and I think it is the absolute coolest after school job a geek could possibly have. I’d even go so far that it’s the coolest job of any type that a geek could have, and I really hope that I keep getting calls when Stargate: Universe starts up, or for the Stargate: SG-1 or Stargate: Atlantis movies. Here’s rooting for plenty of scenes with equations scrawled everywhere…
And I think that’s all the questions you had for me! In an eternal quest to spread good books and interesting science I tried to seed links in the answers for you, so happy reading, happy watching, and may your science be explicable (unless you’re working on a phd, in which case, may your science be thoroughly inexplicable in a novel manner). I don’t think I’ll be able to wade through the comments section to follow up additional questions, but you might be able to find me over at <A HREF=”http://www.spacemika.com“>SpaceMika</A> on the rare occasions when I poke my nose out of my thesis long enough to notice the rest of the world.
For some mysterious reason, my cell phone has stopped working. Despite various attempts to turn the damn thing on, it remains unresponsive. Dark. Dead. For the life of me, I can’t figure out what happened. I didn’t drop it, knock it against something, or otherwise damage it in anyway. It never left my possession so I can’t very well blame someone else for screwing with it. Outside of accidentally dropping it in a water-filled yogurt container last night, I don’t recall anything unusual happening to it.
Now I know what you’re thinking and, normally, inadvertently submerging an electronic device would be cause for alarm. But, fortunately, mine was a Stargate: Atlantis cell phone (see pic for proof). The city of Atlantis was submerged for thousands of years; my phone a mere five seconds or so. Logic dictates that couldn’t be it.
I don’t know. Maybe the battery ran out. Well, I suppose it’ll forever remain one of life’s little mysteries like Stonehenge, the true identity of Jack the Ripper, and why is Aston Kutcher famous?
This does present me with an opportunity to pick up a new phone. But the question is: What kind? Fondy loves her BlackBerry and has been pushing me to pick one up for months. Marty G., on the other hand, swears by his iPhone. These are the pros and cons of each so far as I can tell:
Pros: Tactile keyboard allows for easier emailing, about the only thing I’ll do with the damn thing besides talk to people.
Cons: My wife’s BlackBerry occasionally drops reception – but is it the phone or the service provider that’s at fault?
Cons: Wouldn’t you get fingerprints all over the touch screen? Not available in Canada until July 11th.
Well, my cell phone may not be working but my satellite is back up and running. All it took was the attaching of a disconnected cable, the flick of a switch, and the payment of the $75 service fee, and I was up and running. Reruns of Gossip Girl, here I come!
Today’s entry is dedicated to kilted assassin’s freshly married sister, Neko who completed her medical exams, an under the weather Alipeeps, happy early birthday to flingsglass, and Nika whose manuscript has been picked up by a publisher.
Tricia Anne writes: “…what are your favourite animated films of all time? I’m curious now.”
Answer: Grave of the Fireflies, Spirited Away, Ratatouille, The Incredibles, Monsters Inc., Iron Giant, Aachi & Ssipak.
Cathie writes: “Seen any good movies worth mentioning lately?”
Answer: Yep. Ratatouille. The best movie I’ve seen this year.
Portlandbound writes: “You don’t have much of a show if Joe, Jason, and David go on strike seeing how they are 3 of the main actor’s. I hope they don’t strike but is their a plan?”
Answer: You bet. In the event there is a strike, finished episodes will be replaced by footage of the writers reading/acting out their scripts. It’ll be awesome!
Thornyrose writes: “I didn’t expect the pictured book pile to last a month, but are you really going through them so fast that you need more by Wednesday?”
Answer: I certainly won’t finish the entire pile by Wednesday but, since I’ll be in the office anyway, it wouldn’t hurt to pick up some book while I’m there.
Erin writes: “I saw your pix of your stack of books to be read and my eyes saw only one there – “Inherit the Stars”. The mystery that is the beginning of that series is still so remembered in my head, that just thinking about it is making me want to scrounge through my boxes of books in my study.”
Answer: I’m reading it now. Great book. Which is the second in the series?
Paul William Tenny writes: “If I’m not mistaken, extras can’t actually say anything or they’ll have to be paid more — scripted or not. Muttering is a very apt description.”
Answer: True. As someone pointed out, the actual background conversation (a.k.a. “walla”) is supplied in post. As Paul said, it usually amounts to nothing more than indistinguishable muttering. However, there have been instances when the performers, clearly bitten by the acting bug, have offered up truly memorable lines – that we inevitably remove after the day one mix. “This has never happened before!”was one ill-advised gem delivered by someone in a crowd of villagers who had just seen Sheppard disable a wraith tracking device. Really? Never seen one of those disabled by machinegun fire? Good to know.
