NASA Used Armageddon Film As "Test"

11 years ago

Originally Posted by Horny Devil

Does it impact on your enjoyment of a science fiction film if it's riddled with scientific implausibilities? Should film-makers adhere to basic scientific principles, or should audiences just feel the magic instead? What do you think?

Can science fiction ever get the science right?

Well, the "fiction" part of science fiction tells me not to expect accuracy so no - it does not impact my enjoyment. They're meant to be entertainment - not documentaries. For me a good science fiction film is about the magic.

In fact, I get annoyed at people who pick apart why such things in the film are not possible - I stop watching movies with them

[ 7 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8605986].message }}

Jonathan 2.0

Banned 11 years ago

Originally Posted by MikeAmbrosio

In fact, I get annoyed at people who pick apart why such things in the film are not possible - I stop watching movies with them.

Agreed.

That annoys me too. Just enjoy the movie for what it is.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"Each problem has hidden in it an opportunity so powerful that it literally dwarfs the problem. The greatest success stories were created by people who recognized a problem and turned it into an opportunity."―Joseph Sugarman

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8606020].message }}

Claude Whitacre

11 years ago

I saw Gravity this last weekend. WOW!

And it was the most accurate, for space movies, I've ever seen. But there were still a couple places where the laws of physics were ignored.

It was an amazing experience. I very much recommend you guys see it.

By the way, most movies that include science are not serious movies. Was there any part of Armageddon that made complete sense? It's not a science movie.

I'm happy if they just keep talking ducks out of the movie.

NASA people hate the movie Gravity, because there are several gaping flaws. But the vast majority of the audience would never catch them.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8606057].message }}

Steven Wagenheim 11 years ago

Mike said it best. I expect my sci fi to be as far removed from reality as possible.

That's what makes it sci fi.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

My Soundcloud Music Channel
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8606086].message }}

tagiscom

11 years ago

Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre

I saw Gravity this last weekend. WOW!

And it was the most accurate, for space movies, I've ever seen. But there were still a couple places where the laws of physics were ignored.

It was an amazing experience. I very much recommend you guys see it.

By the way, most movies that include science are not serious movies. Was there any part of Armageddon that made complete sense? It's not a science movie.

I'm happy if they just keep talking ducks out of the movie.

NASA people hate the movie Gravity, because there are several gaping flaws. But the vast majority of the audience would never catch them.

Darnit, l was going to say that! :rolleyes:

But, yeah, great film, interesting storyline. The scenes with the biggest structure they interacted with, were pretty cool, enough said. Some of the best computer animation l have seen, when the action started.

Although the Earth scenes were jaw dropping!

Most of the inconsistencies were ok, but there was one, that annoyed me, especially when it resulted in you know who having to unhook him or herself with no logical reason.

Don't want to give away to much.

But overall great movie, may have to get that one on DVD one day!

But it was refreshing to get realistic sounds in a space movie!

Shane

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Archimedes Forum, Sign up l won't bite

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8606114].message }}

Claude Whitacre

11 years ago

Originally Posted by tagiscom

Most of the inconsistencies were ok, but there was one, that annoyed me, especially when it resulted in you know who having to unhook him or herself with no logical reason.

Shane; I think you are talking about the same scene as I am. Yeah, it stuck out like a sore thumb.

But that wasn't what got the NASA guys in a twitter. It involved the distances between orbiting space stations, etc.

Thanks

Signature

One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8606358].message }}

socialentry

11 years ago

Suspension of disbelief is fairly scarce currency. The director should be wary if he relies on it.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8606001].message }}

Kay King 11 years ago

When I see "fiction" I don't expect fact.

If I watch a "science film" I expect it to be scientifically accurate.

If I watch "science fiction" I expect to be entertained with the improbable.
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
Dear April: I don't want any trouble from you.
January was long, February was iffy, March was a freaking dumpster fire.
So sit down, be quiet, and don't touch anything.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8606019].message }}

HeySal

11 years ago

There are fictional stories that get things so blatantly wrong that it spoils the movie. Most are accurate enough to be able to just forget your physics for awhile. It's probably tougher for someone highly educated in physics, space sciences, technology, etc to enjoy many of the movies us average joes enjoy because there will be more points that are just stick out too blatantly to be able to ignore. Guess that's where "ignorance is bliss" comes from.

For your viewing pleasure - always see sci fi with a person who is NOT an expert in the area of the movie's theme. If "they" are creating monsters - don't see the movie with a microbiologist. If it's space - leave the astro-physicist at home. Only makes sense.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8607050].message }}

Horny Devil

Banned 11 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

For your viewing pleasure - always see sci fi with a person who is NOT an expert in the area of the movie's theme. If "they" are creating monsters - don't see the movie with a microbiologist. If it's space - leave the astro-physicist at home. Only makes sense.

