It's always tough when one of your favorite television
shows blows the science. For me it makes it difficult, if not impossible, to
enjoy the rest of the show. Case in point, this weeks
Doctor Who,
which is a huge favorite of mine, laid a giant, big, bad science goose egg with the
episode "
Kill
the Moon".
Some mild spoilers to follow after the logo below, so be warned.
In this episode, the Doctor comes
across a recently deceased giant spider of an alien. It looks very menacing, it
attacks one of the main characters (big mistake) and it subsequently
dies. This is all quite normal for the show. You expect there to be scary
aliens. You expect the Doctor, as a time-travelling uber-genious, to give all
of us some helpful background on all of the scary aliens he bumps into. But you
don't expect a line like this:
"It’s the size of a badger! It’s a prokaryotic unicellular life form with
non-chromosomal DNA, which as you and me know, yes, scientists know--this is a
GERM!"
Ugh. There's so much wrong with this statement, it's painful. So, let's start
with the part that's ok.
Prokaryotic is a misnomer, as the name (pre-nucleus)
implies that organisms without nuclei are awaiting the nuclei they someday hope
to have. They're not. But that's not that bad, even the textbooks cling to that
mistake. And I like the way
Peter Capaldi says "prokaryotic."
But a unicellular life form the size of a badger? That looks suspiciously like
a well known invertebrate with teeth? That part grates on the science nerves.
There are some strang unicellular life forms deep in the ocean, such as
xenophyphores, that can reach the tremendous size of up to
4 inches long. This is pretty impressive, but they're the size of a golf
pencil, not a badger.
And, this is a
Eukaryote, the largest bacterium
-- ok,
prokaryote for now -- is
Thiomargarita
thamibiensis. This prokaryote can reach 0.75 mm, which is huge for a
little cell, but still no bigger than the size of a pin head.
 |
| Xenophyphores, giant unicellular life, if 4 inches fits your definition of giant. |
This too I think I can handle, because who knows maybe
there ARE large unicellular life forms out there. The “biggest” label should
correctly be the “biggest currently known.” So, ok my teeth were clenching and
then the final “non-chromosomal DNA” sets in. Why, Doctor? All
prokaryotes have chromosomal DNA, their
DNA is non-nuclear but it’s still chromosomal.
Here’s hoping the next time the Doctor runs into these
spider-germs he says, “These spiders are the size of badgers! And they’re attacking
like germs do on Earth.” That be fine. Just
fine. Despite, the science rant, I will be watching the next episode – where
the scary alien is a mummy!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhen I read your blog post regarding the improper use of scientific terms and ideas in one of your favorite shows, Dr. Who, I was reminded of one of my favorite childhood shows, CSI. The main characters are forensic scientists, who double as hyper-sexy field workers that solve almost every crime in record-breaking speed. Additionally, evidence is always present at every crime scene, contamination of the evidence rarely ever occurs, and the technology used is extremely futuristic and yields results with far too little material.
ReplyDeleteRegardless of these scientific infractions, I still think that this show and other shows that follow the same basic concept (NCIS and Bones, to name a few) are useful to the scientific community. These shows build an excitement for the sciences in their viewers. For most of my childhood, I wanted to be a crime scene investigator and follow in the footsteps of my favorite characters. Of course, as I began to do more research I realized that forensics was not going to be as exciting as the show, but instead of being turned away from science altogether I wanted to explore more options. Additionally, more people with an interest in science can mean an increased amount of discoveries and innovations that will only serve to advance our capabilities. I do think that script writers can (and probably should) be a bit more careful with the way they convey the science, but I think that making people excited and interested in science is a step in the right direction.
When I read this article it made me wonder why producers and directors would want to lie about the science when the actual science could make the show really interesting. One of my favorite science/medical show was House. I used to really enjoy it because of the manner in which the doctors would come to a diagnosis and figure out what was wrong with their patient. However, I remember one specific episode where Dr. House stabs a needle into a man's thigh so that he could obtain a bone marrow sample.I remembered thinking that there is no way that a medical professional would behave in such an unprofessional manner in real life, but I guess maybe the media exaggerates these things to make it seem more dramatic.
