ALL SCI-FI

[Bud Brewster]

This remarkable movie is true science fiction on a very high level, with a complex story that I still haven't completely figured out. (I guess I need to watch it again.)

I'm actually surprised the movie was so successful, because audiences today lean toward fast-paced action films, rather than stories with complex concepts which require a healthy appreciation for (and an understanding of) some very high-level science!

And yet with a budget of $165 million, director Christopher Nolan produced a film that made $675 million at the box office.

Way to go, Chris!

One admirable thing he did was to enlist the help of scientific advisors. (Gee, why didn't we think of that? ) Wikipedia says this.

Theoretical physicist Kip Thorne was a scientific consultant for the film to ensure the depictions of wormholes and relativity were as accurate as possible.

So, the secret to making a science fiction movie that makes a butt-load of money is for the producers to be smart enough to get the help of somebody even smarter! (Ah-ha! So THAT'S what the cheapskate filmmakers have been doing wrong all these years.)

Wikipedia summed up the responses from the critics this way.

"Interstellar represents more of the thrilling, thought-provoking, and visually resplendent film-making moviegoers have come to expect from writer-director Christopher Nolan, even if its intellectual reach somewhat exceeds its grasp."

Wait a minute . . . does that mean I'm a dim-wit for being a confused by certain elements of the story? (I definitely need to watch this movie again.)

But when I recently read the fine summary of the plot on Wikipedia to see if I could untangle the film's knotted-up story, it reminded me that the narrative plays hell with the normal passage of time (a very confusing thing, to say the least), and also that the characters do some might strange things — like the way the future society thinks all the Apollo missions were hoaxes, and the way a stranded astronaut who was sent to investigate an alien planet went bonkers and tried to kill his colleagues when they showed up!

I guess what I'm saying is that I wish the movie had stuck to just throwing mind-boggling plot elements at me, and not included mixed-up characters who did really dumb things.

Yes, I know: in reality there are plenty of stupid people. I just prefer movies where there are a lower percentage people like that than in the real world.

I was, however, impressed by the FX and the production designs. The spacesuits were very appealing, for example.





But of course, Ann Hathaway looks good in damn near anything.

One part of the story that seemed to contain a science error concerned the planet with the knee-deep global ocean which had periodic tidal waves.





Two things bugged me about that.

First of all, how could such towering waves crest the way we see in the movie without the typical change in depth (from deep to shallow) that causes waves on Earth to crest?





Second, why didn't the water around the astronauts rush towards the wave, causing it to rise (again, like the way tidal waves do on Earth).

And finally, tidal waves are typically caused by undersea earthquakes that drop the ocean floor downward or push it upward suddenly, imparting kinetic energy to the deep water above it. So, how could a violent displacement of the ocean floor cause such large waves . . . with only a few feet of water above it?

If the waves were actually caused by gravity (the way the Moon creates tides on Earth), would they really happen so quickly and rise up so high?

What do you guys think?
________________________________


_____________________ Interstellar - trailer


__________
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)

[mach7]

I'll start by saying I was very disappointed with this film.

I wanted to like it, but I just could not.

Science was the reason.

1st was Millers planet. If the planet was that deep in the gravity well for time dilation to be so great the tidal forces would rip the atmosphere away, and probably the water also. It would make the planet uninhabitable.

2nd is the Ranger. Where is it's fuel for it to operate in orbit, let alone in a planetary mission? There is NO way it can have enough fuel to get down to Millers planet and then back out.

Also the design of the ranger. The side "wings" would produce massive amounts of turbulent plasma during re entry causing much thermal issues.

There is no room for the motors, basic life support, or consumables.

3rd. the black hole. I'm not a physicist, but I believe if you pass the event horizon, that's it. Game over.

But as an object approaches the EH the radiation and tidal forces would be lethal.

Also, I found the story uninspiring and borderline insipid.

I thought Coop was 2 dimensional.

Dr. Mann's actions are unexplainable.

And lastly, for now, there is a Saturn V available?

Visually it was interesting, but that was not enough for me.

Just my thoughts.

[Bud Brewster]

________________________________

Wow, you certainly spotted more reasons than I did for thinking this movie had flaws in it's science.

I assume you were bothered by the tidal wave, too.
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)

[mach7]

The tidal wave bothered me, but much less than the fact that the planet should not even have water!

The thing that really got me were the Rangers.

They looked cool, but that's where the appeal ended.

They obviously use chemical rockets. No mention of Fusion rockets, so they HAVE to have the limitations of chemical rockets. Look at the amount of fuel it takes to get a space shuttle to orbit from Earth, a 1 G gravity well. Where is that fuel stored? Unless the Ranger has a TARDIS like interior there is simply not enough space for even a basic orbital mission! And I'm not even starting on the mass issues.

This movie was like Gravity to me. It looked really cool, but the science keeps getting in the way.

[orzel-w]

(Inspired by a sporty Camaro with racing stripes I spotted at Starbux.)

----------

[orzel-w]

[ralfy]

I saw this again and noted that the first signals were received around 48 years before 2067, which is the initial setting of the film, or in 2019.