11-08-2013, 12:54 PM
(11-07-2013, 11:39 PM)Lissa Wrote: Sort of a necro since this has been out for a while. Saw it today,
Considering you saw the movie, and have an informed opinion that's on topic. It's a worthwhile post IMO, necroposting or not.
Quote: it's a good movie, but my background in nuclear engineering caused me to find a number of things with the physics that broke levels of realism (for someone not heavily vested in physics it probably wouldn't be an issue).
Fair enough. Though this is still first and foremost, a hollywood film. In case anyone is under the bizarre and frankly, wrong impression that this is somehow a Nat-Geo doc in space. (Not you, just saying some people might need that reminder.)
As much as I also like to see a good, 'hard sci-fi' movie because there simply isn't a lot of them around. Monies, and return on investment on these things are probably a bigger factor then getting every tech details right. Show-biz is still business.
http://www.cracked.com/funny-4739-scott-pilgrim/
^
|
|
Above link is about the Scott Pilgrim movie, but the observation IMO still holds for something like this as well.
Basically I'm not going to count it as a negative that Cuaron decided to make a good movie that's also a popcorn fare, especially when he never set out to film a 100% realistic space documentary.
Putting monies on a movie that will 100% satisfy a few scientists and actual astronauts, vs satisfying a whole lot more people who aren't but are still paying for tickets? Unless those scientists buy multiple tickets for the entire run, buy multiple DVD copies, gets their families and friends to do the same. You know where I'm going with this right?