|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Sept 25, 2018 14:40:25 GMT
Now there's your problem. While the general public loves action films, I don't know if they can handle anything of that intensity. Seriously though, as Cyber points out, the public likes stories about interesting people and the conflicts between them. They couldn't care less about science. Take Edison and Tesla as an example. While many people are interested in the battle that went on between these two great inventors, they couldn't care less that your refrigerator says, "for use on Alternating Current only" on the back. yep, they absolutely love tesla, but they have absolutely no comprehension whatsoever that about half of Tesla's ideas never took off because they were either totally off the mark, or simply not practical to implement. - I.E. his "tesla death ray" better known to scientists as his attempt to transmit electricity wirelessly, which was not usable, because it created so much electromagnetic noise it interfered with nearly everything. Or the fact that Tesla was also a combination inventor and conman. Tesla's idea of wireless power transmission was just a little ahead of its time. We can now charge our cell phones wirelessly using the same science Tesla proposed over 100 years ago. It's just that now we figured out how to eliminate the spark gap. |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Sept 25, 2018 15:07:31 GMT
I think this is why most of us just stick with the apple story. and the dumber among us think Newton invented gravity. He didn't? Next you will try to tell me Ben Franklin didn't invent electricity. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 25, 2018 15:17:50 GMT
and the dumber among us think Newton invented gravity. He didn't? Next you will try to tell me Ben Franklin didn't invent electricity. no, silly, he invented the wind generator. |
|
|
|
Post by rmc on Sept 25, 2018 17:51:12 GMT
If someone were to insist that writing a screenplay about these people was a bad idea, I'd probably take a seat and listen to them carefully, though. This story has its challenges and those challenges probably best explain why this isn't currently already a successful movie somewhere. For instance, as Cyber said, there is the fact that women weren't given the same respect as males in certain places during this time. Also, Wilhelm Leibniz is in an entirely different country, corresponding by mail throughout the picture. That could become taxing to watch, if too long. Then there is Leibniz' treatment of women. Though probably a bit more interesting than having no women at all in the movie, it is arguably considered reprehensible toward women as well. It has been pointed out that depicting the math, or the fact that it is Leibniz' math that really ultimately conquers the world presents a challenge too, if dwelt upon too long. Hooke looks to have actually been the one who first realized that it is gravity at the heart of orbital motion. Properly depicting that likely makes the film seem to be an attempt to dethrone Newton. Accurately depicting Newton probably makes him seem like a mean-spirited, awkward individual! And, he's my hero. Or, at least he was. After all, he tried to basically erase the works of Hooke, at times using fire! In some ways I actually worry that perhaps both science and history have chosen to bury the fact that Newton forced people like Hooke and Leibniz into an early grave somehow. I can't imagine how that could have happened, but the timing and events seem support such a notion. Now, I fear that I am attempting to write another film like "Amadeus" from the year 1984. Except this time instead of the hero dying with the help of the antagonist, my so called hero has set out to destroy two people who may actually be more heroic than he is. I want to feel about this film the same way I did when I foolishly believed Newton was breaking new ground completely on his own. Now, I see that his statement that he stood upon the shoulders of giants was true more than I first understood. Oddly enough, even that credit was more likely a simple sarcastic jab at the shorter-in-stature Robert Hooke. I do want to state that I do appreciate the time you've taken to read this! Thank you! www.bbc.com/future/story/20121004-newtons-laws-of-motion-pictures |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 25, 2018 17:55:09 GMT
If someone were to insist that writing a screenplay about these people was a bad idea, I'd probably take a seat and listen to them carefully, though. This story has its challenges and those challenges probably best explain why this isn't currently already a successful movie somewhere. For instance, as Cyber said, there is the fact that women weren't given the same respect as males in certain places during this time. Also, Wilhelm Leibniz is in an entirely different country, corresponding by mail throughout the picture. That could become taxing to watch, if too long. Then there is Leibniz' treatment of women. Though probably a bit more interesting than having no women at all in the movie, it is arguably considered reprehensible toward women as well. It has been pointed out that depicting the math, or the fact that it is Leibniz' math that really ultimately conquers the world presents a challenge too, if dwelt upon too long. Hooke looks to have actually been the one who first realized that it is gravity at the