2005 SLOAN FILM SUMMIT Hosted by the Tribeca Film Festival NEW YORK OCT. 5 - 8, 2005 Written by Brian Shirey Photographed by Evan Sung

Science + technology + mathematics = Hollywood moviemaking? That was the equation at this past weekend’s 2005 Sloan Film Summit, a forum presented by the Tribeca Film Institute to inspire new filmmakers to create more realistic and entertaining stories about -- what shall we call them? -- the world’s more rigid disciplines.

Sponsored by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, which makes grants in science, technology and economic performance, the October 5-8 event featured panel discussions, script readings, and short film screenings. Attended by both filmmakers and scientists, the Sloan Summit’s goal is to look beyond that tired genre, science fiction, to create movies with compelling plots about real issues in scientific endeavor. Past Foundation-supported works are well-known today, plays such as Proof and Copenhagen, and the presence of science in popular visual media grows, in films like Pi and A Beautiful Mind, and in TV series like CSI and Numb3rs.

But still, the Sloan Summit’s mission has never seemed greater. In Thursday’s panel discussion, Dr. James D. Watson, one of the original founders of DNA structure, offered the view that as the world’s stresses increase, moviemakers are more apt to favor the supernatural over more scientifically grounded storylines. Certainly we see sci-fi and horror films repeated (and sequelized) endlessly; now, after hits like The Passion of the Christ and The Exorcism of Emily Rose, fantastic religious themes have come to the fore. Another panel member, physicist Brian Greene, was concerned about an “antagonism towards science,” because in movies, rational explanations can be at odds with the escapism audiences often desire. But scientific reality and entertainment need not be separated. The erudite Dr. Watson (no, he was not accompanied by Holmes), while respectful of religious doctrine, hoped that the moviemakers gathered before the Summit panel would create fascinating films that might “make secular thought more respectable.”

Another focus of the Sloan Summit: Challenging stereotypes in the portrayal of doctors, engineers, and mathematicians. Instead of “mad” scientists, the emphasis -- the panel noted -- should just be on really human ones, progressive thinkers who are also capable of errors in personal judgment. In 2004, Bill Condon’s Kinsey set a high standard for the scientist bio-pic in Hollywood; it’s a model for hopefully more thoughtful movies about the characters of the men and women who labor in their laboratories. One great subject for a film, panelist (and actor) Ben Shenkman suggested, would be a biography of A-bomb inventor J. Robert Oppenheimer, which while filmed previously (1989’s Fat Man and Little Boy), could do with a powerful updating in this age of catastrophe. “All science is morally neutral,” noted Shenkman, ”but scientists are not.” Indeed, showing what happens when certain uranium particles collide is not dramatic. But add flawed human beings, and science can lead filmmakers to rich, personal stories.

To encourage the effort, the Sloan Foundation honors directing and writing students at six of the country’s leading film schools: AFI, Carnegie Mellon, Columbia, NYU, UCLA, and USC. At the Sloan Summit, another highlight was the reading of excerpts from screenplays developed with Foundation support. Among the group were “Indelible” and “Signs of Life,” which both unfolded engaging storylines mixed with scientific discourse. The former, written by Mikki del Monico, tells the tale of a biologist who has lost her husband to a rare hereditary disease… and is now racing to save her son from the same fate. It’s TV-movie-of-the-week fare on the surface, but the script’s emphasis on the ethical issues involved elevates the material to a more rarefied air. The mother must deal not only with the politics of her research facility skimping out on funding, but with a problem common to the best scientist stories: her own God complex. (For further reference, check out the perfectly cast Alec Baldwin as a super-surgeon in 1993’s Malice).

“Signs of Life,” written by Lisa Robinson, is a much lighter story, detailing the brainy romance of video game designer and a neuroscientist. Performed by actors Julianne Nicholson and Alan Cumming, among others, the script (as excerpted) could be a Ryan-Hanks type romantic comedy. And who wants to see another one of those? In “Signs of Life,” it’s not clashing personalities that keep the lovers from their inevitable union; instead, we’re presented with characters who are just too absolute to deal with something as abstract as love. “My relationships don’t last long,” say Sacha (Nicholson), “there’s always a glitch.” The couple’s first date is at a high-tech video arcade, and later, sexual tension occurs in that empty, silent moment… as they wait for her computer to load. Daniel (Cumming) flirts by suggesting to Sacha that when she first saw him, “the neurons in your brain played a rhapsody.” Chemistry,indeed. It’s a script that, while hilariously using techno-babble in the context of personal relationships, reveals scientists to be as clueless about some phenomena as the rest of us.

In the end -- with box office-friendly projects like “Indelible” and “Signs of Life” on their way to production -- the 2005 Sloan Film Summit proved to be a great event to show how scientists and filmmakers can work together for mutual benefit. And with support from major film festivals (Tribeca, Sundance) and production companies (Miramax, Focus), it’s a good bet that the influence of the Sloan Foundation on Hollywood cinema will be felt for a long time to come. Who knows? Even now, new stories on science and technology are perhaps being developed in the busy frontal lobes (and hard drives) of the next generation of filmmakers. More power to them!