Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
typodupeerror delete not in

Book Reviews

Recent reviews from Slashdot readers:

Submitting a review for consideration is easy; please first read Slashdot's book review guidelines. Updated: 2008114 by samzenpus

Comments: 55 + -   The Science of Caddyshack on Friday July 30, @01:28PM

Posted by samzenpus on Friday July 30, @01:28PM
from the it's-in-the-hole dept.
humor
astroengine writes "Thirty years after the release of the cult classic comedy Caddyshack, Discovery News has geeked out and gone on the hunt for any trace amount of science they can find in the movie (video). From gopher territoriality to seismic deformation, from pool poop bacteria to the color of lightning, it turns out there's quite a lot of science to talk about..."
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Science (Score:2, Interesting)

    by slaxative (1867220)
    Why do I think of Sonny and Cher's, I Got You Babe, every time I hear about this movie?
  • by Drakkenmensch (1255800) on Friday July 30, @01:34PM (#33085864)
    Turns out they already tested the C4 explosion pushing the golf ball down the cup. The explosion neither provided the onscreen fireball or the ground shaking required to push the ball down. Myth busted!
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Combatso (1793216)
      oh well if they say so, then how could anyone dispute.. afterall, they use science-sounding words during that hour of entertainment.
      • Re: (Score:1, Informative)

        Even if you disagree with the show format, you can hardly dispute the fact that they seeded the ground with actual C4 and blew it up with a few dozen yards of a golf cup with a precariously perched golf ball. And it held firmly in place.
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Plekto (1018050)

          The problem with C4 is that it's too explosive. If you watch the show frequently, you see them talk about how it feels for each type of explosive. C4 is a very sharp and quick jolt, and as a result, won't do anything much to the ground and surrounding area at long distances. Gunpowder or something much slower, though, would have had the desired effect. Yet again, Hollywood goes for high-tech and fancy when low-tech and simple actually is how it should be. To be honest, if the guy had a few barrels of

          • by blair1q (305137) on Friday July 30, @02:53PM (#33086922) Journal

            erm, no.

            high-speed explosive is just fine for this, but i'm guessing (because i didn't see that episode) that it wasn't tamped with enough earth above it to create a reaction mass that would reflect significant energy into the ground. large bang, small bullet, no recoil. also, i highly doubt they used enough. it takes a way huge lot of thump to make ground move several meters away without some extenuating circumstance.

            which brings me to the subject of golf course soils. good golf courses have very porous soil, having been constructed for drainage, as standing and flowing water are a nuisance to golfers and greenskeepers and bad for grass (or glass, if you're channelling Chinatown today). especially under the greens. you can jump a foot in the air about two meters from the hole and make a ball wiggle. so their choice of venues would be critical. local $12 muni? expect it to be hard as a rock out there. snooty private country club? like blowing up gophers next to a bowl of jell-o.

            • Concerning the explosives, you're correct. But, in the movie, he also didn't pack it in(neither did Mythbusters). Of course, looking at the movie, I suspect that they actually used dynamite(or detonation cord plus gasoline - a Hollywood favorite) buried a few feet down as the holes are too large and I can't imagine even Hollywood getting their hands on that much (actual) C4 easily.

              • I can't imagine even Hollywood getting their hands on that much (actual) C4 easily.

                Hollywood has probably never used C4 except for the purpose bringing down a structure. When you want a fireball and a blast front you use gasoline. Indeed you'd use both if you wanted to blow up the building with big fireballs shooting out the window and then have it collapse, because when you blow out the supports with little enough C4 to avoid scattering the building across the neighborhood there's no fire to speak of, at least nothing you see outside the building.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by tkohler (806572)
            Well C4 molds in to the shape of an attractive female gopher better than gunpowder.
    • by ebuck (585470) on Friday July 30, @02:33PM (#33086676)

      I don't think so. They forgot to properly mold the C4 into friendly forest animals.

      • shape charges. why does it always have to be shape charges...

      • by 2names (531755)
        Not only that, but didn't Carl pump some sort of explosive chemical down through the gopher tunnels as well?
  • People, its a movie for god sake!!

    Science was the furthest thing from the author's mind when writing this. Just have a beer and watch it, don't over analyse it.

    Hint: Just because you can find some vapid article posted somewhere on the web doesn't mean they all deserve space on slashdot.

  • So Grant, Tori & Kari... wait... wasn't there topless scenes in that movie?
  • What about (Score:4, Funny)

    by SnarfQuest (469614) on Friday July 30, @01:42PM (#33085972)

    What about gopher dances? How accurate are the gopher dances? That is obviously the most important part of the movie!

  • by Adambomb (118938) * on Friday July 30, @01:52PM (#33086126) Journal

    When asked for further comment, Discovery was quoted as responding 'Nnnnnnanananananaaa'.

  • by elrous0 (869638) * on Friday July 30, @02:07PM (#33086338)
    So, Discovery News has that going for them...which is nice.
  • Jumping the shark (Score:3, Insightful)

    by DerekLyons (302214) <fairwater&gmail,com> on Friday July 30, @02:30PM (#33086638) Homepage

    The "Science Of ___________" meme has finally jumped the shark.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by blair1q (305137)

      Not until the do The Science of Happy Days, including the water-skiing scenes.

    • The "Science Of ___________" meme has finally jumped the shark.

      Congratulations! Misuse of both terms meme and jump the shark.

    • The "Science Of ___________" meme has finally jumped the shark.

      Next week on Discovery News: The Science of Jumping a Shark.

  • X(T(Y+N)) = "In your DVD Collection" where... N = The number of times you've seen this movie. Y = Number of ridiculous golf References T = THe number of titties in the movie. X = Is Chevy Chase still funny? (Boolean response)
  • The world needs scientists, too.

  • by bashibazouk (582054) on Friday July 30, @02:53PM (#33086916) Journal

    I want to know about the science of:

    "This is a hybrid. This is a cross, ah, of Bluegrass, Kentucky Bluegrass, Featherbed Bent, and Northern California Sensemilia. The amazing stuff about this is, that you can play 36 holes on it in the afternoon, take it home and just get stoned to the bejeezus-belt that night on this stuff."

  • Heading to the store to pick up a Baby Ruth.

  • Found some science in Caddy Shack, have you? That's great. A popular urban legend holds that the movie contains some humor, but I haven't been able to locate anything very funny.
  • That dude's soul patch is unscientific....

  • Can a Gopher make someone that psychotic? As for the swimming pool thats why you don't swallow the water! the amount of times I've seen people swallow the swimming pool water is beyond me. Yes swallow the water where theres chlorate ions.
"Is this foreplay?" "No, this is Nuke Strike. Foreplay has lousy graphics. Beat me again." -- Duckert, in "Bad Rubber," Albedo #0 (comics)