Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | RSS
Welcome to The SciFi Podcast, a wretched hive of scum and villainy a podcast focused on in-depth discussion of all things Science Fiction. The SciFi Podcast features three hosts—Mattroid, Solo, and Station!—and frequent guests. Each episode we look at a science fiction theme or franchise and take the discussion where no show has gone before.
We thought it was “about time” we get to our Terminator Genysis coverage, so we brought on special guest Brian “The Brain” Patchett, our real life friend and a real life physicist, for our discussion of the the film and the themed discussion of the real science behind the filmic representation of fictional time travel.
Theme music courtesy of I Hear Sirens, featuring Matt on bass and Liz on keyboard. Hear more of I Hear Sirens ethereal, instrumental, post-rock at BandCamp. Podcast production by Solo and SpaceWolf. Art by SpaceWolf.
Show notes after the jump.
I. INTRODUCTION
—Welcome, Brain!
—Mattroid introduces the theme
II. [00:03:21] WHILE YOU WERE SLEEPING IN THE CRYO-CHAMBER
—Solo on The Sirius Documentary with Dr. Steven Greer
—Brain is hell-bent on convincing us that Kanye West doesn’t exist*
—Station! is a hardcore conspiracy theorist*
—Brain saw Terminator Genysis multiple times—for you!
—Mattroid has been watching Knots Landing*
—Listener feedback
—TeePublic affiliate
*Some of this information cannot be corroborated
III. [00:17:40] FEATURE REVIEW: TERMINATOR GENYSIS (2015)**
Solo: 5 ( Stream it, when it’s on Netflix )
Mattroid: 5.5 ( Buy it, for fans )
Station: 6 ( Stream it, don’t be a sheep and decide if you want to buy it )
Brain: 6.5 – 7 ( Buy it, in a $5 bargain bin, despite it ruining the franchise )
**Plus, a huge amount of interwoven time travel theme discussion
—Brain discusses the “scuttlebutt” on three popular theories of time travel
IV. [01:23:20] ADDITIONAL THEME DISCUSSION: “TIME TRAVEL”
—Solo asks “What is real?”
—Mechanisms
—Fantasy time travel aka “A Wink and a Twirl”
—Superman turning back time
—Science and religion
—Star Trek time travel
—Planet of the Apes time travel
—Albert Einstein, “special relativity” and the “twins paradox”
—Etcetera
V. WRAP-UP
—Sign-offs, plugs, and recommendations
LINKS FOR THIS EPISODE:
REMEMBER TO CHECK OUT BRAIN’S: “The Physics of Ant-Man or The Science of Small” via his new Brain Blog on TheSciFiPodcast.com
READ MATTROID’S TERMINATOR GENYSIS ARTICLE AS GARY THE UNICORN: “Man vs Machine vs Father Time”
PLEASE DO ALL OF YOUR GEEK SHIRT SHOPPING at our TeePublic affiliate store to help us keep the lights on and help yourselves to some awesome tees.
REMEMBER TO CHECK OUT BIZARRO ANDY HOWELL’S: “The Science of …”
Mattroid’s links:
—Read Matt’s writing for The Daily Herald newspaper as “Gary the Unicorn” on topics like FanX at heraldextra.com
—Watch Matt’s Gary the Unicorn comedy sketches about things like alien abduction on YouTube
—Listen to Matt discuss sci-fi / horror movies on the topics like “When Science Goes Too Far” on Horror Movie Podcast
Station’s links:
—Liz says to subscribe to The SciFi Podcast on iTunes and Stitcher
Solo’s links:
—William says to listen to him on Movie Stream Cast and Movie Podcast Weekly
If you’re on Facebook, please “like” the TSFP Facebook page and connect with other listeners. Send emails or pre-recorded voicemails to ask [at] thescifipodcast [dot] com
COMING UP NEXT WEEK on TSFP:
Join us in two weeks for our review of Mad Max: Fury Road (2015)!
Guys! This new episode of The Sci-Fi Podcast is FANTASTIC. I can say that because I had NOTHING to do with it. If you’re a Kyle Bishop fan (like I am), you’re going to be thrilled to hear Brian Patchett. He’s the Dr. Walking Dead of science fiction and he schools the crew (and all of us) on the REAL science behind time travel for over two hours here, while reviewing the latest Terminator movie. It is SO good! SO, so, so, so good! If you loved this as much as I did, make sure you check out Brain’s “The Physics of Ant-Man or The Science of Small” blog we posted last week.
