abeefaria Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 What mistakes has Hollywood made regarding science? - Tom Sizemore's character in Red Planet says "I am a geneticist. I write code, A,G,T,P. - The space shuttle craft in Armageddon flying like there is an atmosphere when on the asteroid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 There is a web site somewhere with very good analyses of the worst common mistakes. I'll see if I can find it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bettina Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 Not sure if this fits here, but when I saw the new "War of the worlds", an EMP burst destroys all the electronics....except the guy with the video camera....he was still recording. Bettina Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 That didn't take long: http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abeefaria Posted July 12, 2005 Author Share Posted July 12, 2005 That is very funny Bettina and that is a cool site Sayonara. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radiohead Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 Bettina took mine. Maybe I will think of a new one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hellbender Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 Tom Sizemore's character in Red Planet says "I am a geneticist. I write code, A,G,T,P. I think the mistake is casting a guy like Tom Sizemore to play a scientist. In Alien, upon seeing the dead space jockey skeleton, Dallas says "Looks like its been dead a long time...fossilized. Looks like its growing out of the chair". Fossilization only occurs when the hard parts are buried in sediment which exchanges molecules with the "skeleton". But his character is the futuristic equvialent with a merchant marine, so I guess he might not have known. In "Resident Evil", the holographic girl says that "after you die your hair and nails continue to grow". AS far as I know, they grow very little after you die, and the illusion that they have grown more is the result of your skin "shrinking". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greentea Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 "The day after tomorrow". Clearly the effects are ridiculous. Wally Broeker's theories as a background is also poor science. He is the prototype for the guy in the movie. Even some of the diagrams in the movie are from actual Broeker's presentations. I do not totally disagree with anthropogenic global warming, but it should be supported with real science not apocalyptic nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 In "Resident Evil", the holographic girl says that "after you die your hair and nails continue to grow". AS far as I know, they grow very little after you die, and the illusion that they have grown more is the result of your skin "shrinking". That is indeed true. But I don't think we need to mention all of Resident Evil's immense number of gaffs or plotholes. Except one. The entire reason the "plot" happens is because the hazchem lab is on the same ventilation system as the rest of the base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 i hate the fact that in the day after tomorrow the huge wall of water leaves all the buildings standing. to cheep to even copy the effects from deep impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In My Memory Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 I always wonder where that whooshing sound comes from when space ships zoom by. And this isnt really science related, but there are lots of movies where a computer genious shows a blurry or pixelated image on screen, then clicks a button and magically produces a crystal clear image. The only way this can be done is by blurring an image, then pressing the "undo" button - but, the way its portrayed in the movies, it simply isnt possible to add any more detail than the resolution allows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuel pod Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 u guys should check out http://www.badastronomy.com Hollywood movies,especially james bond movies are all about bad physics... u guys should have noted the following: ->the unknown attarctive focers b/w dying villans and the glass windows/shelves... ->the explosive super computers.. ->unlimited sub machine gun ammo.. ->net connection with any desired computer in all conditions... ->highly explosive cars.. a really intresting thing which I read was that...u guys must have noted that the hero usually escapes a building by jumping out of glass window in the process the window smashes...and the guy just has a few cuts...actually the the the broken pieces of glass will be so sharp that they act as tiny daggers due to thier inertia..they will wound nearly the hero to death...what do u think? its a theory I read somewhere... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In My Memory Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 Fuel Pod, u guys should have noted the following:->the unknown attarctive focers b/w dying villans and the glass windows/shelves... ->the explosive super computers.. ->unlimited sub machine gun ammo.. ->net connection with any desired computer in all conditions... ->highly explosive cars.. Almost all of those things are mentioned in Sayonara's Link' date=' almost verbatim: Flaming Cars Ever notice how cars in movies always burst into flames the instant they collide with anything? ... The Attractive Force of Glass ... The Mac 10 Problem We can't help asking where the sidekicks are with wheelbarrows to carry the ammo, let alone the cooling systems Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radiohead Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 In National Treasure, the fact that at a historical showing of antiques and such, the thing you would most want to see was underground with one security guard. I am talking about the Declaration of Independence for those of you who haven't seen it. Also in National Treasure, you notice they are /extremely/ careful with the Declaration when it is out of the tube, yet the tube gets thrown around and battered with th Declaration inside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuel pod Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 well it must have been his link cause I read the stuff sometime back didnt see someone had already posted it b4..and didnt remeber the link.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graeystone Posted July 14, 2005 Share Posted July 14, 2005 That's what I like about Myth Busters on Discovery. They proof/disproof Hollywood stuff but they don't act like stiffs about it. They have fun and know that to completely ruin a movie like that ruins other people's experience of seeing a movie. Seeking truth is one thing, being a Grade-A Jerk about it is another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted July 14, 2005 Share Posted July 14, 2005 Seeking truth is one thing, being a Grade-A Jerk about it is another.Welcome to Being a Superior Geek 101. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted July 14, 2005 Share Posted July 14, 2005 That didn't take long:http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/ The one thing I really like about that site is that the section about recoil' date=' "[i']There's yet another way to view the problem. Conservation of momentum works for shooters as well as victims. In other words, recoil from firing a weapon will give a shooter backward momentum equal to the forward momentum of the bullet and hot gasses from burning gun powder exiting the gun barrel... [/i]" was added right after I suggested it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinalm Posted July 14, 2005 Share Posted July 14, 2005 My nomination for worst science in a movie has to go to "The Core". To many problems to list but my favorite is obtaining power to drive the ship from the ambiant heat of its surroundings. Apparently, the writers never heard of Carnot or the laws of thermodynamics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuel pod Posted July 14, 2005 Share Posted July 14, 2005 The one thing I really like about that site is that the section about recoil' date=' "[i']There's yet another way to view the problem. Conservation of momentum works for shooters as well as victims. In other words, recoil from firing a weapon will give a shooter backward momentum equal to the forward momentum of the bullet and hot gasses from burning gun powder exiting the gun barrel... [/i]" was added right after I suggested it. Just got bit of an inquiry..For practical calculations for a gun with a good barell design cant we say that: momentum of exiting gases<<<momentum of bullet ???? Cause I guess most of their moment would be transferred to the bullet.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted July 14, 2005 Share Posted July 14, 2005 Just got bit of an inquiry..For practical calculations for a gun with a good barell design cant we say that: momentum of exiting gases<<<momentum of bullet ???? Cause I guess most of their moment would be transferred to the bullet.. I would suppose so. But that's not particularly relevant to the transgression of the bullet launching the victim into the wall, but doing nothing to the shooter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 where does the Incredible Hulk get his extra Mass from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 he ate his vegetables Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 where does the Incredible Hulk get his extra Mass from? He doesn't. Bruce Banner weighs over 200 tonnes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted July 16, 2005 Share Posted July 16, 2005 That's the real reason they call him Dense Brucey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now