Worst "science" movie

[Rel]

Well, according to IMDb's goofs on "Firefly," they weren't supposed to fire in a vacuum. It's just that they asked the wrong "expert."

It says,

Jayne says that his gun (which we know as "Vera" from earlier in the episode) needs oxygen around it to fire. The gun is shown with standard projectile rounds which produce all the oxygen they need. The producers were not sure if "Vera" would need oxygen to fire. So they asked a gun expert, who gave them the wrong information, according to commentary on the DVDs.

That implies that they said on the show that "it needed oxygen around it to fire", which turned out to be erroneous information.

 

[JimAde]

More thorny would be the reason why you'd have a gun in space in the first place. Even if they function perfectly, it's a highly impractical weapon for the environment from an operational standpoint. You'd better hit whatever you're aiming at on the first try.

AND not use a very big gun. Even if you hit your target, the bullet can keep going. So gunfights in space will consist of everybody running around with .22 caliber hollowpoints and wincing every time they miss.

 

[Rel]

AND not use a very big gun. Even if you hit your target, the bullet can keep going. So gunfights in space will consist of everybody running around with .22 caliber hollowpoints and wincing every time they miss.

I'd be a lot more inclined to use a grenade against my space enemies, provided I had access to some cover.

 

[Rackhir]

But will the mechanics of the gun function in vacuum? What about vacuum cementing? Could the oil in the gun freeze or something? I have no idea, just saying that space is a very hostile environment for gadgets. Not too good for people, either.

According to some research I did. Vacuum "wielding" probably doesn't actually exist. From what I've been able to find, they've traced all supposed incidents of it to inadequate lubrication.

As far as freezing goes, I'm not really sure that's an issue if the proper lubricants are used. Part of it is that space isn't actually "cold". While the nominal temperature is close to absolute zero, there isn't anything there to transfer heat to. Most heat transfer on earth is by convection or molecules bumping into other molecules. In space there is really only radiative heat transfer or emitting energy as infra-red radiation, which is a much much slower process.

 

[John Crichton]

The Core and Armageddon get a slight reprieve, in my mind.

Armageddon has some bad sicence, but I don't think it's really trying to be a sicence movie. It is more an adventure flick, and with a goodly portion of charactgerization from the actors, it was at least entertaining.

Never seen The Core but you touched upon something that I was going to say. I'll elaborate -

According to the original poster, "What breaks it for me, though, is a film that purports to be set in "reality," yet gets even the simplist scientific principles wrong."

Armageddon never purported to be set in anything remotely resembling reality. Yeah, it had humans in it but so does Lord of the Rings. I think they are very similiar (and yes, I happened to love both films). Does Armageddon have "bad science?" Of course! It's a doomsday movie released as a summer blockbuster, produced by Jerry Bruckheimer, directed by Mike Bay, the king of blowin' stuff up and blowin' it up real good and starring Bruce Willis who also likes to do the same. Go watch the trailer/teaser/super bowl commercial again and think if you've been deceived into thinking that the film was grounded in any kind of science.

I also think it should be mentioned that the movie is really Americana personified. They have the biggest guns, the most ra-ra, big-ass jets and spaceships and even the crazy ruskie. Check out the amount of flags, symbolism and general patriotic blabber going on. None of it really makes any sense or really matters but it's all there wrapped up in a package of one-liners, cheezy romance and suspense points with some great production values. Fantastic film once you remove it from the catagory of realism as it was properly presented as.

EDIT: I'd also like to mention that for all you Lost fans out there (a show that has loads of melodrama, similar to Armageddon) JJ Abrams was a screenwriter on the flick. Do I want all my movies like it? No. But it was a damn fun ride.

I had a much bigger problem with Deep Impact, which did present itself as realistic. Maybe it's just me.

 

[WayneLigon]

just to be really nitpicky, if you did shrink down all the atoms and cells and such proprtionally, they would no longer form the correct chemical receptors to take in oxygen and you would lie there and suffocate on the gigantic air molecules....

but shrinking movies, like time travel and super powers tend to be exempted from these sort of bash fests.

They actually mention this in the book; when they go to the lungs to refill the air tanks on the sub, they have to use a small version of the reducing machine to utilize the air there.

 

[Rel]

As far as freezing goes, I'm not really sure that's an issue if the proper lubricants are used. Part of it is that space isn't actually "cold". While the nominal temperature is close to absolute zero, there isn't anything there to transfer heat to. Most heat transfer on earth is by convection or molecules bumping into other molecules. In space there is really only radiative heat transfer or emitting energy as infra-red radiation, which is a much much slower process.

I'm rather talking out of my ass when I say this (I'm an amatuer physicist at best) but I'd be inclined to imagine that the heat radiated from the space suit might be enough to keep the oil from "freezing".

 

[jasper]

speaking of gunfights in space imagine this...
James Bond clone #007 steps out of ship to confront Blowfield #9 only to be killed by round James Bond clone #006 fired a decade ago killing Blowfield #7. Talk about stray arounds.

 

[WayneLigon]

The Day After (1984) Atom bombs fall over american but limited damage. Plus standard story line of horny girl wanting to be former maiden. This thing is still spoke of as great movie in the hollywood crowd.

Did you ever actually watch this movie or did someone just tell you about it and you just wanted to attempt a cutesy quote about 'the Hollywood crowd'? This is the one with Jason Robards where people die hideous slow deaths from radiation poisoning because they were 'lucky' enough not to wind up as shadows on a wall, where we see Kansas City wiped off the face of the Earth, rubble and fires and destruction everywhere... that movie. Probably the most realistic portrayal we've seen yet of what even a limited nuclear attack would do.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Check out the amount of flags, symbolism and general patriotic blabber going on.

Actually, I had almost managed to repress that hell of oppressive brainwashing cheese. Thanks. :\

Armageddon was one of those movies where I came out thinking "wouldn't it have been easier (and maybe less painful) for them to write their message on a lead pipe and bash us over the head with that for 2 hours?"

And I found the production values uninspiring. No redeaming qualities, except maybe the existance of bruce willis.