5 ms·

I'm a fan of computer interfaces in film across the board. From the intentionally tongue-in-cheek 'Hackers' to the downright unintentionally awful and the occas

by pstack 16y ago

I'm a fan of computer interfaces in film across the board. From the intentionally tongue-in-cheek 'Hackers' to the downright unintentionally awful and the occasionally vaguely bordering on something close to reality. I haven't seen this movie, but I'm actually impressed by what I see in the article. It raises the question, however, whether it's something that actually pays dividends. That is, when you employ any sense of reality in this specific domain, does anyone who isn't intimately familiar actually notice? Is the subset of people like ourselves who notice even worth catering to in such small ways? I know my mother, sister, grandmother, and most of the other people in my life wouldn't recognize if it was accurate or not and I suspect 95% of the audience falls into that category. On the other hand, small things can make a big difference, when you catch them. They're like seeing a loose thread on a piece of clothing that you can't unsee again. Or a stuck pixel on your LCD. For instance, I was watching a marathon of Roswell on Netflix this week (hey, shaddup -- I've never seen it before and wanted something awful to go along with feeling under the weather!). At one point, a guy says to another who is holding a revolver "you might as well just fire every bullet in your chamber!". Of course . . . a gun only has one bullet in the chamber at an time, as far as I know. Most certainly only one in a revolver. And it has bugged me ever since.

muyuu 16y ago
I don't think he'd have saved any time doing a completely original interface based on nothing. Quite possibly, it would have taken him a lot more time to do something as visually compelling (for mom and pop) as that completely from scratch.
SimonPStevens 16y ago
"I know my mother, sister, grandmother, and most of the other people in my life wouldn't recognize if it was accurate or not" I think each knowledge domain has it's set of experts that will spot mistakes in their own areas of experience. Every mother I know, when watching an on-screen delivery, will retort "that's not a newborn" when the babies face first appears on camera.
- pchristensen 16y ago
  retort "that's not a newborn" when the babies face first appears on camera Some fathers too :)
lallysingh 16y ago
It results in much better consistency and depth. Look at Star Trek (at least TNG+): when they were talking about fairly real science, it was rich, consistent, and added to the story. When they went off that track, they ended up giving the same phrase multiple inconsistent definitions. "Phase," I'm looking at you.
numlocked 16y ago
You're right, 95% of people won't notice this, but in any given scene there are dozens of tiny details that only 5% of the audience cares about. Over the course of a 2 hour movie, if the crew has cut corners on all of those little details, everyone notices a few things, and the suspension of disbelief is a little less suspended.
mirkules 16y ago
This conversation brings to mind Neil deGrasse Tyson's quip about Titanic, the movie (the fact that they used the "wrong" sky): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICsgjqVvtM0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICsgjqVvtM0 But I think little things like that do make a difference, even if it's just to a small audience, for example "chip art" http://smithsonianchips.si.edu/chipfun/graff.htm http://smithsonianchips.si.edu/chipfun/graff.htm People in general appreciate attention to detail, but mass consumerism has somehow discouraged it - and I think that's sad.

by pstack 16y ago

muyuu 16y ago

I don't think he'd have saved any time doing a completely original interface based on nothing. Quite possibly, it would have taken him a lot more time to do something as visually compelling (for mom and pop) as that completely from scratch.

SimonPStevens 16y ago

"I know my mother, sister, grandmother, and most of the other people in my life wouldn't recognize if it was accurate or not" I think each knowledge domain has it's set of experts that will spot mistakes in their own areas of experience. Every mother I know, when watching an on-screen delivery, will retort "that's not a newborn" when the babies face first appears on camera.

pchristensen 16y ago
retort "that's not a newborn" when the babies face first appears on camera Some fathers too :)

lallysingh 16y ago

It results in much better consistency and depth. Look at Star Trek (at least TNG+): when they were talking about fairly real science, it was rich, consistent, and added to the story. When they went off that track, they ended up giving the same phrase multiple inconsistent definitions. "Phase," I'm looking at you.

numlocked 16y ago

You're right, 95% of people won't notice this, but in any given scene there are dozens of tiny details that only 5% of the audience cares about. Over the course of a 2 hour movie, if the crew has cut corners on all of those little details, everyone notices a few things, and the suspension of disbelief is a little less suspended.

mirkules 16y ago

This conversation brings to mind Neil deGrasse Tyson's quip about Titanic, the movie (the fact that they used the "wrong" sky): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICsgjqVvtM0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICsgjqVvtM0 But I think little things like that do make a difference, even if it's just to a small audience, for example "chip art" http://smithsonianchips.si.edu/chipfun/graff.htm http://smithsonianchips.si.edu/chipfun/graff.htm People in general appreciate attention to detail, but mass consumerism has somehow discouraged it - and I think that's sad.