5 ms·

It was certainly a lot kore realistic than Gravity (which was massively hyped for its realism) and a lot more fun to boot. Of course, no space movie can do with

by Udo 13y ago

It was certainly a lot kore realistic than Gravity (which was massively hyped for its realism) and a lot more fun to boot. Of course, no space movie can do without plot device-related absurdities for the sake of drama, but at least it was entertaining and relatively clever. One thing I liked too was that the crew was not composed of abrasive drama queens, which is refreshing considering the genre.

arrrg 13y ago
Huh? Gravity was massively hyped for its special effects and the very real feeling of exhilaration it creates. It’s an awesome action movie with none of the stereotypical and boring tropes of action movies. (Also, the cinematography is very much above average and I personally really loved its rhythm of quiet and action.) The depiction of space hardware is actually awesomely realistic (to some level of detail) but I don’t recall anyone praising it for realism beyond that. Because it very much isn’t. (Still, getting the actual space hardware right is something not many movies manage to pull off and pretty impressive on its own.) I don’t think it matters very much or reduces the enjoyment very much. This movie is very much not about space travel. Europa Report is a bit cringe but probably the best you can do with that kind of budget and in that respect it’s pretty and also pretty realistic.
- Udo 13y ago
  Huh. I recall my friends citing articles from popular publications where astronauts supposedly praised Gravity for its utter phycics realism. I disagree with you about Gravity (I didn't like it very much) but I agree that in the great scheme of things realism isn't that important for entertainment.
  - jessaustin 13y ago
    SPOILER WARNING, I guess. I can't imagine an astronaut praising the "physics realism" of the "buffeted by the wind in space" moment that caused the death of the male character. His momentum had clearly been completely stopped by the tether, but instead of rebounding back toward the other tethered astronaut (as had happened multiple, more realistic, times earlier in the movie), some unknown force kept pulling him away until at last the tether came loose. If the setting were terrestrial the force would be inferred by most viewers to be the drag of a moving fluid such as wind. What similar force exists in space? I don't complain about the presence of unrealistic space plot device in unrealistic space movie, but there it is.
    - GlennS 13y ago
      If I recall, the object they were tethered too was rotating. So it would be centrifugal force.
      - jessaustin 13y ago
        It's been some time since I've seen it, so you may be right. However, the situation you describe would only obtain once the entire system was rotating. As I recall, the female astronaut grabbed onto the object and the tether immediately stretched out tight, with no time to impart angular momentum to the tether or to the male astronaut. In that situation, I would expect the tether to wind around the object somewhat in the interim before the male came loose, and in that case he would have been imparted with some lateral momentum that would have taken him past the object (although not necessarily within retrieval distance) rather than straight away from it as I dimly recall from the film.
      - afterburner 13y ago
        It was not in any way portrayed as rotating. In fact Sandra's character seemed to be moving away from the ISS at a snail's pace. Furthermore, she was neither accelerating nor decelerating. It was poorly portrayed, that's why there is disagreement. As portrayed visually, it doesn't make sense. This was done I assume to stretch out the dramatic moment of decision so they could have an actual conversation about it. Even then that could have been achieved simply by having the conversation happen while the two were moving away from the ISS much faster. EDIT: Go to the movie with this exact shot to see what I mean: http://www.spaceanswers.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Gravity-online-tether-death.jpg http://www.spaceanswers.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Gravi... (from this article: http://www.spaceanswers.com/space-exploration/3802/16-things-gravity-got-wrong-and-some-things-it-got-right-too/ http://www.spaceanswers.com/space-exploration/3802/16-things... )
        jessaustin 13y ago
        Hahaha looking at the picture I realize there is no way the "object", let alone the tether and astronaut, could be rotating fast enough to create such a force.
  - vinkelhake 13y ago
    Aside from the thing that jessaustin mentioned, there's also the problem that Hubble and the ISS have completely different orbits and that you can't just take your back mounted whatever-it-is-called and fly between them.
    - Udo 13y ago
      And that's exactly what I'm talking about, that was my point.

by Udo 13y ago

arrrg 13y ago

Huh? Gravity was massively hyped for its special effects and the very real feeling of exhilaration it creates. It’s an awesome action movie with none of the stereotypical and boring tropes of action movies. (Also, the cinematography is very much above average and I personally really loved its rhythm of quiet and action.) The depiction of space hardware is actually awesomely realistic (to some level of detail) but I don’t recall anyone praising it for realism beyond that. Because it very much isn’t. (Still, getting the actual space hardware right is something not many movies manage to pull off and pretty impressive on its own.) I don’t think it matters very much or reduces the enjoyment very much. This movie is very much not about space travel. Europa Report is a bit cringe but probably the best you can do with that kind of budget and in that respect it’s pretty and also pretty realistic.

Udo 13y ago
Huh. I recall my friends citing articles from popular publications where astronauts supposedly praised Gravity for its utter phycics realism. I disagree with you about Gravity (I didn't like it very much) but I agree that in the great scheme of things realism isn't that important for entertainment.
- jessaustin 13y ago
  SPOILER WARNING, I guess. I can't imagine an astronaut praising the "physics realism" of the "buffeted by the wind in space" moment that caused the death of the male character. His momentum had clearly been completely stopped by the tether, but instead of rebounding back toward the other tethered astronaut (as had happened multiple, more realistic, times earlier in the movie), some unknown force kept pulling him away until at last the tether came loose. If the setting were terrestrial the force would be inferred by most viewers to be the drag of a moving fluid such as wind. What similar force exists in space? I don't complain about the presence of unrealistic space plot device in unrealistic space movie, but there it is.
  - GlennS 13y ago
    If I recall, the object they were tethered too was rotating. So it would be centrifugal force.
    - jessaustin 13y ago
      It's been some time since I've seen it, so you may be right. However, the situation you describe would only obtain once the entire system was rotating. As I recall, the female astronaut grabbed onto the object and the tether immediately stretched out tight, with no time to impart angular momentum to the tether or to the male astronaut. In that situation, I would expect the tether to wind around the object somewhat in the interim before the male came loose, and in that case he would have been imparted with some lateral momentum that would have taken him past the object (although not necessarily within retrieval distance) rather than straight away from it as I dimly recall from the film.
    - afterburner 13y ago
      It was not in any way portrayed as rotating. In fact Sandra's character seemed to be moving away from the ISS at a snail's pace. Furthermore, she was neither accelerating nor decelerating. It was poorly portrayed, that's why there is disagreement. As portrayed visually, it doesn't make sense. This was done I assume to stretch out the dramatic moment of decision so they could have an actual conversation about it. Even then that could have been achieved simply by having the conversation happen while the two were moving away from the ISS much faster. EDIT: Go to the movie with this exact shot to see what I mean: http://www.spaceanswers.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Gravity-online-tether-death.jpg http://www.spaceanswers.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Gravi... (from this article: http://www.spaceanswers.com/space-exploration/3802/16-things-gravity-got-wrong-and-some-things-it-got-right-too/ http://www.spaceanswers.com/space-exploration/3802/16-things... )
      - jessaustin 13y ago
        Hahaha looking at the picture I realize there is no way the "object", let alone the tether and astronaut, could be rotating fast enough to create such a force.
- vinkelhake 13y ago
  Aside from the thing that jessaustin mentioned, there's also the problem that Hubble and the ISS have completely different orbits and that you can't just take your back mounted whatever-it-is-called and fly between them.
  - Udo 13y ago
    And that's exactly what I'm talking about, that was my point.