Looks like no more cinema for Claude then.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8607154].message }}

Claude Whitacre

11 years ago

Originally Posted by Horny Devil

Looks like no more cinema for Claude then.

HA! For some reason, Space operas don't bother me. The Star Wars series was riddled with blatant mistakes in physics. But it was fun. It was like going on a ride.

But Gravity was so...cutting edge. Sooo well done... Sooo real looking... That any slip stuck out like a sore thumb. It's really a tribute to how near perfect the film was. You believe that they are in space.

But it would be like hearing a nearby space craft humming in space. In Star Wars? Who cares, it's fantasy anyway. But Gravity was ...well...you'll have to see it. I saw it twice, and it was more amazing the second time.

The one that was unwatchable for me was 2012. Amazing...dazzling...interesting....but every second of the movie, the family was less than one second from dying. Every second. It was painful.

Sure, a lion can be at your heels, less than an inch away...but not for a continuous two hours.

My poor wife, she puts up with my 'Did you see that!?" complaining. At least, now I wait until after the movie is over.

Claude "Geeky, Geek, Geek" Whitacre

Added later; Monsters? Globs from outer space? Zombies? Not a peep from me. Just physics, I'm a "Physics nerd"

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8607431].message }}

MissTerraK 11 years ago

When I see a sci fi flick, I expect to be wowed by the special effects and nothing more.

But if a moving relationship is thrown in...all the better!

Terra
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8607559].message }}

Horny Devil

Banned 11 years ago

Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre

HA! For some reason, Space operas don't bother me. The Star Wars series was riddled with blatant mistakes in physics. But it was fun. It was like going on a ride.

But Gravity was so...cutting edge. Sooo well done... Sooo real looking... That any slip stuck out like a sore thumb. It's really a tribute to how near perfect the film was. You believe that they are in space.

But it would be like hearing a nearby space craft humming in space. In Star Wars? Who cares, it's fantasy anyway. But Gravity was ...well...you'll have to see it. I saw it twice, and it was more amazing the second time.

The one that was unwatchable for me was 2012. Amazing...dazzling...interesting....but every second of the movie, the family was less than one second from dying. Every second. It was painful.

Sure, a lion can be at your heels, less than an inch away...but not for a continuous two hours.

My poor wife, she puts up with my 'Did you see that!?" complaining. At least, now I wait until after the movie is over.

Claude "Geeky, Geek, Geek" Whitacre

Added later; Monsters? Globs from outer space? Zombies? Not a peep from me. Just physics, I'm a "Physics nerd"

Claude, kindly stop rabbiting on about "Gravity". It's not showing in the UK for several weeks yet, and you're doing my head in.

Can't wait.

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8607593].message }}

MikeAmbrosio

11 years ago

Thank goodness I flunked physics

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8607621].message }}

tagiscom

11 years ago

Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre

Shane; I think you are talking about the same scene as I am. Yeah, it stuck out like a sore thumb.

But that wasn't what got the NASA guys in a twitter. It involved the distances between orbiting space stations, etc.

Yeah, rubber bands and if it was a ship, l could believe it, comes to mind. :rolleyes:

But the second goal after the space Shuttle, etc, etc, etc, could be at that distance, (although probably further) but the next one, considering that they were 600 k,s up, was another biggie.

Pity they did such a great job and dropped the ball a few times.

2001 and 2010 were probably the only movies ever done in space that were 100% realistic.

Making allowances for background opera music, he, he!

Saw it twice, hmmm, might see it again if it was on at IMAX, but l will wait for the DVD.

Probably been pulled at AU cinemas by now, for some reason Aussies don't like these sorts of movies. Or maybe women???

Although with George Clooney and Sandra Bullock in it, it has something for everyone, he, he!

Shane

Thanks

Signature

Archimedes Forum, Sign up l won't bite

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8607661].message }}

HeySal

11 years ago

Inception had some outrageous errors in it, too - but you have to be made of stone not to have been mesmerized by that one. The advancement in visual effects might help us to forget that the situation is stupidly unreal sometimes.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8608619].message }}

tagiscom

11 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Inception had some outrageous errors in it, too - but you have to be made of stone not to have been mesmerized by that one. The advancement in visual effects might help us to forget that the situation is stupidly unreal sometimes.

True visually impressive, and it gave me a headache keeping up with the storyline.

Haven't had a headache like that since Back to the future two! :rolleyes:

Goes back in time and has to make sure he doesn't run into his past self, which might cause a paradox! Groan!