a) It's a movie. b) It's a fiction movie. c) It's a science fiction movie. d) It wasn't about space travel, it was a metaphor for the personal growth of Dr. Ryan Stone. e) It was a metaphor for the evolution of humanity. f) Dr. Tyson is a killjoy sometimes.
a) It is a movie. But it's a movie based in reality, not fantasy. Therefore, the script supervisor and writers should have done a better job making sure the details were in line with reality. There are actually people who get paid by the studios to research these things to make sure their facts are correct and consistent. b) It is a fiction, but that doesn't give them an excuse to be lazy with details. c) Science fiction or not, it portrays elements within our realm of reality inaccurately. d) It was about space travel. The metaphor underlies the main theme which is space travel. If you're making a movie set in space, you'd better make sure you get the details correct. e) Solid. f) He may be a killjoy, but someone has to expose the inconsistencies. Millions of people will have gone to see the movie and won't know that what they are watching is all wrong. People base their lives around what they see on tv and in movies. As is now clear, that is going to lead to a bunch of misinformed individuals.
Lol, but that's his job, in a sense. He's an astrophysicist. So when a blockbuster space movie comes out and dominates the box office, and millions of people go to see it, you can't blame him for going and watching it. And then you can't blame him, an astrophysicist, for pointing out the glaring mistakes and inconsistencies. It's like a professional baseball player going to watch a movie about baseball where all the actors played in soccer cleats. I minor detail, but everyone who knows anything about baseball would find that to be a glaring error/oversight and would quickly discredit said movie.
I studied cinema production in college, so when I see a movie, I can't help but notice the flaws. It's more of a curse than anything, really. But what it does is allow me to appreciate the producers and directors of movies that actually do put in the work and effort to get their movies right. Gravity, as it seems to me, is a lazy, star-studded CGI-fest.
Dude, tell me about it. I made the mistake of seeing Top Gun with a bunch of fighter pilots when it first came out. Sheesh.
I'm more into literature (though I am a science nerd too) so I recognized the flaws but I was focusing on the story. The danger and isolation of space where what propelled Ryan forward from an over-eager noob to confident splash down. The punctuation at the end of her journey was her crawling up on to the beach and finally standing erect.
I though the story of her personal growth was so well done that I was willing to suspend disbelief and go on the ride.
Yes, the space shuttle, ISS, and Chinese station are in very different orbits. I got that. Still...
BTW, "star-studded"? Two stars appear on screen and we get the voice of a third. As for the CGI, yep, can't argue. But I can't think of any other way to get the shots they got.
Yes, way too much of him around. and that velour shirt he was wearing during the plug for his channel, ugh! But it was a very limited gimmick used by Cinema Sins so not really much NDT. But Cinema Sins, in general, sometimes makes me laugh the way DamnYouAutocorrect does. That "We interrupt this movie for a scene from Armageddon" line was classic!
WHAT?? Nobody told me this was an actual Cinema Sins production. I'm just now watching it for the first time. I have to say that I, too, wondered about a medical Dr. working on equipment. Right now I'm waiting for the Cinema Sins obligatory "F---ing Sprint!" when comms go down. OK, I'll settle for the HBO-going-down reference.
Pin it! 
13 comments
Login to comment →
ahnyerkeester 9 years, 11 months ago
a) It's a movie.
b) It's a fiction movie.
c) It's a science fiction movie.
d) It wasn't about space travel, it was a metaphor for the personal growth of Dr. Ryan Stone.
e) It was a metaphor for the evolution of humanity.
f) Dr. Tyson is a killjoy sometimes.