ReplyDeleteThe real reason why this irritates me is because when I watch science shows like House or CSI, I get excited about learning new things. It would make me really upset if these types of shows were feeding me incorrect information or exaggerating the situation.
I too have had these moments when I yell at the tv off a bad science mistake in a tv show (although I can't remember now what instance this happened or in what tv show). So I feel your pain. My favorite TV show is The Big Bang Theory. Almost everything they say is scientifically related and funny. Sheldon Cooper takes science to a whole new level and every character contributes to the show, even Penny who isn't exactly the brightest of the bunch when it comes to science. I think when shows like that make a science mistake it is ok because it is supposed to be humor and sarcasm, and I won't get particularly annoyed by it.
ReplyDeleteIn contrast, Dr. Who has been running for years, and many seasons. I believe many people take the science articulated by The Doctor seriously to an extent since he is such a prominent and important character in the show. I would certainly be more annoyed at a science mistake if I saw one in Dr. Who. My roommate tried to get me into Dr. Who watching old episodes with David Tennant as The Doctor. After the first two/three episodes I cringed and turned away. The science/ scifi this series is going for just wasn't for me, nor was it that funny. I guess every TV show suits a particular audience, but the "fakeness" and unrealness of the time travelling stories and plots in Dr. Who are not particularly intriguing to me, nor do they have me convinced. I was just thinking to myself "this would never happen so why would I watch this". I know never say never, but Dr. Who didn't captivate me as other fictional, sci/fi series have (such as Fringe and Lost).
In addition, GATTACA is one of my favorite movies (I've only seen it about 10 times..maybe 11 ). Now this is a movie that I can say, "Wow, what a realistic approach and peak into what our future could potentially be like" It really made me think about all of our scientific advancements particularly in genetics. I like those movies that take a scientific concept and bring it to light in an efficient, and grounded way.
All in all, when bringing science in tvshows/film one has to be cautious, but one must also know that not everyone is going to like the way science is protrayed in that tvshow/film.
While I am not a Doctor Who fan myself, I can see that the number one goal of television writers is to attract an audience. This being the number ONE goal, writers (and the on screen renditions of their writing) can make some pretty large mistakes as long as they don't mess with the fan base. While Fringe is known for taking science to a fictitious extreme, usually attributing their ideas it to being possible in the future, they still breach the boundaries of what is physically possible. In a relevant example, a character on Fringe ingests water containing microscopic cells of unknown composition. One of the cells, after reacting to the victim's stomach acid, grows to an enormous size and slides out of the man's throat, killing him. Cells are cells for a reason. They obey certain size limitations and for that reason they are successfully permeable to the environment around them while being able to store their genetic information and other cell parts happily among other reasons. They DO NOT slide out of your throat. I guess I'll have to forgive them, as their horrendous portrayal of science is in fact the premise of the show and keeps the masses coming. Or it did at least... Didn't they cancel Fringe?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI completely understand your frustration with the way the show lied to its audience about certain scientific information. Though Doctor Who is a fictional television show, there is no need for them to fib science in order to make it more appealing. Why not find a better example of a scientific anomaly that looks like a badger? Shows involving science have the amazing opportunity to interest and teach audiences about a part of the world that is still unknown and foreign to most people. Though they do a great job at capitalizing on these opportunities, sometimes they do make mistakes and impress wrong information onto viewers. I guess a question we could ask ourselves is, are the mistakes they make worth the "cool" factor they bring to science, and the interest of science that they plant into viewers? I think a show that really put great interest into science was Breaking Bad. They had an organic chemist consulting the writers and making sure that the information they were providing the viewers in every episode was accurate. As a science major, it was really cool to be able to watch the show and know that true information about chemistry was being passed along to people who did not know much about the subject.
ReplyDelete