What is "grounded
sci-fi" and how does this set it apart from other types of science
fiction? To really understand grounded sci-fi, it helps to first think about
the broader sci-fi genre. Science fiction, at its
core, imagines how the future might look based on speculations about
technology, science, society and more. It asks "what if?" questions
and creatively explores the possibilities. This could mean far-future worlds,
alien life, time travel, alternate histories, and other mind-bending concepts.But grounded sci-fi is a
specific approach within this genre. The key word here is "grounded."
This type of sci-fi tries to keep at least one foot firmly planted in reality.
While it still speculates and imagines future possibilities, it aims to do so
in a way that feels authentic and plausible based on what we currently know. Here are some key features
that distinguish grounded sci-fi:
1. Realistic science and
technology: In Technically Soccer, droids already exist like
AI-Me, (pronounced Amy,) which stands for Artificial Intelligence for Maximizing Efficiencies.
Grounded sci-fi usually tries to base its speculative elements on real,
cutting-edge science and engineering. The futuristic technologies feel like
logical progressions from today's capabilities rather than pure magic or
hand-waving. There's an emphasis on scientific accuracy and showing how these
advancements might realistically function.
2. Relatable settings
and characters: The worlds of grounded sci-fi tend to resemble our own,
just with added layers of futuristic elements. The societies, cultures, and
challenges faced by characters parallel contemporary issues in thought-provoking
ways. Basically, despite the sci-fi trappings, this world still feels connected
to and shaped by the one we know. Both of my "grounded" scripts take place in the present
time and in ordinary settings; a house, an office building, and a soccer field. Runaway Cricket takes place in a small town that could be anywhere - on Earth. It is sort of a modern-day E.T., and if you believe in aliens...
3. Exploration of
near-future scenarios: Rather than leaping centuries or millennia ahead,
grounded sci-fi often focuses on the near future, anywhere from a few years to
a few decades away. It imagines the impact of emerging technologies, social
trends, political changes, environmental challenges, etc., within a timeframe
we can still reasonably wrap our minds around. I think the science behind Last
Woman exists. An electromagnetic pulse (EMP) is a burst of
electromagnetic energy that can disrupt or damage electronic equipment. The
physics behind EMPs starts with a rapid acceleration of charged particles,
which creates an intense electromagnetic field. This field induces electrical
currents in nearby conductors - similar to how a changing magnetic field creates
electricity in a generator, but far more intense and sudden. The current
military significance of EMPs comes from their ability to disable electronic
systems. This is one of the small storylines in my script. When the
electromagnetic wave hits electronic equipment, it can induce voltage spikes
that exceed what the components are designed to handle. This can burn out
semiconductors, damage integrated circuits, and corrupt stored data. Could it make someone appear to "disappear?"
4. Emphasis on
plausibility and consequences: Grounded sci-fi doesn't just focus on the
"wow" factor of futuristic concepts. It deeply considers the ripple
effects, unintended consequences, and socio-economic implications of these
advancements. It aims to tell believable stories of how technology intersects
with human experiences, both good and bad. I explore this both in Technically Soccer and Last Woman.
Some well-known examples
of grounded sci-fi include:
- "The Martian"
by Andy Weir: A realistic tale of an astronaut stranded on Mars, using real
science to solve problems.
- "Minority
Report" by Philip Kindred
Dick: A world where "precrime" police use psychics to arrest
people before they commit crimes.
The book option that I'd
like Melissa to get is similar to Minority Report. One of my
favorite movies, is The Martian with Matt Damon, and I started a
"Mars-like garden" in my backyard.
But movies like "Star
Wars," are superhero stories, far-future tales, and
fantasy-leaning sci-fi wouldn't qualify as "grounded" because they
tend to prioritize imagination and drama over realism. The
picture above is outside Guardians of the Galaxy in Epcot. That
is my favorite franchise of movies.
Getting back to Contact
- the book vs. the movie, there are five differences I found;
1. Ellie's childhood
and relationship with her father: I write a lot of father/daughter scripts
because for the past almost thirty years, I've been close to my father after my
mother died. In the book, Ellie's father dies when she is quite young, fueling
her interest in science and the stars as a way to feel connected to him. Her
childhood, relationship with her father, and early passion for astronomy are
explored in much more depth. In contrast, the movie begins with Ellie already
grown up. It shows some flashbacks to her as a girl with her father, establishing
their bond and her curiosity about the universe. However, this backstory is
condensed compared to the book. The film focuses more on Ellie as an adult and
her present-day journey.
2. The nature and
motivations of the alien message: The book goes into great scientific and
philosophical detail about the alien message, its layers of meaning, and what
it suggests about the nature and intentions of the senders. Decoding the
message is a major plot point that reveals fascinating insights about the
aliens. We don't have the luxury to write a 5-hour movie - unless your last
name is Lucus or Coppola. Although a limited series is opening up in this area.
The movie streamlines the philosophical, not delving as deeply into the
message's complexity. The film is more focused on Ellie's quest to understand
and respond to the message rather than its intricate content. The aliens'
motivations are left more mysterious and open-ended.
3. Ellie's romantic
relationships: In the book, Ellie has a few romantic partners, including
her longtime boyfriend Ken der Heer. Her relationships are realistically
complex, influencing her emotions and personal journey throughout the story.
Actors cost a lot of money, So the movie reduces this, making Palmer Joss
Ellie's primary love interest. Palmer is a Christian philosopher, allowing the
film to further highlight the faith vs. science themes. The on-again/off-again
nature of their movie romance drives character development and provides
conflict that isn't as important in a book.
4. Ellie's role and the
machine: Ellie is part of a large team building the machine in the book
based on the alien instructions. She is not the sole passenger, with several
international travelers taking the journey alongside her. Compare this to the movie
where Ellie is the sole American representative and ends up making the voyage
by herself due to sabotage and accidents. Having her go alone heightens the
drama and keeps the focus on her individual experience when meeting the aliens.
5. The meeting with the
aliens: The book's alien meeting is an incredibly vivid, almost psychedelic
journey through time, space and other dimensions. Ellie has lengthy, enigmatic
interactions with the aliens who take on familiar forms from her mind. But In
the film, the alien encounter is briefer and less abstract. The aliens appear
as fuzzy, incorporeal versions of her deceased father. The dialog is more
concise and less philosophical compared to the book.
But the best line in the
movie isn't even in the book; "The universe is a pretty big place.
If it's just us, it seems like an awful waste of space." Carl
Sagan wrote this, but he also wrote the first draft of the screenplay.
Sagan and his wife, Ann
Druyan began working on the movie, Contact in 1979. They wrote a
film treatment over 100 pages long and set up the project at Warner Bros. with
Peter Guber and Lynda Obst as producers. Nothing happened, so Sagan published
Contact as a novel. In 1981, Simon & Schuster gave Sagan a $2 million
advance on the novel. At the time, the advance was the largest ever made for a
book that had not yet been written. Guess what? The film reentered development
in 1989. With Zemeckis as director, filming ran from September 1996 to February
1997. Carl never saw the movie, he died in 1996.
Writing a book after the
movie is something I'm very familiar with. Last year, I wrote Mama Dallas
and Augie (published by Little
Studio Publishing. It is based on two screenplays, one of them that I
wrote; Augie. I'm hoping to write the third one, which would be the early years
of Mama Dallas (Concetta) in Italy.
If we can dream…hey, that is the title of next month's
blog!