What is Digg?Sponsored by Amazon.com
Kindle(TM) - Amazon's #1 most gifted product view!
amazon.com - Order Kindle now and receive it in time for Christmas. Free Expedited shipping. Click to learn more.
241 Comments
- XHashmeerX, on 10/10/2007, -6/+96Buried as lame. If you're going to pick movies with scientific fault, pick ones that try to pass themselves as scientific. Don't pick 3 super-hero movies for chrissakes.
Which btw, i'd love to know how the hell anyone could calculate the caloric intake needed by Magneto to move a bridge. Can't pass your article as scientific when you try to pull numbers like this. - maklershed, on 10/10/2007, -1/+57I'm more of a fan of when movies dumb down hacking. It's generally some "extreme" dude who just got done eating cheetos and washing it down with mt. dew that goes to a keyboard (in front of at least a 3 monitor display) and types away furiously, the pc beeps, and wallah .. hacking has occured.
- Sirocco, on 10/10/2007, -15/+46An Inconvenient Truth didn't make the list?
*ducks* - nshah, on 10/10/2007, -0/+30Movies that are based off premises such as radioactive spider bites causing superhuman powers or that Keanu Reeve's having acting ability are NOT scientific or logical?
Shocking! - Error601, on 10/10/2007, -1/+30That's because the real thing is too incredibly boring to use in a movie.
- huskerdude, on 10/10/2007, -1/+21Whining about the "scientific inaccuracies" in superhero movies is about as useful as complaining about the acting in a documentary. Buried as lame.
- Error601, on 10/10/2007, -3/+20Superman flying around the planet to reverse time is a problem...but a bullet proof flying guy isn't mentioned?
- omegadirective, on 10/10/2007, -0/+17If you want physics accuracy, try the new Battlestar Galactica. Spaceships (particular the Viper fighters) obey the laws of physics when using their thrusters and firing high-speed bullets and missiles, and generally the whole show obeys the "sound in space" thing pretty well.
- Loonacy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+17The viola is a musical instrument.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viola
I think you mean "voilà." - DrvThruPnk, on 10/10/2007, -2/+17see Firefly and Serenity
- yargthepirate, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16Just for you, my personal favorite which I'm amazed wasn't on the list:
Batman Begins. OMFG, our gun evaporates water! It's a damn shame that HUMANS are mostly water, you idiots, if it's got enough power to evaporate a city's water supply it's damn sure going to evaporate your face. - Akaji, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15The number of calories burned in moving an object weighing X lbs over a distance of Y feet. It can be measured.
- Akaji, on 10/10/2007, -3/+16Light is only visible when it reflects off of an object - for example, dust and other particles in the air. Most 'spy movies' will have blatantly visible laser beams (think Mission Impossible 1, when not-yet-insane Cruise is being lowered into the secure room) without giving any logical explanation.
This is best seen when playing laser tag; most places that I've been to will have fog generators set up so that people can actually see the lasers (and to obscure visibility, probably). - Nooze2k, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11I think the only way to logically justify Superman reversing time (and I use that loosely) is to think of it as this:
He's fly faster than the speed of light, therefore theoretically traveling backwards in time. Therefore, the Earth itself doesn't begin to spin backwards, but the perception of time reverses and therefore the Earth appears to rotate in reverse.
... then again, I thought that part of the movie was a little over the top anyways. - miriclaire, on 10/10/2007, -2/+13Battlestar Galactica is an exception, my friend. One of the best shows on TV.
- boomqweeshaa, on 10/10/2007, -3/+13The movie Proof? Two math mathematicians as attractive as Gwyneth Paltrow and Jake Gyllenhaal working in the same school, I don't think so.
- SpectralSounds, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9My favorite recently was in Superman Returns. Where Superman saves the Jetliner from crashing. I didnt know that the nose of a jet was so reinforced, that all of its weight could be suspended by two hands on the nosecone.
Obviously, that was only one of the hundreds of examples of that movie I could have used. The primary one being Superman himself of course. - gungaroo22, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9He isn't physically moving it with his body though. This assumes his powers utilize his body's energy.
- Gorrondonuts, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9Obviously you never watched firefly or serenity. All the space scenes are completely devoid of sound effects. In fact thats probably why the final space battle takes place just inside the atmosphere of a planet, so you can hear all the stuff goin on.
- Error601, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Babylon 5 beat them to that. They even said it was cheaper and easier that way with CGI because the physics models are readily available.
- Homunculiheaded, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Come on 'laser' is just a movie colloquialism for 'direct plasma weapon' which in theory would give off visible light.
- fantasticFlan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7It's basically magic pixie dust.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7I'm surprised they didn't mention the giant imperial start destoyers "falling" after they blow up in Star Wars, aside from the whole "sound in space" thing (which I can understand, a silent battle is a tad boring...) that has always REALLY bugged me.
Also, it seems like spaceships *always* have "gravity generators" or something, probably so they don't have to pay oodles for 0G special effects (which always look corny anyhow). While I'm fine with them not trying to attempt 0G realistically and having "artificial gravity" without spinning things and whatnot, they should at least tie it in logically to the propulsion systems. Why would you have the gravity vector pointing at a right angle to the thrust vector, aside from just a throwback to earth-based vehicles? seems like if there were some "logical" way to do it, the two would be tied together in some sort of advanced inertia manipulating propulsion system. If you can pull *people* around with your gravity generators, then why not pull the whole damn *ship* around with them? - NeoCortex, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7I guess that would have been too convenient?