We really went off the rails on this one! Good times were had by all.
You were excellent, Brain.
I’d repeat this, but I’ve already sent a few too many “thank you” and “you’re great” texts to Mr. Brain.
Just finished up the episode, which means the only episode I still need to listen to is the second Marvel one.
I was disappointed at hearing all of the negative reviews for the new TERMINATOR movie. I love TERMINATOR 2 to the extent that it’s my favorite action movie. For whatever reason, I’ve always viewed it as being more of an action movie than a sci-fi film. It’s a movie where I can watch it at any time and it’ll never get old. While I haven’t seen the original as many times as I should, I do enjoy that one as well. It has a different feel to it than JUDGMENT DAY, which is a great thing to find when it comes to first movies and their sequels. It’s a bit like ALIEN and ALIENS where you have these two great movies with a similar topic, but both movies manage to feel totally different. I went to see TERMINATOR 3 in the theater and was left feeling underwhelmed. All it took was one viewing to know that the movie was going to feel very dated and it wouldn’t take long for that to happen. With the underwhelming third movie and the lack of Arnold, I haven’t bothered to watch the fourth film yet. When I heard Arnold was back and the amazingly talented Emilia Clarke would be in the movie as well, I was looking forward to finally seeing another good TERMINATOR movie. With all of the negative reviews, with your lackluster reviews being the most positive I’ve heard online, I don’t know if I should bother watching it nor out of fear of being disappointed yet again. Oh well, there’s still the two great TERMINATOR movies.
Thanks to this podcast series, I think I’m going to have to finally give in and get around to seeing at least one of the BILL & TED movies for the first time.
Yeah, I haven’t listened to this episode yet, but I did see GENYSIS in theaters. I’m a fan of the Terminator series, and for that reason, GENYSIS was a fun movie. It was not a good movie, though.
If you can get past the “this is not a very good movie” part of it and not be terribly disappointed, then you might have some fun with it.
Better call Sal!
I’m with Dino on this one. Not a great movie, but still a fun movie, especially if you’re a fan of the franchise. I think I came in around a 6. I think the negative comments from the hosts seemed more negative than intended because they love the first two movies so much that they wanted this new film to erase the bad taste left in our mouths from T3 and TS (ha!). Just watch it, Sal. The movie is packed with fan service that you’ll either appreciate or hate.
My main concern is the fact that the hosts on the Sci-Fi Podcast gave the most positive reviews I’ve heard of the movie thus far. That’s…troubling.
I can’t see myself spending money to see it in the theater (Fool me once…), but I’ll check it out once it comes out on DVD or hits Netflix.
It’s waitable. It’s also worth watching, especially for fans of the franchise. But it’s a bit not-terminator in the same way T3 and TS are.
Speaking of “conspiracy theories” … it is mine that Emilia Clarke got the role of Sarah Connor specifically because of this video: Terminator of Thrones *NSFW[ookies]. Call me unimaginative, but that’s exactly what I’m accusing the Producers of Terminator Genysis of.
But the only thing “Terminator” about that was the first 30 sec…?
Exactly. Again, unimaginative. It simply physically puts Emilia Clarke into the Terminator universe, looking all Sarah Connor Chronicles. Game of Thrones is a big hit, she’s a standout character—because boobs—and they are looking to cast an upcoming Terminator movie. “Hey, what if we do a JJ Abrams, alternate timeline kinda thing, really tease out the time travel elements of our franchise, and then we can make this hot, young actress Sarah Conner. You know, because boobs!”
Let’s not pretend that she doesn’t have the most incredible eyebrows in Hollywood history.
Eyebrows = ratings
Right?
Factually, yes.
Look man, yes she was miscast, yes she stood out in Terminator (and not in a good way), but let’s be fair too. The character she was given was not the same Sarah Connor that we love. Also, she is not a stand out in GOT because of her perfect boobs. She is legitimately a great actress in the show and the character she plays is infinitely better than the alternate timeline Sarah Connor that she plays in the movie. So is it her fault that Genysis kind of sucks? Not really, but she definitely contributes.
Wasn’t commenting on the quality of her acting or the movie at all, Juan. ONLY saying that my conspiracy theory is that someone involved in the Terminator production saw this video and said “we should cast her!” because it made it easy to imagine this hugely popular actress in their franchise.
Now, in terms of her being a stand-out … I have never seen a GOT episode, as you know, and yet I have seen Emilia Clarke all over the internet due to a couple of pronounced characteristics … and they are not her eyebrows.