heart of orbital motion. Properly depicting that likely makes the film seem to be an attempt to dethrone Newton. Accurately depicting Newton probably makes him seem like a mean-spirited, awkward individual! And, he's my hero. Or, at least he was. After all, he tried to basically erase the works of Hooke, at times using fire! In some ways I actually worry that perhaps both science and history have chosen to bury the fact that Newton forced people like Hooke and Leibniz into an early grave somehow. I can't imagine how that could have happened, but the timing and events seem support such a notion. Now, I fear that I am attempting to write another film like "Amadeus" from the year 1984. Except this time instead of the hero dying with the help of the antagonist, my so called hero has set out to destroy two people who may actually be more heroic than he is. I want to feel about this film the same way I did when I foolishly believed Newton was breaking new ground completely on his own. Now, I see that his statement that he stood upon the shoulders of giants was true more than I first understood. Oddly enough, even that credit was more likely a simple sarcastic jab at the shorter-in-stature Robert Hooke. I do want to state that I do appreciate the time you've taken to read this! Thank you! the topic did capture our imagination, so there's still hope. |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Sept 25, 2018 18:14:52 GMT
If someone were to insist that writing a screenplay about these people was a bad idea, I'd probably take a seat and listen to them carefully, though. This story has its challenges and those challenges probably best explain why this isn't currently already a successful movie somewhere. For instance, as Cyber said, there is the fact that women weren't given the same respect as males in certain places during this time. Also, Wilhelm Leibniz is in an entirely different country, corresponding by mail throughout the picture. That could become taxing to watch, if too long. Then there is Leibniz' treatment of women. Though probably a bit more interesting than having no women at all in the movie, it is arguably considered reprehensible toward women as well. It has been pointed out that depicting the math, or the fact that it is Leibniz' math that really ultimately conquers the world presents a challenge too, if dwelt upon too long. Hooke looks to have actually been the one who first realized that it is gravity at the heart of orbital motion. Properly depicting that likely makes the film seem to be an attempt to dethrone Newton. Accurately depicting Newton probably makes him seem like a mean-spirited, awkward individual! And, he's my hero. Or, at least he was. After all, he tried to basically erase the works of Hooke, at times using fire! In some ways I actually worry that perhaps both science and history have chosen to bury the fact that Newton forced people like Hooke and Leibniz into an early grave somehow. I can't imagine how that could have happened, but the timing and events seem support such a notion. Now, I fear that I am attempting to write another film like "Amadeus" from the year 1984. Except this time instead of the hero dying with the help of the antagonist, my so called hero has set out to destroy two people who may actually be more heroic than he is. I want to feel about this film the same way I did when I foolishly believed Newton was breaking new ground completely on his own. Now, I see that his statement that he stood upon the shoulders of giants was true more than I first understood. Oddly enough, even that credit was more likely a simple sarcastic jab at the shorter-in-stature Robert Hooke. I do want to state that I do appreciate the time you've taken to read this! Thank you! www.bbc.com/future/story/20121004-newtons-laws-of-motion-picturesHere is a thought; Try writing a scene where Newton is talking about his life and work to, say, a group in the Coffee House or one other individual when he is older. (There is actually someone mentioned in one of the links I posted before who could be suitable). Have this be Newton having an honest, if fictional, conversation; Maybe to a young woman. You could use this as the basis for outlining aspects of Newtons life, or the more important parts from his view and his view of his contemporaries. Add notations to where Newton is being, lets say 'somewhat biased' or 'inaccurate'. From there you could move into 'flashback' scenes showing what 'really' happened. We know, for example, that the story about the Apple was one that Newton himself propagated. So it would be 'accurate' to have him tell that story, while showing the 'real' (most likely) one. That kind of format might allow you to show Newton for the flawed man he really was, and the 'truth' behind the other figures he is discussing as the flashbacks would of course be more from their point of view. |
|
|
|
Post by rmc on Sept 26, 2018 14:01:21 GMT
A good exercise! And, I am planning on taking it seriously. However, in my current attitude towards Newton, I end up writing something so cartoonish it basically goes something like this (joking, of course):
Interior, The Grecian, Newton sits, sipping his coffee. Sitting before him is BLANCH, a local wench lucky not to have been removed yet from the all-male premises. Newton sets the cup down. He looks at Blanch.
NEWTON
Let me tell you a story about how a tyrant always wins.
