io9’s been on a role, so I thought I’d do a quick hit on two posts of theirs from the past couple of days that really struck me:-Charlie Jane Anders asks why English is the language most science-fiction seems to be written in these days is English. Obviously, as she notes, part of it is a desire for a larger audience. But given that in a great deal of science-fiction, there is a universally accessible or spoken language like Basic in Ender’s Game, or common useage of English in Kim Stanley Robinson’s Mars books, I wonder if writing in English might be a way of not simply thinking futuristically, but acting that way, too.-What happens when studios geek out over 3D — and directors don’t? In RoboCop’s case, Darren Aronofsky holds the remake hostage. I do wonder if this will be a problem, studios insisting on 3D, particularly as more theaters can handle the technology and they can make a larger profit margins on individual tickets, even for projects that might not be well-suited to the technology. I’m not sure the grubby realism of District 9 would have been particularly enhanced if it popped off the screen, and it might even have been too uncomfortable for viewers in the film’s more visceral moments. I do wonder if that will close off opportunities for directors who already have visions they’re quite wedded to, if only because it forces one more compromise? Or if we’re at a point where 3D is about to become so standard that everyone will have to work in it.