Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
White Crane Feather

Wow. I'm not normally into movies.

41 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Br Cornelius

It's a movie cornlius. We already addressed the impact of tidal forces approaching and crossing an event horizon even with a worm whole which is pretty much the same thing . There's is a premis in the movie that takes care of this. It was very acurate while still being able to spell out a story. Art has its place aswell.

The premise is hockum because it creates the whole circular time flaw. We only get to be advanced humans because advanced humans helped us survive. It is the fundamental flaw in all time travel SI FI movies. Its not a solution it a fudge and weakens an otherwise good movie. One of the only time travel movie to deal with the paradoxes well was Twelve Monkeys.

I like my SI FI to make sense. I can see why you like it though.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Emma_Acid

I like my SI FI to make sense.

Then you're going to miss out on a heap of great movies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Br Cornelius

Then you're going to miss out on a heap of great movies.

Not really, its the gross error which jar, and that usually involves time travel plot lines.

I enjoyed LOOPERS until they really messed it up at the end.

In this particular case, if the advanced humans were so advanced - why didn't they just come back and cure the blight ?? Why didn't they come back and transform society ??? They obviously had the technology to do so and it would have guaranteed their survival without leaving anything to chance. It jars like a pickaxe to the temple.

There are so many good SI FI movies that don't fall into the whole time travel paradox trap, or other basic scientific errors, that its not difficult to be entertained.

Its asking for trouble to make a movie targeted at some of the best informed Nerds in the world and then make basic plot errors. They spend whole websites pointing out the errors.

I suppose you are then left with the whole teenage boy customer base, though my teenage boy was similarly disgusted.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
White Crane Feather

The premise is hockum because it creates the whole circular time flaw. We only get to be advanced humans because advanced humans helped us survive. It is the fundamental flaw in all time travel SI FI movies. Its not a solution it a fudge and weakens an otherwise good movie. One of the only time travel movie to deal with the paradoxes well was Twelve Monkeys.

I like my SI FI to make sense. I can see why you like it though.

Br Cornelius

It was never established that it was actaully advanced humans. That was his theory. The robot diddnt agree. I don't believe in any sort of time travel. Still the movies grappled with some interesting stuff and was successful at most of it. I'm beginning to think you sir are a contrarian by nature. No worries, you remind of my sister sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grey Area

It was never established that it was actaully advanced humans. That was his theory. The robot diddnt agree. I don't believe in any sort of time travel. Still the movies grappled with some interesting stuff and was successful at most of it. I'm beginning to think you sir are a contrarian by nature. No worries, you remind of my sister sometimes.

I agree with BR Cornelius. I waited with held breath for this movie, and was very disappointed, expecting a sort of up to date Contact. What I actually got was 90% slow character dialogue that attempts to grapple a few contemporary issues, some nice visuals and a few things that don't make sense.

Paradoxes in movies are great, they make amazing plot twists, but if you want accuracy, they are wrong, they are paradoxes for a reason, they shouldn't exist. A couple of minor scientific errors or curiosities from the film: Stable planetary system around singularity? Planets receive light from said singularity? frozen floating clouds that actually damage the shuttle!!! (I may have missed something about the last one as I was preoccupied at that point, but still, they should have just snowed surely.)

The plot of this film is very similar to the plot of the novel Space, by Stephen Baxter. However Baxtor manages to deliver future humanities message in a better more plausible way (if I recall).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker

The premise is hockum because it creates the whole circular time flaw. We only get to be advanced humans because advanced humans helped us survive. It is the fundamental flaw in all time travel SI FI movies. Its not a solution it a fudge and weakens an otherwise good movie. One of the only time travel movie to deal with the paradoxes well was Twelve Monkeys.

I like my SI FI to make sense. I can see why you like it though.

Br Cornelius

Time paradoxes are varied and have been dealt with in many ways in books and films over the years. I didn't get the detail about the future altering the past so that the future existed. Only that a future civilization did exist and was able then to manipulate the past.

This doesn't really create an irreconcilable paradox, and is technically quite feasible given enough energy and technology. (We alter/create the future constantly, already) What would then be interesting is the perception of those within any altered existence Only someone outside the alteration would be aware of the change .In other words it is possible that our time line is constantly being altered but we would never realise this. (I don't believe this is happening, or has happened, but when we are advanced enough to time travel (as we will if we survive) anything might result. )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Archangel Oger

Personally I thought Matthew McConaughey and Anne Hathaway literally destroyed ANY hope for this movie which wasn't that good to begin with. Perhaps it would have had a (better) chance with a different cast, but those two certainly didn't help at all IMO.

I'm not sure what has happened to McConaughey, I thought he did great in 'A Time To Kill' and 'Contact'.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy

.... Two people already addressed these problems ;)

I understand, I have a great respect for Br. Cornelius too, his thoughts and Leo's are greatly valued when it's come to Science. I will be seeing this, regardless. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Br Cornelius

I understand, I have a great respect for Br. Cornelius too, his thoughts and Leo's are greatly valued when it's come to Science. I will be seeing this, regardless. :)

Exactly, see it for yourself and make up your own mind.