Suddenly, stage right, the screenwriter enters and drop kicks Newton right in the, er uh... Face.
...
Anyway, I need to start somehow. So I know you are right. But, at the moment, I'm not exactly thrilled with Newton, currently.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 26, 2018 14:08:23 GMT
A good exercise! And, I am planning on taking it seriously. However, in my current attitude towards Newton, I end up writing something so cartoonish it basically goes something like this (joking, of course): Interior, The Grecian, Newton sits, sipping his coffee. Sitting before him is BLANCH, a local wench lucky not to have been removed yet from the all-male premises. Newton sets the cup down. He looks at Blanch. NEWTON Let me tell you a story about how a tyrant always wins. Suddenly, stage right, the screenwriter enters and drop kicks Newton right in the, er uh... Face. ... Anyway, I need to start somehow. So I know you are right. But, at the moment, I'm not exactly thrilled with Newton, currently. so write it about how Newton self-promoted his way into being the face of gravity. |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Sept 26, 2018 16:39:22 GMT
A good exercise! And, I am planning on taking it seriously. However, in my current attitude towards Newton, I end up writing something so cartoonish it basically goes something like this (joking, of course): Interior, The Grecian, Newton sits, sipping his coffee. Sitting before him is BLANCH, a local wench lucky not to have been removed yet from the all-male premises. Newton sets the cup down. He looks at Blanch. NEWTON Let me tell you a story about how a tyrant always wins. Suddenly, stage right, the screenwriter enters and drop kicks Newton right in the, er uh... Face. ... Anyway, I need to start somehow. So I know you are right. But, at the moment, I'm not exactly thrilled with Newton, currently. Set the flash forward scenes in Newtons home or offices at Trinity College rather than at the Coffee House. It is VERY unlikely that any women would make it more than two steps beyond the doorway of the Grecian before being thrown out. This was one of the Premiere and highest class Coffee Houses in London at the time, and had they allowed any women inside (Other than presumably the owners wife, who is not someone I can see Newton talking to) they would be viewed as prostitutes and damaged the places reputation. Setting it in his house or offices would allow set designers to add in Easter Eggs as to some of Newtons interests in the form of props scattered around. Without having to mention them in the actual script, or reinforce any mention of them by having him walk over and pick up something related to them. A good way to start might be to actually do a short recap of Newtons life up to this imaginary point in time near the end of his life. Then imagine that he is telling someone about his life from his earliest days in a sketch form. From there you can pick out those specific parts you actually want to include, but in such a way that you at least will know what was said before that and even reference it in some form. Basically allowing you to know where the conversation has been before we reach the point that the audience joins in. This might allow you to get a feel for how Newton and his audience are interacting before you need to literally start talking about specifics. In fact writing an earlier scene that isn't really intended to be used might not only help you find the right feel, but also remove any pressure at having to 'get things right'. Another thought might be to imagine this as a stage play, where the elder Newton is played by someone like Sir Ian McKellen or Sir Patrick Stewart. This might allow you to picture how those actors would play the older Newton, as they would add their own mixture of charm and class to the role, and as such how to write a more complex character who would still be somewhat sympathetic to an audience. |
|
|
|
Post by rmc on Sept 26, 2018 16:42:57 GMT
A good exercise! And, I am planning on taking it seriously. However, in my current attitude towards Newton, I end up writing something so cartoonish it basically goes something like this (joking, of course): Interior, The Grecian, Newton sits, sipping his coffee. Sitting before him is BLANCH, a local wench lucky not to have been removed yet from the all-male premises. Newton sets the cup down. He looks at Blanch. NEWTON Let me tell you a story about how a tyrant always wins. Suddenly, stage right, the screenwriter enters and drop kicks Newton right in the, er uh... Face. ... Anyway, I need to start somehow. So I know you are right. But, at the moment, I'm not exactly thrilled with Newton, currently. so write it about how Newton self-promoted his way into being the face of gravity. I suppose it would be to boast how he got over on Hooke for embarrassing him over his paper on optics. Also, he did believe that Leibniz stole his ideas on Calculus. So, maybe telling the story about how he forced those two guys out is an understandable story in some way? (While showing in flashback form what really happened too). |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Sept 26, 2018 17:04:27 GMT