This posting has turned much more sexist, dirty-old-man than I intended. I was just posing a conspiracy theory.
You’re just jealous that no one praises your eyebrows.
Even though people on the net obviously love her boobs, I’ve seen a lot of praise of her as an actress as well. As someone who has seen the show, she’s one of the best aspects of the show for me (Only partly for dem eyebrows).
I think you’re underselling Clark’s popularity if you think it’s solely due to her chesticles. Frankly, even if she had never gotten naked on GAME OF THRONES, I can see the TERMINATOR creators wanting her to be in the most recent movie.
I mean, I’m mostly joking. I’m trying to be funny, not be a pig. But, I can only speak to my experience, which is that I’ve seen hundreds of posts about Emilia Clarke and Game of Thrones online and yet I’ve never seen her with clothes on before the Terminator Genysis trailer. And I’m not into porn, I’m talking about mainstream entertainment sites. Also, I have no opinion on her as an actress as I’ve never seen her act outside the Terminator Genysis trailer. I’m not saying she couldn’t earn a spot in the series due to her acting ability. I’m just drawing a direct link between a viral Terminator-themed clip that she is in and her being cast in a Terminator film about a year later. I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised that this is so controversial … most good conspiracies are.
And, oddly enough, I’ve had a surprising amount of comments on my eyebrows in my time.
I like your eyebrows, Josh, I like them a lot. Your funny jokes though, didn’t land this time. After reading your response, I understand what you really meant, but I still think you’re exaggerating A LOT about these nude pictures of the lovely, oh so lovely, Emilia Clarke. And to prove you wrong, I just did a search on Google (at my job!) of “Emilia Clarke Games of Thrones”. I scrolled down the page five times and got zero nude images of her. So, I think mister Josh Ligari here has been purposely searching for the wrong thing. And really, I wouldn’t blame you or think of you as a pig if that were the case.
As far as your conspiracy theory goes… 150 views? Really? That’s how she got the gig? :/
It only takes one view, Juan. And it just popped up for me like every other Emilia Clarke scene has.
I’ve never Googled her, though. Just read articles that come up on “around the web” kinds of links. Anyway, this conversation has out-lasted it’s welcome by a long shot around the sun.
anyway, here’s a link for you that I’d like to offer as an apology to Juan, Sal and Ms Clarke: “If I Could Turn Back Time“
Steven Greer (The Sirius).
I believe that he believes in what he’s doing. To that extent, I believe there is something the government is hiding and is dreading the day it hits Wikileaks. However, he employs a dubious method for contacting aliens involving thought. I have an open mind to the subject but I also recognize the ridicule at stating something and having no proof. It seems odd that a scientist can state he has contacted aliens with his mind (whether he did or not).
many brilliant men have minds that tend to wander off down the road of non-reality. it’s an epidemic in theoretical quantum and cosmology physics. when you spend every day questioning reality nothing feels real anymore, and maybe things that aren’t real begin to feel as though they are.
That’s very interesting and very well put, Brain.
now that I’ve read what I just replied it strikes me that I’ve never heard a story of a woman in those same positions losing her grip on reality…off to the library!
Go!
Suggestions!
You pretty much do this but wanted to mention it anyhow:
1. Any time a sci-fi movie is coming out – do a trailer and theorize
2. Any current sci-fi, review. I’d suggest Matt & Liz watch it first 🙂
3. End off with a classic sci-fi.
MAYBE alternate theories or draw connections between unintentional plots. Liiiiiike, how the phone booth from Bill & Ted was potentially a Mark 1 TARDIS for the future Time Lords.
Watching stuff is a little amateur, but whatever.
mattroid, if you can’t know everything about the show from just the title, then I just don’t know what kind of world we’re leaving for our children.
oh I had a great theory for who John Connor’s original father was! I never got to explain it though, maybe in another episode…
No! Now! Explain!
It’s better when I explain it out loud rather than write it down.
I thought of this when you mentioned the moon landing.
“What costs are involved in actually going to the moon?”
“Well, actually mostly the massive rocket.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bZU6vHSewU
HA! fake the footage of the fake moon landing on the moon. good stuff.
I was very interested to hear the comparison of Star Trek, Superman and Planet of the Apes time travel. Great stuff.
Now that we’ve got some of the basic theories down (and use that phrase very loosely with regard to myself), I’d love to find themed episode to have Brain back where we pick apart different time travel theories.
I just don’t know if that’s possible, since it is all theoretical and the movies often make stuff entirely up.
