Comments on: A New Hollywood Scientist Cliche

By: Feralboy

Feralboy — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 03:43:45 +0000

The Professor did not build a radio out of a coconut. They brought the radio with them. I think he made batteries for it out of coconuts, however.
The reason he didn’t notice the hot chicks was because it was the early sixties, and sex didn’t exist until 1967.

By: Matthew Francis

Matthew Francis — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 07:47:38 +0000

Re: comment 43. Ed, you say noone would want to watch a show featuring real doctors like yourself. Well, here in Australia we have a reality show called RPA, which is set in the Royal Prince Alfred hospital in Sydney which just shows day to day happenings such as patients consulting with doctors, having operations etc. I don’t watch it but from the few snippets I’ve seen here and there, it’s pretty boring. I don’t watch House either, but it looks far more interesting than RPA from what little I’ve seen of it.

By: Devil's Advocate

Devil's Advocate — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 14:24:36 +0000

Two other shows – The Big Bang Theory, sitcom with not one, but four geeky scientists. Eureka, which has just about every scientist stereotype covered in one character or another: geeky, awkward, vile, crazy, career-driven, etc. In Eureka, the sole ‘normal’ main character is the non-scientist, the local cop.

By: Max

Max — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 23:55:39 +0000

Just like Sarcos CEO, Dr. Stephen Jacobsen.

By: Zebulon Pike

Zebulon Pike — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 23:32:39 +0000

Two Words, Iron Man.

Granted he’s more of an engineer but IMO that’s splitting hairs when we are talking about creating flying armor with a ludicrous power supply. He goes very strongly against the scientist stereotype, he’s socially capable, good with the ladies and funny because of his wit and not his lack of co-ordination. I also like that they portrayed him as determined . He didn’t just build a suit, he built a prototype that nearly killed him and then he went back and tried again and again until he got it right.

By: Ed Uthman, MD

Ed Uthman, MD — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 18:16:25 +0000

The dilemma that drama creators face is that if they make their characters too realistic, no one will want to watch them. For characters to have entertainment value, they have to be better looking, or more courageous, or more foolhardy, or more idiosyncratic than the people we encounter in everyday society. I am reasonably sure that Dr. House, if realized as a member of my hospital’s medical staff, would be very quickly reported for “disruptive behavior,” probably ending up with his expulsion from the staff. On the other hand, no one would want to watch a show that featured me or other actual doctors in my hospital practicing medicine.

By: Devil's Advocate

Devil's Advocate — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 18:10:17 +0000

All kidding aside, it is well to recognize that almost all fictional drama employs the characterologically flawed protagonist (religious texts excluded) as the kernel upon which dramatic tension is built. It isn’t just scientists. You see it on cop shows (Shield, Law And Order, CSI, etc.), for example. Same with westerns. Even sitcoms, where just about every Dad is a moron, deeply flawed.

By: Max

Max — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 17:20:49 +0000

The horror! The horror!

By: Devil's Advocate

Devil's Advocate — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:55:55 +0000

Exactly.

By: Bill

Bill — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 23:45:07 +0000

Devil’s Advocate: “If he builds a raft and returns to civilzation, he returns to all the stereotypes and archetypes attributed to scientists as outlined in Dr. N’s article. On Gilligan’s Island, he enjoys a monopoly on science and technolgy, and could be king if he wanted.”

I’m feeling some kind of weird Gilligan’s Island / Lord of the Flies mashup coming…