"Understanding is a three edged sword. There is your side, their side and the truth in between" - Vorlon saying. (Yes, I've been watching Babylon 5, again)
|
|
|
|
Post by rmc on Sept 26, 2018 18:59:36 GMT
"Understanding is a three edged sword. There is your side, their side and the truth in between" - Vorlon saying. (Yes, I've been watching Babylon 5, again) And, "their side" could probably include observers too. And, in this case, "observers" can mean the audience, producers, directors and agents, where a few of these kinds folks have some say in what we ultimately see. Then the three edged sword becomes more like that of a Cuisinart... So, I'll probably just study the situation as best as I can and decide basically for myself how the story should go. But, that doesn't mean I cannot listen to other points of view along the way. Besides, I don't have rights to the story specifically. There is nothing that prevents someone else from writing it for themselves also. Cyber, I see your point about making a central scene where Newton is describing his story to someone. That seems so fundamental to the story it just has to be done. Thank you for pointing it out. And, yes. I realize if he is speaking with a woman, it wouldn't be happening in the Grecian. I was just kidding around. I wonder, given his position on being with a woman, if he managed to speak to that many? He probably did. But, he seemed to address people only when they are part of the review process or a class from what I can see so far. Naturally, that is because that is all that is recorded historically, or easily found. I do know that I have decided to introduce Robert Hooke's character with him entering the coffee house, perhaps saying a heart warming hello to all the patrons who welcome him, (he being the one who helped rebuild London, after all). And his first full line in the story will be devoted to his love of coffee. (Struggling with sleep apnea, and being responsible for much of the major thinking of the time, Hooke needs coffee. Sleep apnea, as he ages, will become his weak point.) In fact, he may just acknowledge the customers as he enters with a bright smile, but his first actual word in the story may be "Coffee!" Anyway, I hope this thread is being utilized by me in the way intended by the group. I have certainly enjoyed hearing from everyone. But, I don't want the thread to become anything other than what the group as a whole requires. Thank you again, though!! |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Sept 26, 2018 19:44:29 GMT
If you wanted to fudge history a little you could have Isaac Newton having this conversation with Maria Clara Eimmart. She was a German astronomer, but also well versed in Mathematics. While there is no evidence I can find that she ever visited England, let alone met Newton. She could have possibly visited London if her husband, Johann Heinrich Muller himself a astronomer and physicist of note in Germany, had been invited to talk to the Royal Society. Which is the point I have a light bulb moment. If Newton had met the couple there might not be any whiff of a scandal if he was entertaining them, and Muller was late to dinner. She was after all a married woman, and as an astronomer might well have been able to impress an older Newton into talking about his life. She was also known for making illustrations of the sun and moon, the latter would tie in very well to the narrative. No need for a shot of the moon in the sky, instead an illustration of the Moon she made on view. Then of course there is the fact that she was German, and while she didn't live in the same city as Leibniz it is not impossible that she may have met him. And of course fudging history a bit would mean that you could easily have her act as the link between Newton and Leibniz for story telling purposes. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Clara_Eimmart |
|
|
|
Post by wvengineer on Sept 26, 2018 21:24:09 GMT
A good exercise! And, I am planning on taking it seriously. However, in my current attitude towards Newton, I end up writing something so cartoonish it basically goes something like this (joking, of course): Interior, The Grecian, Newton sits, sipping his coffee. Sitting before him is BLANCH, a local wench lucky not to have been removed yet from the all-male premises. Newton sets the cup down. He looks at Blanch. NEWTON Let me tell you a story about how a tyrant always wins. Suddenly, stage right, the screenwriter enters and drop kicks Newton right in the, er uh... Face. ... Anyway, I need to start somehow. So I know you are right. But, at the moment, I'm not exactly thrilled with Newton, currently. so write it about how Newton self-promoted his way into being the face of gravity. Or maybe have him be a bit tipsy, but not full on drunk. At that state where is lips are extra loose, but he is a bit more honest than he would normally be. |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Sept 26, 2018 21:38:51 GMT
I don't think Newton drank.
