Bad Movie Science

[Bando]

In the interest of continuing science discussion here on the ol' Blue & Gray board without being so contentious about it, I bring you a meme based on this article listing egregious science errors in movies. I'm not talking about the normal suspension of disbelief stuff (e.g. Superman flying), but really stupid errors that were unnecessary and ruined the story for you.

I'll start. Starfighters do not move like fighter planes. You cannot bank in space. This happens in almost every sci-fi space story except the new Battlestar Galactica.

[TBird41]

bando said:

In the interest of continuing science discussion here on the ol' Blue & Gray board without being so contentious about it, I bring you a meme based on this article listing egregious science errors in movies. I'm not talking about the normal suspension of disbelief stuff (e.g. Superman flying), but really stupid errors that were unnecessary and ruined the story for you.

I'll start. Starfighters do not move like fighter planes. You cannot bank in space. This happens in almost every sci-fi space story except the new Battlestar Galactica.

So....what do they do instead?

[Bando]

There's no air in space, so you can't bank. And you need more than rear thrusters, as you can't slow down without some force acting on you in the opposite direction.

This also leads to the next major complaint: why can I hear the Star Destroyer's engines burning, George Lucas?

[theexorcist]

During interviews for the IRC, one of the questions asked was "Name one mistake in the movie 'Independence Day'".

[kchoya]

theexorcist said:

During interviews for the IRC, one of the questions asked was "Name one mistake in the movie 'Independence Day'".

Thinking people would believe that Randy Quaid would ever know how to fly a plane.

[kchoya]

bando said:

There's no air in space, so you can't bank. And you need more than rear thrusters, as you can't slow down without some force acting on you in the opposite direction.

This also leads to the next major complaint: why can I hear the Star Destroyer's engines burning, George Lucas?

If you want to go there, shouldn't every scene in space be absolutely silent? No explosions, no sounds from the laser cannons, and no sounds from an b-wing fighter streaking by?

After all, in space, no one can hear you scream.

[Bando]

kchoya said:

bando said:

There's no air in space, so you can't bank. And you need more than rear thrusters, as you can't slow down without some force acting on you in the opposite direction.

This also leads to the next major complaint: why can I hear the Star Destroyer's engines burning, George Lucas?

If you want to go there, shouldn't every scene in space be absolutely silent? No explosions, no sounds from the laser cannons, and no sounds from an b-wing fighter streaking by?

After all, in space, no one can hear you scream.

Exactly. 2001 and Firefly/Serenity did this right, and they made up for the sounds by using the score.

[Boz]

Someone invite Gregg Easterbrook to the board. He talks about this nearly every week in TMQ.

I think it was last year he decried the "science" in The Day After Tomorrow as absolutely laughable.

I think "The Core" is rated by physicists as the worst science movie ever.

Interestingly, I read an explanation from Star Wars fanatics that the sounds in space (engines, explosions) in those movies are not really occurring, they are just audible translations from ships' computers about what is happening out in space. Ridiculous, but you got to give 'em credit for creativity.

Just another reason that Battlestar Galactica rules. (Two reasons it doesn't rule? 18 months between seasons and incredibly stupid humans...)

[Bando]

boz1 said:

Someone invite Gregg Easterbrook to the board. He talks about this nearly every week in TMQ.

I think it was last year he decried the "science" in The Day After Tomorrow as absolutely laughable.

I think "The Core" is rated by physicists as the worst science movie ever.

Interestingly, I read an explanation from Star Wars fanatics that the sounds in space (engines, explosions) in those movies are not really occurring, they are just audible translations from ships' computers about what is happening out in space. Ridiculous, but you got to give 'em credit for creativity.

Just another reason that Battlestar Galactica rules. (Two reasons it doesn't rule? 18 months between seasons and incredibly stupid humans...)

Hell, I accept the consensus on global warming and still thought that movie was ridiculous. Of course, Dennis Quaid, global warming is a one-off event that happens in 12 minutes. Right.

While "The Core" is pretty bad, I nominate almost any made for TV movie on the SciFi channel.

[Boz]

This is one of the places I saw the "sound in space" explanation for Star Wars.

Note: if you have any suspension of disbelief or enjoyment of the original three movies remaining, you probably should not be reading this. Virtually no aspect of the three movies goes uncriticized:

www.apeculture.com/movies/swscience.htm

[theexorcist]

A wizard did it.

[hoyatables]

theexorcist said:

During interviews for the IRC, one of the questions asked was "Name one mistake in the movie 'Independence Day'".

Assuming that a Mac can interface with an alien spaceship when it can't even interface with an IBM.

(This was a lot funnier when the movie came out and Macs, in fact, were notorious for being completely incompatible with anything except other Macs. )

[DrumsGoBang]

I like how sound in space is the big problem in Star Wars, and not some strange magical force that can move things around if you think too hard.

[Bando]

drumsgobang said:

I like how sound in space is the big problem in Star Wars, and not some strange magical force that can move things around if you think too hard.

Yeah, but that's crucial to the plot and is what the whole movie is based on. You suspend your disbelief for that. I'm talking about the stuff that doesn't change the plot in any way and was still done wrongly.

[DrumsGoBang]

artifical gravity

[Bando]

Hmm. I never know how I feel about that. The only movie I've ever seen that has a good explanation for it's gravity is 2001 (the module was spinning). Is that something we just have to give screenwriters? Do you really want to see everyone on the Enterprise floating all the time?

[theexorcist]

If you've ever seen "Thank You For Smoking", they address this. In discussing a movie set in space with cigarettes, the following lines of dialogue occur:

"Nick Naylor: But wouldn't they blow up in an all oxygen environment?
Jeff Megall: Probably. But it's an easy fix. One line of dialogue. 'Thank God we invented the... you know, whatever device.' "

Science is cool that way.

[DrumsGoBang]

hence you can also say they invented something to make fighters move around in space like they do in the air. Also they could also make the computers simulate noises in the cockpit of engine sounds

[DrumsGoBang]

Yah!! I killed this threat! Take that bando and your science.......

Science, It doesn't work.....

[bubbrubbhoya]

Bando, some of your assertions are ludicrous. Have you ever seen a real starfighter in space? If the answer is no, then how the hell do you know that they can't bank? Maybe starfighters have some sort of space-banking technology about which even science know-it-alls like you don't know. And how do you know that sounds can't be heard in an atmosphere of "dark matter?"
space.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn10903&feedId=space_rss20

Finally, KC, how do you presume to know that laser cannons can't be heard in a void? Have you ever seen a laser cannon? How do you know that laser cannons don't defy the laws of physics as we know them? The answer is, you don't know.

Maybe you guys should do a little better research before you go opening your big mouths next time.

(Edit: Stupid drums...beat me to it by a day)