science
Some (dystopian) science fiction stories have infertility at their basis. What are some of the best in how they treat the phenomenon? And is the threat real?
In this new Fantasy Science, we are revisiting the Fermi Paradox: if there are so many galaxies and planets out there, why haven’t we found evidence of alien life?
Dominic Brunt’s horror comedy Attack of the Adult Babies is equally versed in British toilet humour and the classics of the horror genre.
Why haven’t we found any signs of life out there in the universe, when statistically, there should be? This is Fermi’s Paradox, and in this new Fantasy Science column, we cover some of the explanations offered for this paradox in movies and TV.
In this all new column in our Fantasy Science series, resident physicist Radha Pyari explains what scientific writing devices can be used to prevent Grandfather Paradoxes in time travel stories.
Birthmarked is a comedy struggling with an identity crisis. Maybe that’s the point, or was more nurturing required?
In this third part of Fantasy Science, we’re going to get into how multiple universes may be possible. We’ll attempt to categorize some of the ones represented in popular fiction, starting off with the film The Golden Compass.
In this first part of Fantasy Science, our resident physicist Radha Pyari Sandhir explains wormholes and discusses how they are portrayed in film, and explains what the real life science behind them is.
Although The Penguin Counters showcases a sense of wonderment for its central research expedition, it fails to fully capture the importance of this mission to the Arctic.
Readers of a certain age will fondly remember Bill Nye as their de facto substitute teacher,…
Flatliners is a terrible remake of an already bad movie, whose basis is genuinely interesting but the vision poorly conceived.
In Tarkovsky’s 1972 film Solaris, Kris Kelvin (played by Donatas Banionis) journeys to a space station on the sentient planet Solaris in order to investigate whether the planet is still useful for scientific inquiry. Critics at the time considered Andrei Tarkovsky’s 1972 film as the Soviet answer to Stanley Kubrick’s famed 1968 film, 2001: A Space Odyssey.
On the surface, what the medical industry should be doing is simple: saving and improving lives. All possibilities should be explored and tested, with the breakthroughs made readily available to anyone who needs it.
Two decades after the original Jurassic Park became the most successful film of all time at that point and ushered in the era of CGI, the blockbuster cinema landscape is very different. With Marvel Cinematic Universe, franchises six or seven sequels deep, and young-adult dystopias dominating the big releases more and more every year, original screenplays or adaptations of adult-oriented novels are struggling to make an impact – it is inconceivable that Steven Spielberg’s classic could have been released today with anything near the same level of success as in 1993. And so while the original film has a devoted fan base, few would have thought there was that much demand for a new Jurassic Park film, especially after its two increasingly inferior sequels.
I’ve been toiling over this review for about a week now. A large portion of mainstream film criticism has shifted towards tearing down films, blatantly nit-picking all aspects of a movie and continuously shouting nasty adjectives which seemingly constitutes as a review of a film. I get why it’s so big nowadays, being angry at or disappointed in something will always get a more humorous and memorable responses.