|
God forbid we not have a huge name when the movie already has Matt Damon, Ridley Scott, Jessica Chastain, Sean Bean and Kate Mara attached to it.
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2015 15:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2024 18:52 |
|
|
One gently caress and a conditional gently caress to be named later.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
Movie was good other than iron man part, but I can forgive that part compared to interstellar's ridiculous magical science.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
How are u posted:Sure, it is exactly the kind of Serious treatment of China as a Real and Great power that gives whoever runs the board that approves the foreign releases in China a big loving boner. China landed a probe on the moon recently, and we haven't even done that since Apollo. They take space and Mars very seriously so I don't see how this is any more implausible than NASA actually getting the funding it needs for a series of manned Mars landings.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 04:42
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:In the book it's just straight-up a design defect that got overlooked and would have been meaningless on a regular operation. One of the seams was bad IIRC. Another thing you have to keep in mind when questioning the airlock malfunctioning for "no reason" is that the habitat was designed to last for 30 days, and he's many months beyond that when it fails. Mechanical parts eventually just break. quote:Gosh, yeah we haven't put a probe on the moon recently. We've totally lost our edg Yeah, NASA's incredible and what they do on a budget that's the equivalent of dumpster diving is remarkable. However, there's no loving way that in 20 years they'll have the money to land on Mars, even if they could theoretically do it (they could). So if you're going to bitch about China being portrayed as advancing a lot 20 years from now, you may as well bitch about the whole premise of the movie. And  at Russia. You know they almost starved the ISS just recently because they've forgotten how to launch rockets, right? Yeah, SpaceX had a part in that too, but SpaceX is new and also was in the process of testing groundbreaking boosters.
Nail Rat fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Oct 5, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:Pretty much. Mars is not actually that exciting, other then having a little bit of water its a dead planet that has been stagnant for 4 billion years. Well, it does have canyons and mountains that make the biggest features on Earth look like divots and hills, so there is that. edit: on another note, best part of the movie was when they said something was nominal. I was hoping for about fifty more nominals before it blew up Nail Rat fucked around with this message at 18:30 on Oct 5, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
I think part of the problem that was being presented in the movie wasn't just getting escape velocity and a trajectory for Mars insertion during a bad launch window, but having a lot of excess velocity to get there sooner because time was critical with Watney slowly starving to death. I mean, clearly they could get things to Mars; Ares III was the third manned landing. Another nitpick I had was the nerdy math guy explaining a gravity assist to the director of NASA as though he were a child. Nail Rat fucked around with this message at 19:16 on Oct 5, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 19:12
|
|
|
To be fair, it actually was a fairly risky and unconventional plan. Mostly due to the fact that they would only be doing a flyby of earth and have only one shot to intercept the supply vessel that would allow them to not starve to death. If launch had to be scrubbed for another day, they'd have died. Of course, this also begs the question of how the hell they were able to rendezvous with it when they were supposedly traveling at an extremely high velocity. Really while it's a lot more realistic than Interstellar, I guess it's best to not think about the science too much.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
Jenny Angel posted:Here's how you can tell this movie is relentlessly optimistic in its tone: Neil DeGrasse Tyson loves it, with a caveat that it's slightly too optimistic, and dude's like, Space Optimist in Chief. Don't get bogged down in plot here. It's definitely pro-NASA (which I think is a good thing), but I don't think NDT is as optimistic as you think. He's very realistic about NASA's nonexistent budget and how much that limits the chances for manned exploration beyond Earth. That's the biggest thing that's unrealistic about this movie; in 2035, only four Senate terms away, NASA will in no way, shape, or form have the budget for the equivalent of Apollo on steroids. Maybe in 2135. quote:All the events make me wonder what contingencies NASA built in for Ares IV. While Watley didn't end up bringing any samples back, his journey provided a lot of valueable information- Yeah, at the very least I would think his experiences would teach them "send some more non-processed vegetables, and maybe some seeds, for emergency survival." Nail Rat fucked around with this message at 17:58 on Oct 6, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 17:53
|
|
|