The real issue that makes the paradoxes and bending of science unforgivable for me - is that it attempts good science and makes claims for accurate science. Playing fast and loose with science is OK if you never made any pretensions to be better. Simply saying that some advanced civilization (whether it be us or someone else) can ignore basic scientific tenets because they are "advanced" is wrong. Nothing survives the transition through the event horizon in a coherent form - that is basis.

Br Cornelius

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stubbly_Dooright

Exactly, see it for yourself and make up your own mind.

The real issue that makes the paradoxes and bending of science unforgivable for me - is that it attempts good science and makes claims for accurate science. Playing fast and loose with science is OK if you never made any pretensions to be better. Simply saying that some advanced civilization (whether it be us or someone else) can ignore basic scientific tenets because they are "advanced" is wrong. Nothing survives the transition through the event horizon in a coherent form - that is basis.

Br Cornelius

I haven't seen the movie yet, but I will now think of Br Cornelius's words now while I will have the chance to watch it. ;)

I do this, while watching something, I get involved in the characters and the movie. I'm like, 'wait, that can be considered real to them?!' and my husband always turned to me and says, 'IT'S ONLY A MOVIE!'. I guess, some could look it that way, but as a bookseller, book and word reading lover and then in essence a lover of seeing it in film, I identify with it.

I feel what you are saying Br Cornelius, but unfortunately directors take what they think is an artist leeway. There will always be nits.

And anyways, and I say this tongue in cheek, it was a science fiction?! *cringes* ............... or *ducks*

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker

I haven't seen the movie yet, but I will now think of Br Cornelius's words now while I will have the chance to watch it. ;)

I do this, while watching something, I get involved in the characters and the movie. I'm like, 'wait, that can be considered real to them?!' and my husband always turned to me and says, 'IT'S ONLY A MOVIE!'. I guess, some could look it that way, but as a bookseller, book and word reading lover and then in essence a lover of seeing it in film, I identify with it.

I feel what you are saying Br Cornelius, but unfortunately directors take what they think is an artist leeway. There will always be nits.

And anyways, and I say this tongue in cheek, it was a science fiction?! *cringes* ............... or *ducks*

And as long as there are nits we will have "nit pickers". :devil:

Edited by Mr Walker
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stubbly_Dooright

And as long as there are nits we will have "nit pickers". :devil:

And this post as no bearing on this thread what so ever. :no:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Mr Walker

And this post as no bearing on this thread what so ever. :no:

It is absolutely relevant; semantically and pedantically, but I wrote it in jest, as a joke/pun/ play on words. If I have to explain it, then you have missed the point.

Edited by Mr Walker
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
White Crane Feather

The real question is who is the real nit picker? The one who nit picks or the one who picks the "nit?" :devil::innocent:

Edited by White Crane Feather
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy

Exactly, see it for yourself and make up your own mind.

The real issue that makes the paradoxes and bending of science unforgivable for me - is that it attempts good science and makes claims for accurate science. Playing fast and loose with science is OK if you never made any pretensions to be better. Simply saying that some advanced civilization (whether it be us or someone else) can ignore basic scientific tenets because they are "advanced" is wrong. Nothing survives the transition through the event horizon in a coherent form - that is basis.

Br Cornelius

I don't know if you saw Robert Redford's "All is Lost", but having a step,father who races sailboats and is in my world an expert on sailing. It was almost blasphemy to watch this movie, especially if you listened to my Dad, or read reviews from other sailors. Basically, a "real sailor"would not of done the things Robert Redford did. Tee hee.. I get that there is not enough movies that portray the actual reality of sailing and for those that are in that world, their passion is so intense, they would love to see more movies that are true to life, I get that and I think you have a valid point, I too, think to bad, I would also love a movie that took the time to teach, it can get across a lot in a short time. I was hoping it actually was spot on, I appreciate your feedback, and will not take the movie too seriously when I watch it. :)

Edited by Sherapy
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stubbly_Dooright

The real question is who is the real nit picker? The one who nit picks or the one who picks the "nit?" :devil::innocent:

I would think the one who nit picks, because one who picks the nits, is just hating their sweater!!! ;):P

I don't know if you saw Robert Redford's "All is Lost", but having a step,father who races sailboats and is in my world an expert on sailing. It was almost blasphemy to watch this movie, especially if you listened to my Dad, or read reviews from other sailors. Basically, a "real sailor"would not of done the things Robert Redford did. Tee hee.. I get that there is not enough movies that portray the actual reality of sailing and for those that are in that world, their passion is so intense, they would love to see more movies that are true to life, I get that and I think you have a valid point, I too, think to bad, I would also love a movie that took the time to teach, it can get across a lot in a short time. I was hoping it actually was spot on, I appreciate your feedback, and will not take the movie too seriously when I watch it. :)

I get you. although, in some cases, are not names changed to protect some. Remember a movie some time ago, that starred Victoria Principal? She played the horrible mother of a teenager, whose boyfriend killed the mother. That movie was about true events that happened in my home town. Of course, the names were changed, and ages were fudged too. But there were a lot more involved, (in which some of them were close to those close to me) yet not mentioned. So, is it for protection of names, or something else, and is that a problem?

So, where does art stop being art, when certain things cannot be taken seriously?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.