- sholt, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6real hackers don't need GUI input.
- Desolite, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6what about the scene in swordfish when he's hacking while getting a bj? the best part is when they ask them how they did it. its invariably involving a "back door" of some kind.
- swordedge, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8As for your visible laser security systems. Mythbusters destroyed that one. They use Infrared, not red. Even with night vision goggles and powder to float in the air, you CAN'T get past them before it goes off. A properly setup laser security system is not bypassable.
- themouth, on 10/10/2007, -6/+11According to my roommate I 'ruined' transformers by smacking my head so often whenever they dealt with computers. As a software developer and security enthusiast, I can accept that there might be magic transforming robots from a different world, but 'hacking', leaping over routers and firewalls by using SOUND (and no we're not talking about modem tones) ? Not to mention the ***** "Hey we need this 1970's era computer technology to generate morse code over a telegraph" "OK I'll need a screwdriver" A SCREWDRIVER? ***** YOU!
- Kingmichael, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7"Anything that makes a noise in a vacuum. Which covers just about every movie set in space aside from 2001."
...and Serenity. - Crispin, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6The sad thing is that you're both right. And that is why you'll never see realistic hacking in a scene lasting longer than 2 seconds.
- TrevorBelmont, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6I tip my hat to Akira for the silent space scene. It doesn't bother me in the slightest when movie ignore that rule, but it was refreshing when Akira got it right.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -6/+10wallah -> viola
it's french... - Otto, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Green lasers can, in fact, be seen without any particles in the air at all, if it's strong enough. If the wavelength is correct, it can reflect off the air itself. Google for Rayleigh Scattering.
- nezza, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6I think it was called 'the bus that couldn't slow down'.
- arbulus, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5*hereby
- TrevorBelmont, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Buried for being a total ass about it.
- carbonetc, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5That's what always bothered me most about strong characters in comic books. I'm hoping to come upon a scene one day where a character tries to pick up a car and just ends up with a hunk of torn metal or a bumper.
- N10E, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5You mean the scene where he is rotating geometric shapes and passes it off as hacking?
- drakenlot, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Dugg for calling Jake a girl.
If it was unintentional, good job anyways. - SOS84, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I am a geographer (carbon cycle science) by training. I have taught introductory physical geography, introductory climatology and introductory Earth Science over the last two years. On occasion when we are ahead in lecture I do a narrated version of "The Day After Tomorrow." From what I have heard from my students, it is quite entertaining and pretty funny. Now if you want to criticize science in movies, there you go.
- fant0m, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6There is a reason why these movies are for "entertainment" - no one would watch Star Wars if it followed the law that sound cannot be heard in space... No one would pay money over the course of 30+ years to see a bunch of ships flying around the galactic universe fighting a war which they can't hear.
- swordedge, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Maybe. Done right, you get new challenges. Heck, I'd like to see non instantaneous communications. 3 seconds turnaround for the moon, Ten to Twenty MINUTES for Mars, hours for anything else.
Or a space battle where the distances are millions of Klicks, not 50 meters. If a ship is 10 million Kilometers out, light would take 33 Seconds to get there. A missile at 500G's acceleration would take many minutes. Filming a battle like that would be a challenge but there is bound to be somebody in Hollywood up to it. - Jeffmr1, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Iria: Zeiram the Animation
Thats the anime youre thinking about. - Blarble, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4The issue isn't with the fact that Superman can fly (in the original comic he couldn't, he was just really strong), we all accept that he can fly and that is a necessary plot point. However, we don't all accept that you can balance a commercial airliner on it's nose (I wonder what the PSI is for that?), the movie isn't called "Superplane".
- UlicBelouve, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4or hitting the spacebar. Seriously, try listening for the spacebar click, it doesn't happen.
- khorbin, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I think anyone who knows a lot about anything is bound to be disappointed by the portrayal of their subject of expertise in movies. Doctors tend to hate doctor shows, computer people laugh at the portrayal of hacking into a system by putting colored blocks together on a GUI screen (i.e. Jurassic Park "This is UNIX. I know this!"). I'm sure most people who work for the CIA hate spy movies, etc.
But is this really a problem? If a director makes me believe that a car blows up every time it gets turned upside-down, then I think that's a good thing. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4The article got it wrong - he didn't cause the earth to rotate backwards. It rotated backwards to show that he was going backwards in time.
- wingo123, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Dude... I went to school with Danika at UCLA and worked with her on an indie film. I hate to ruin your nerdy beat-off fantasy, but she really is NOT that attractive in person, and a complete bitch. Prima donna to the utmost extent. Annoying, boring, and full of herself. Couldn't even stay in a room with her for five minutes. She's all yours, buddy.
- givinupthefight, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4"The earth's magnetic field?" Umm...yeah, actually. He doesn't create any magnetic fields, only alters existing ones. That includes the Earth's magnetic field. Wiki it.
- Professr, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Superman didn't make the earth turn backwards. He flew so fast in circles around it, that he passed the speed of light and caused time, from his perspective, to go backwards. I'm not saying that this explanation is any better scientifically, but the earth turning backwards was only a visual from Superman's perspective.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 241 discussions
