Gravity: Can Film Ever Get the Science Right? 438
dryriver writes in with a story lamenting the lack of accurate science in movies. "The relationship between science and science fiction has always been tempestuous. Gravity focuses on two astronauts stranded in space after the destruction of their space shuttle. Since Gravity's US release (it comes to the UK in November) many critics have praised the film for its scientific accuracy. But noted astrophysicist Dr Neil deGrasse Tyson, director of the Hayden Planetarium at the American Museum of Natural History in New York, had several issues with the accuracy of Gravity's portrayal of space. Through a series of posts on Twitter, Tyson — who later emphasized that he 'enjoyed the film very much' — highlighted various errors. He noted the Hubble space telescope (orbiting at 350 miles above sea level), the International Space Station (at 250 miles), and a Chinese space station could never be in line of sight of one another. On top of that, most satellites orbit west to east, yet in the film the satellite debris was seen drifting east to west. Tyson also noted how Sandra Bullock's hair did not float freely as it would in zero-gravity. This is arguably not so much an error in physics, but a reflection of the limitations of cinematic technology to accurately portray actors in zero-gravity. That is, of course, without sending them into space for the duration of the film. The Michael Bay film Armageddon is known for its woeful number of inaccuracies, from the space shuttles separating their rocket boosters and fuel tanks in close proximity to each other (risking a collision) and to objects falling on to the asteroid under a gravitational pull seemingly as strong as the Earth's. More than one interested observer tried to work out how big the bomb would have to be to blow up an asteroid in the way demanded in the movie. Answer: Very big indeed. Nasa is reported to have even used Armageddon as part of a test within their training program, asking candidates to identify all the scientific impossibilities within the film."
Moo (Score:5, Funny)
That is, of course, without sending them into space for the duration of the film.
That doesn't seem like such a bad idea.
What a load of bullocks. (Score:2, Funny)
Sandra to be exact.
Moo (Score:4, Funny)
"My pet peeve is inertia," says Trollope. "There are many good reasons for keeping your engines on in space, but 'maintaining speed' is not one of them. If you turn your engines off, you don't stop."
I have *years* of experience watching Star Trek to know that isn't true. Indeed, the only thing inertia can do for space travel is keeping horrid shows about it from being cancelled.
Short answer "NO" (Score:5, Funny)
Long answer: Gravity is about as close as Hollywood's *ever* come to doing it right, and will probably be as close as anyone's ever going to get, until the day you can actually shoot your movie in space itself.
But by then it'll probably be a reality TV show -- "the real housewives of the moon", or something like that....
Re:Moo (Score:5, Funny)
Lets send Congress while we're at it.
The most annoying thing. (Score:5, Funny)
I now understand how my dad (A Boeing inspector for many years) felt when watching movies with airplanes... pointing out that they took off in a 737, but the landing scene shows a 757!
I still recall how annoying it was to have such things pointed out all the time... So I try and keep my mouth shut during shows.
Imagine what it must be like for a real medical doctor to watch 'House', or a real serial killer to watch 'Dexter'.
Unrealistic. (Score:5, Funny)
George Clooney talking for hours with a woman his age?
Pure Fantasy.
Re:Moo (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Moo (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Moo (Score:5, Funny)
I think you missed the point of putting them in space. No one mentioned adequate life support.
Re:Short answer "NO" (Score:4, Funny)
Gravity is about as close as Hollywood's *ever* come to doing it right
Oh, they can do better, but it has to be filmed in England. ;-)
Re:The most annoying thing. (Score:3, Funny)
It must be just like Slashdotters watching IT-Crowd. They would hate it!
Re:Short answer "NO" (Score:2, Funny)
Iron Sky... d'oh, I just did a Godwin!
Re:The most annoying thing. (Score:4, Funny)
"or a real serial killer to watch 'Dexter'."
They usually became serial killers as the result of being a doctor watching House, a lawyer watching Law and Order, or anybody in IT watching any sort of computers.
Re:The most annoying thing. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Moo (Score:5, Funny)
The Battle Droid Syndrome.
The mutated muscular soldiers of Mordor turned out to be hilariously ineffective fighters, a dozen of them held off by a single dying human. Apparently they made the beasts by crossing Orcs, Goblins and the French.
I almost wet myself!
Re:Moo (Score:2, Funny)
like the fact that Julia Roberts isn't really an astronaut and has never been into space.
I can't tell if this is a joke or not, but I laughed. In case it's not a joke, the movie stars Sandra Bullock, who also isn't an astronaut.
Re:Moo (Score:5, Funny)
Let's be a little selective, though.
We wouldn't want to be wiped out by pandemic unsanitary telephone disease.
Re:Moo (Score:5, Funny)
The inverse ninja (Orc) law applies, that's a real thing right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_ninja_law#Inverse_Ninja_Law [wikipedia.org]
Re:Moo (Score:5, Funny)
Exactly - another mistake in the movie. Julia Roberts is actually Sandra Bullock.
Re: Moo (Score:4, Funny)