Reply
Mattlockhart 9 years, 11 months ago
a) It is a movie. But it's a movie based in reality, not fantasy. Therefore, the script supervisor and writers should have done a better job making sure the details were in line with reality. There are actually people who get paid by the studios to research these things to make sure their facts are correct and consistent.
b) It is a fiction, but that doesn't give them an excuse to be lazy with details.
c) Science fiction or not, it portrays elements within our realm of reality inaccurately.
d) It was about space travel. The metaphor underlies the main theme which is space travel. If you're making a movie set in space, you'd better make sure you get the details correct.
e) Solid.
f) He may be a killjoy, but someone has to expose the inconsistencies. Millions of people will have gone to see the movie and won't know that what they are watching is all wrong. People base their lives around what they see on tv and in movies. As is now clear, that is going to lead to a bunch of misinformed individuals.
That is all.
Reply
ahnyerkeester 9 years, 11 months ago
I respect your opinion, Matt. Well stated. But my reaction to Dr. Tyson is still "Lighten up, Francis." :)
Reply
Mattlockhart 9 years, 11 months ago
Lol, but that's his job, in a sense. He's an astrophysicist. So when a blockbuster space movie comes out and dominates the box office, and millions of people go to see it, you can't blame him for going and watching it. And then you can't blame him, an astrophysicist, for pointing out the glaring mistakes and inconsistencies. It's like a professional baseball player going to watch a movie about baseball where all the actors played in soccer cleats. I minor detail, but everyone who knows anything about baseball would find that to be a glaring error/oversight and would quickly discredit said movie.
I studied cinema production in college, so when I see a movie, I can't help but notice the flaws. It's more of a curse than anything, really. But what it does is allow me to appreciate the producers and directors of movies that actually do put in the work and effort to get their movies right. Gravity, as it seems to me, is a lazy, star-studded CGI-fest.
Reply
ahnyerkeester 9 years, 11 months ago
Dude, tell me about it. I made the mistake of seeing Top Gun with a bunch of fighter pilots when it first came out. Sheesh.
I'm more into literature (though I am a science nerd too) so I recognized the flaws but I was focusing on the story. The danger and isolation of space where what propelled Ryan forward from an over-eager noob to confident splash down. The punctuation at the end of her journey was her crawling up on to the beach and finally standing erect.
I though the story of her personal growth was so well done that I was willing to suspend disbelief and go on the ride.
Yes, the space shuttle, ISS, and Chinese station are in very different orbits. I got that. Still...
BTW, "star-studded"? Two stars appear on screen and we get the voice of a third. As for the CGI, yep, can't argue. But I can't think of any other way to get the shots they got.
Reply
Mattlockhart 9 years, 11 months ago
I bet those two stars cost about $100 million between the two of them.
Reply
ahnyerkeester 9 years, 11 months ago
It didn't come cheap!
Bullock worked really hard since she was in practically every shot.
I think Clooney worked a few days to get his shots done. And for Clooney, that's at LEAST a mill. :)
Reply
Chet_Manly 9 years, 11 months ago
I'm feeling a bit of NDT overexposure setting in... maybe it's just me.
Reply
ahnyerkeester 9 years, 11 months ago
Could be! Could be.
Reply
JakeLonergan 9 years, 11 months ago
Yes, way too much of him around. and that velour shirt he was wearing during the plug for his channel, ugh! But it was a very limited gimmick used by Cinema Sins so not really much NDT. But Cinema Sins, in general, sometimes makes me laugh the way DamnYouAutocorrect does. That "We interrupt this movie for a scene from Armageddon" line was classic!
Reply
Chet_Manly 9 years, 11 months ago
This is all well and good, but he better not come out and tell me Star Wars wasn't scientifically accurate.
***head exploding***
Reply
JakeLonergan 9 years, 11 months ago
He would, too. Dude is a total buzzkill.
Reply
JakeLonergan 9 years, 11 months ago
WHAT?? Nobody told me this was an actual Cinema Sins production. I'm just now watching it for the first time. I have to say that I, too, wondered about a medical Dr. working on equipment. Right now I'm waiting for the Cinema Sins obligatory "F---ing Sprint!" when comms go down. OK, I'll settle for the HBO-going-down reference.
Reply