I’d love a dissection of a group of “time machine” films where you talk about the practical functioning of the different time travel apparatus in a variety of films, from The Time Machine to Time Crimes to Back to the Future.
I’d also be curious to hear a discussion of Looper and how it implements some from column A and some from column B. Looper is basically part Primer and part Back to the Future (in terms of time travel, not the Akira stuff), as near as I can tell.
All time travel can be easily explained with a single answer:
A wizard did it.
Wow, that was easily explained. Why the hell did you have this Brain guy on?
for filler!
Spacewolf, that sounds cool! I could totally tear every time travel movie to shreds with very basic physical laws…but I could still be nice and say if it’s a great show or not! Heck, Back to the Future is my all time favorite movie!
I’m mostly curious if one time machine is more plausible than the next. The scuttlebutt, as Station would say, is that Primer is very accurate to scientific principles, while Back to the Future (also one of my all-time favorites) is not. If this is true, that would be disappointing because a Deloreon is infinitely cooler than a storage shed. Haha. Actually, I love Primer too. I just wonder if one is closer to the other. Brain, make sure to check out Time Crimes before next time (I’d like to re-watch both the classic and modern version of The Time Machine 1960 – 2002) and even though it is a “wink and a twirl” movie (and I thought Duplass and Plaza were horribly miscast), I think Safety Not Guaranteed deals more deftly with the emotion at the heart of many of these time travel stories than most do. Especially with regard to the Jake Johnson character. I think his storyline (and performance) is incredible.
to be totally honest man Primer only deals with the causality of time travel well. gluing a bunch of washers to a box can’t change the flow of time. they do absolutely zero explaining in that movie to describe how they slow down time, (other than the vague reference to gravity manipulation), they sell that movie by saying that the writer/director/whatever studied a bunch of physics before writing it, but if he did he sure didn’t bother putting any of it in the movie. At least Doc Brown had a flux capacitor.
One thing I would just tack on to the end here though is that no movie has ever tackled the violations to the laws of thermodynamics and conservation that time travel always entails (well, except TMNT 3). i would guess that it’s mostly because the general public at large does not have a deep understanding of them, and would probably be bored by a movie that lectured for two hours on entropy and conservation of energy. I mean, I would stick around for that, but most other people wouldn’t.
What this episode taught me:
-We need at least one more episode focusing on Time Travel in some respect
-Brain should either be an occasional co-host or a very regular guest
-Terminator is a polarizing franchise
-More Spacewolf, always more Spacewolf
It taught me that you guys are funny. There were so many great laugh-out-loud moments.
I am very regular, I eat lots of fiber.
Ladies and gentlemen, I’m afraid to report that Kanye West is, in fact, real. I “met” the guy during the 12/12/12 Concert for Sandy Relief. Naturally, he was wearing a black leather skirt.
#namedropping
OR, did you meet someone that “they” wanted you to believe was Kanye West…? *cue ominous music*
This is the most likely scenario. “They” lie about everything.
A few quick thoughts on the episode:
1. Station! and Mattroid – What season of The Killing are you two on right now?
2. A lot of what the T:GENYSIS writers said they were setting up in the story doesn’t seem to actually be in the movie. Am I right about this, or did I just miss A LOT when I saw the movie?
3. I don’t think your criticism of Emilia Clarke’s Sarah Connor has any real basis. The movie takes place in an alternate timeline where Sarah Connor experienced great loss and was aware of terminators and the impending Skynet future from a very early age. In fact, she was raised most of her life up to this point in the timeline by a terminator. She obviously knows what’s up and is somewhat prepared for the battle. However, she is not the hardened, stewing in a mental institution, 30-something y/o Linda Hamilton in T2. She is still the young woman from THE TERMINATOR at this point in the timeline. So, she’s not Linda Hamilton’s Sarah Connor; it makes sense that she would be some weird, in between mix of Sarah Connor from T1 and T2.
That said – and this is coming from an Emilia Clarke fan – her performance was not very good. I like that this wasn’t Linda Hamilton’s Sarah Connor because it shouldn’t be (we’re in an alternate timeline, duh), but unfortunately Ms. Clarke did not pull it off.
One thing I hated about the film was that nothing I had read from the writers interviews was actually IN the movie! If you’re not going to say that Matt Smith’s character is from another dimension IN THE MOVIE then shut up about it and have it be the big reveal in the next one! amatuers.