Tehan posted:The 'good' soil came from deliberately spreading the microbial life and bacteria and whatnot in the soil samples he brought from Earth to the Martian soil, fertilized by poop. When the airlock was breached it killed everything in the soil. He has more poop, but he's got no more Earth soil samples. Besides, all the potatoes died as well. Even in an airtight container, wouldn't all the bacteria have died from the cold overnight?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2015 16:37
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:Finally got to watch this today and found it wholly engrossing. This was a kick rear end Ridly Scott film. So drat good. Hope it encourages science. Are there any actual plans for us to go to Mars? Vague "plans" but no, nothing realistic or concrete. At present it would take an Apollo-like budget for a decade or so, meaning we'd need to give NASA 8 times its current budget for awhile. Good luck getting that passed in Congress.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
gohmak posted:Divorced? That was my assumption.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
gohmak posted:What a poo poo dad. Well the divorce might not have been his decision. It is an interesting moral quandary though; do you spend another two years away from your kid who probably is young enough that he doesn't even remember you, or do you let a good friend starve to death millions of miles from home? It's just kind of glossed over in the movie, but I guess you can tell from the ending that his wife would rather he let Watney die.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:That's completely on Weir as a failure of imagination. If he couldn't come up with a plausible scenario for Watney getting left behind on real Mars, he should have punted and gone for some other planet. He seemed to build the entire plot around the slingshot maneuver to get back to Mars and didn't try too hard on stuff other than that. Then it wouldn't resonate as powerfully with people because Mars is actually our next destination, and we're dragging our feet getting there. If it was some fictional planet or one that few people have ever heard of, it would never have worked. People who don't care about space know at least something about Mars due to a couple decades of robots sending pictures that get put up in the news; they generally know just about nothing about Venus, Europa, Io, or any world like those with more dangerous weather (also it makes the travel and human presence less plausible and less based in real science, so it's kind of six of one and half dozen of the other).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
Large open spaces is definitely a feature of the inflatable modules being R&Ded by companies like Bigelow for use in spacecraft, habitats and space stations. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigelow_Aerospace They've done presentations where they propose spacecraft with inflatable modules large enough that Orion CSMs can pass through an airlock and be serviced in a kind of maintenance bay.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2015 13:36
|
|
|
Plastik posted:Third, each Ares mission drops the next Ares mission's MAV as a first order of business upon arriving at Mars. So who placed the first MAV? Answer THAT, evolutionary scientists 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
Baron Bifford posted:They're all supposed to be scientifically accurate. Interstellar made a big deal about it. Well it's not, and we all know that already. If you can land and take off those Rangers multiple times, breaking orbit, you've already "solved the gravity problem." quote:The "I haven't showered in 400 days" line was pretty funny but the movie definitely shows him taking several showers. He takes one right before leaving the hab! I'm pretty sure it's "I haven't showered in half a year" or something, and it had been months since he'd left the hab. They glaze over just how long he had to travel to get to the Ares IV MAV.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:Some of it (the rangers, mainly) is simplified for story-telling purposes. Ordinarily I'd accept things like that, but that's core to the problem of the plot. Additionally, it's just not a very scientifically accurate movie in general. That doesn't mean it's a bad movie, but The Martian is far more plausible.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
He should have been fired on the spot for explaining a gravity assist to the director of NASA as though he were a child. I know in reality that was for people in the audience who don't know anything about space travel, but maybe they could have had him have a kid at home and done that dumb explanation to them, at least, or something. Not the director of NASA  I'm personally finally reading the book after having seen the movie again, and there are a lot of things the book does better, but I still enjoy the movie. Except Childish Gambino. Also it would've been nice if they had found Indian and Korean actors to play Kapoor and Park but that's been done to death and I guess with Hollywood it's just a step up that Kapoor didn't end up being white. Nail Rat fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Jan 19, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2024 18:52 |
|
|
Much in Gravity is physically impossible, and lots of people who don't "know better" don't know that the Martian sandstorm is completely impossible.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2016 15:40
|
|