Visual concept or technical credibility? You decide.

I think it has evolved in us becausewe love it so much. We still enjoy the visuals and what else we see, but our interest is captured, almost too well, so we crave more and more and it leads us to enjoy this techno babble. At times i suppose it can get in the way, but only so I can understand it more. Which in turn allows me too enjoy it more

I like techno babble, because I'm interested in technology. And I enjoy listening out for bloopers like Han Solo's daft comment about the Millennium Falcon making the Kessel Run in less than twelve parsecs. Ridley Scott likes to throw it in occasionally, with references to things like ion propulsion, inertial dampeners etc. It adds to the atmosphere, so... bring it on!

Right zz, agreed. The influx of real or imagined technologies acts as a literary device greatly enhancing the believability of the story. Sc Fi is based upon science fact. HG Wells wrote a short essay describing the ingredients that go into any sci fi story and one of the central ones was a new technology or science, which the writer then projects human beings into with their very human concerns and the result is science fiction. I always found his little formula incredibly accurate and had to admire his keen insight into his craft. Techno babble , as you are calling it, is nothing more than the expression of technologically related statements used to butress the illusion of reality in science fiction, just as Hermine Melvile used all the details of the whaling industry to enhance the reality of Moby Dick. Read this novel and you will need all of your patience to wade through the 3/4 ths of the book devoted to the ins and outs of specific harpoon types and rope knots and all things nautical in order to get to the white whale but when he does finely return from his large detour you really understand the context of the story far better and you totally believe it. It really works and is known as a literary device. Bram Stoker used real contemporary European train tables when writing about Johnathan Harker's journy to Castle Dracula. Techno babble is just an updated form of the same thing working to enhance believability in a fictional story.

To be a director who does not like science fiction, one can appreciate the artistry of this man in each one, including Prometheus, the art remains high standard. I let here this interesting quote from the biographical book by William Parrill. [i]"Scott has said that he had not previously been interested in science fiction and that the only two sci-fi films that had made any impression on him were Star Wars and The Day the Earth Stood Still. He does not mention the real competition: Metropolis, Forbidden Planet and 2001: A Space Odyssey."[/i] (Ridley Scott, A Critical Filmography, William B. Parrill. p. 46)

I will say another thing about technobabble. A prime example of this was when Ridley Scott used it during the conversation between Eldon Tyrell and Roy Batty regarding represor proteins and EMS recombination. I was actually learning about these processes in the real world in a Biochemistry class at UOP at the time. Needless to say my eyes bugged out of my sockets when the vary language that I was learning in class turned up on the big screen in Blade Runner! It added a very strong element of reality to the movie because of the argument I presented above involving literary devices. So technobabble not only did not interfere with my enjoyment of the visual aesthetic of Blade Runner, it made it for me.

I say babble away when you are lacking in visual aesthetics, but visual aesthetics with no babble to back it up is just fluff. The truly great ones have both. That is why I place Alien & Prometheus on top, they have both & really deliver!

I like it in any form, visual or written, but I don't require it. The demand for accuracy is understandable but only up to a point, unless the story is centered on extant technologies. And it can definitely go too far, limiting the comprehension of all but those with doctorates! What I like is information woven into the narrative that will yield further enjoyment and understanding with casual research. But it is, in the end, science fiction, emphasis on the fiction. It's as much, if not more, about the imagination.

You don't need a doctorate but you do need to be a geek to really enjoy science fiction loaded with technical jargon and concepts.

I should have been clearer with my previous comment, as that complaint is limited to literature only, and then only a small segment of it. Further, it wouldn't be science fiction without science, but sometimes the entertainment is lost in a cloud of the authors intellect. Neal Stephenson comes to mind, a highly entertaining author whose stories hit these academic speed bumps, just a little beyond the average ( me) readers investment in research. Wil Mcarthy is another good example, a great author who lacks somewhat the ability of say Arthur C Clarke to make it all approachable. Techno babble does sound a bit derisive but from an aesthetic point of view it's accurate, if referring to cool sounding dialog that enhances the fun. If that dialog contains real information, so much the better. Just don't overdo it!

I think used in the right manner, technical jargon does enhance things. I don’t know if anyone is familiar with Professor Stanley Unwin, but he was able to play on people’s interpretation of incomprehensible sounding words to great effect. [url=http://youtu.be/ol6iCCgEPQA]Professor Stanley Unwin[/url] Somehow, I'm kinda pleased that this type of jargon does not really appear much in Sci-fi movies, then again I bet there are those who will disagree. Enjoy.