Ok, good. I know I turned my brain off after about 20 minutes because I realized that was the only way I would enjoy the movie, but wanted to make sure I didn’t unknowingly doze off at some point.
Clarke is what she is, but she’s no Sarah Connor. Having not seen anything else with Clarke I’m tied to nothing with her, therefore she’s being judged on the version of an iconic character she’s playing; as such, she disappoints. Big time.
As for The Killing, we finished a few days after this episode was recorded. We LOVED almost all of it. The last season, the Netflix season, was tonally and content-wise a shift which I didn’t care for at all.
I felt the same about THE KILLING. I didn’t want to say anything ahead of time because I know (now) how Station hates that. Seasons 1-2… great… season 3 was pretty good… season 4 was meh.
—
“she’s being judged on the version of an iconic character she’s playing”
See, I don’t think that’s a fair criticism to make against Clarke, though. Is it the change in the Sarah Connor character that bothered you so much, or just the performance? It’s the writer(s) and director who mold the version of the character. I like what they intended to do with Sarah Connor – making her aware of the situation and “academically” prepared to handle it, but mentally and emotionally unequipped to actually handle it. It’s taking the hardened Sarah Connor from T2 and making her young and vulnerable; she’s the character from T1 with the knowledge of the character from T2. I think that’s an interesting idea. I just don’t think Emilia Clarke did a good job with it.
I’m with Dino on this one. I don’t think the lovely ms. Clarke is to fully blame for the mess that was this new incarnation of Sarah Connor. She was playing a completely different character, not out of her own free will, but because that’s the way the character was written. She still did a terrible job, but putting all blame on her isn’t fair. I’d say the blame is 35% casting director 35% writer, 15% director, 15% the lovely ms. Clarke.
Or she’s just a crap Sarah Connor. 🙂
Maybe I should write a short essay on why time travel on the macroscopic level has never been accurately dealt with in films…
too late, don’t try to stop me, I’ve already written the introduction…
This is good.
But let’s make it fun. You have to somehow intelligently incorporate the following words into your essay:
Hot Dog
Giraffe
Pimple
Maury Povich
Dumpster
Whirlpool
Ha
Challenge accepted!
BOOM! Challenge complete.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8yrKJYWC0IjYkdiMlNTME9idms/view?usp=sharing
It’s coming….I’ve been submitting abstracts all week, busy work. This Saturday at the latest.
Will be reading this today.
Hey, TSFP has the notify me of replies option now. Sweet.
Since this movie does involve time travel, I want to give a shout out to Station for all of her mentioned of Bill & Ted. I watched EXCELLENT ADVENTURE for the first time and loved it. It’s impossible to not love the bromance between Bill and Ted particularly when Bill went into super serious mode for the only time in the movie when he fears a knight killed Ted when they went back to the medieval times. Bill went from bill this goofball who doesn’t seem like he’s ever taken anything serious for his entire life to wanting to rip someone’s throat out for what they did to his bestie.
The whole about Socrates name never got old. Every time Bill or Ted referred to him as Soul Cray, I would let out an entirely unmanly Ron Swanson-esque giggle.
Looking forward to watching BOGUS JOURNEY soon.
Station! will be extremely excited to read your response, Sal.
And it was a great response, to be fair. B&T is a movie franchise that people sometimes fail to recognize as brilliant. I pity those people
Watching BOGUS JOURNEY and I have to give the creators some serious credit. Rather than just redo EXCELLENT ADVENTURE with some new reason to time travel, they told a completely different story.
The two movies remind me a bit of ALIEN and ALIENS. While ALIEN was a sci-fi/horror, ALIENS was a sci-fi/action movie. For BILL & TED, they keep the comedy in both films, but ADVENTURE is sci-fi while JOURNEY is horror.
After hearing the name Station so much on The Sci-Fi Podcast, I was pretty surprised to see what Station actually was in BOGUS JOURNEY. The character of Station summed up the movie well – it’s goofy, off the wall, and pretty catchy.
Comparing the two movies, I think I dug ADVENTURE a little bit more than JOURNEY. The sequel is still quite fun though and as I said, deserves loads of credit for not falling into the easy habit of retelling the same story over again for a sequel.
Personally, I like BOGUS JOURNEY like a billion times more. But what do I know? I can’t even tell a good Sarah Connor from a bad Sarah Connor :/
True.
But Station! agrees with you 100% on Bogus Journey. I’d already seen Excellent Adventure a dozen times by the time Bogus Journey came out, so I’d established a favorite. I love them both, but I prefer the first one.