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Sept 27, 2018 1:26:48 GMT
I don't think Newton drank. Not even apple cider? |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 27, 2018 2:03:31 GMT
so write it about how Newton self-promoted his way into being the face of gravity. Or maybe have him be a bit tipsy, but not full on drunk. At that state where is lips are extra loose, but he is a bit more honest than he would normally be. that would work if it was him telling his story, with flashbacks included. especially if a few of the flashbacks showed his embellished version and then the real version. "I was sitting under the tree wondering how the moon orbits around the earth, and then it hit me." |
|
|
|
Post by rmc on Sept 27, 2018 2:10:01 GMT
Once young Newton obtained his Ph.D, he presented his paper on optics to the Royal Society in the hope that they would test and confirm for young Newton that he was right, and that it would confirm his belief that he alone was unfolding God's universe.
But, as we basically know, Newton had a strange side too. And, unfortunately, in his youth, he let some of that show and, apparently, Robert Hooke picked up on it.
Here is a video detailing the issues at hand with regard to the study of light during the 1660s that allowed young Newton to become a bit embarrassed by Robert Hooke after Hooke further analysized the materials.
This turning point becomes the beginning of the furious Newton, and an end to the young appreciate professor.
|
|
|
|
Post by rmc on Apr 19, 2020 12:14:16 GMT
Believe it or not, I have been mulling this around in my head still.
The story, in my view, in order to make it a familiar theme that Hollywood could pick up on, should really be about internet flaming, in some sense. That's going to be where a lot of the raw conflict takes place, followed later with public ramifications.
How could that be? Well, they didn't have an electronic internet, per se, but they did write letters; lots of letters. And each of these letters were reviewed, commented on, and ended up in the public view through one Henry Oldenburg, secretary of the Royal Society.
This, to me, is the way the "internet" battle began and took place, for the most part. And, should be written today in a familiar setting where the letters seem more like internet posts or texts. The science discussed should be visual graphics, animations, such that a modern audience can easily follow along.
This way we have Hooke and Newton, separated by some miles between Cambridge and London, and Huygens & Leibniz, by way of France, Holland, or Germany, depending - even though apart, fighting and fuming nonetheless.
There will be scenes when captain Edmund Halley and others meet with Hooke at coffee houses in London, but for the most part, it remains the personal journey of a once well-respected and extremely busy Robert Hooke slowly succumbing to an endless list of promises and tasks, along with increasingly failing health that, ultimately, get the better of him, turning him into the angered and jealous genius who ultimately suffers embarrassment after embarrassment at the hands of Newton.
Since Newton helps put Hooke in his place (deserved or not), and since Newton, a deeply religious man of his own convictions, believed not in the holy Trinity, (in fact he was convinced it was subversive to believe this way) I've chosen to title the screenplay, "Infernal Trinity" -- helps identify Newton, and the ensuing battle between Hooke, Newton and Leibniz; the three of them.
More later!
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Apr 19, 2020 14:38:25 GMT
Believe it or not, I have been mulling this around in my head still. The story, in my view, in order to make it a familiar theme that Hollywood could pick up on, should really be about internet flaming, in some sense. That's going to be where a lot of the raw conflict takes place, followed later with public ramifications. How could that be? Well, they didn't have an electronic internet, per se, but they did write letters; lots of letters. And each of these letters were reviewed, commented on, and ended up in the public view through one Henry Oldenburg, secretary of the Royal Society. This, to me, is the way the "internet" battle began and took place, for the most part. And, should be written today in a familiar setting where the letters seem more like internet posts or texts. The science discussed should be visual graphics, animations, such that a modern audience can easily follow along. This way we have Hooke and Newton, separated by some miles between Cambridge and London, and Huygens & Leibniz, by way of France, Holland, or Germany, depending - even though apart, fighting and fuming nonetheless. There will be scenes when captain Edmund Halley and others meet with Hooke at coffee houses in London, but for the most part, it remains the personal journey of a once well-respected and extremely busy Robert Hooke slowly succumbing to an endless list of promises and tasks, along with increasingly failing health that, ultimately, get the better of him, turning him into the angered and jealous genius who ultimately suffers embarrassment after embarrassment at the hands of Newton. Since Newton helps put Hooke in his place (deserved or not), and since Newton, a deeply religious man of his own convictions, believed not in the holy Trinity, (in fact he was convinced it was subversive to believe this way) I've chosen to title the screenplay, "Infernal Trinity" -- helps identify Newton, and the ensuing battle between Hooke, Newton and Leibniz; the three of them. More later! treating the letters back and forth as tweets might provide a good hook |
|