Wraith Cake writes: “ 1/ do you read comics/graphic novels? 2/ How much of what you write do you visualize? (I am a visual person and enjoy how Moore, for instance, will have frame after frame in his narratives with no written text 3/ How much/often do you need to collaborate with the artistic directors to flesh out a scene? 4/ Finally, when you write a story, how does it take place in your head: Do you focus on the dialogue most, the body language of the characters most or the setting the most? Or, regardless of how you intend the story, does it become an altogether different beast by the time we see it?”
Answers: 1. On occasion I do read comics/graphic novels. I’m very interested to see how my favorite graphic novel, Watchmen, turns out when it hits the big screen. 2. I visualize everything I write, from the big action sequences to a character’s small business while delivering dialogue. Of course the way I visualize a scene is just a guide and, more often than not, the final product is very different from the way I’d initially envisioned it. 3) Our directors are infinitely capable and don’t require direction from me. Occasionally, for trickier sequences, we may discuss how we want something to play out. 4) It really depends on the scene but usually, the writer‘s primary focus is on the dialogue.
Airelle writes: “ Did you read Ghost Brigade by Scalzi, if you did, is it worth getting?”
Answer: I did and, yes, it is worth it.
DasNdanger writes: “However, Ellia proved that – in the right environment – a Wraith can be different.”
Answer: Yes. This and several other instances suggest that the wraith’s arguably “evil” disposition is not genetic but shaped by their upbringing and their environment. Check out The Queen for an interesting lesson on wraith politics and diplomacy.
David writes: “ Do you tell Fondy about the script your writing? Is she a fan of Stargate, or just not interested?”
Answer: I think I answered this question. Fondy prefers Grey’s Anatomy.
LiquidSky writes: “What is a ‘bottle show’?”
Answer: A bottle show is an episode that only makes use of our standing sets. Quarantine is a good example. SG-1’s Message in a Bottle is another.
Anais33 a ecrit: “1) Que font les acteurs sur le tournage quand ils ont une pause entre deux scénes? 2)Quand avez vous l’intention de faire un voyage en Europe? 3)Connaissez vous, des bonbon qui se nome “Les bétise de Cambrai” ?”
Reponses: 1) Ils retournent à leurs remorques. 2) Je ne sais pas. 3) Non. Sont-ils bons?
Translation: 1) Between scenes, the actors go back to their trailers. 2) I have no idea when I’ll be traveling to Europe. 3) I’m not familiar with “Les bétise de Cambrai” candies. Are they any good?
Jose Sanders writes: “ Now I was wondering, would it be all right for me to print out one of your pics to have it signed?”
Answer: By all means.
Sector24 writes: “Can you tell us if you are going to be involved, and if and when Atlantis ends, would you jump to Universe, or you’ll be done with Stargate?”
Answer: At this point – no idea.
TBA writes: “Since you’re an anime fan, have you ever seen Death Note?”
Answer: Just watched the first episode this morning. An interesting start.
Sprinkles writes: “Just wondering if you ever read any more Terry Pratchett novels beyond ‘the Colour of Magic’?”
Answer: Yep. I’ve read about a half dozen. Last month, it was Small Gods.
DasNdanger also writes: “ My opinion about it is this – true, you can’t please all the fans, and only a very small percentage participate in on-line discussions. However, I think it’s fairly safe to use the internet input as a reflection of how the fanbase as a whole is reacting – taking the ‘pulse’ of the fans, as it were.”
Answer: True. I don’t think anyone should dismiss the response of online fans. But what you read on the forums must be taken with a grain of salt. As someone in that article pointed out, unhappy fans are far, far more likely to take the time to express their feelings that fans who are pleased with a show’s creative direction. Also, the opinion of fans with diverse opinions (both positive and negative) holds a lot more weight than, say, the opinions of the same dozen fans over on Gateworld who complain about anything and everything. Another interesting point is that, while online fandom is generally weighted toward the vocal minority, focus group testing seeks out a more balanced opinion. And, while I am personally not a fan of this approach, I was amazed by the difference in opinion between focus groups and online fandom.
Enzo Aquarius writes: “How have the ‘intuitive’ blog titles been affecting your views?”
Answer: They’ve actually hurt traffic a little. But they’re kind of fun so I’m sticking with ‘em.