Summary points:
- much of the "science" in Crichton-based movies is actually, at best, superficially plausable handwaving.
- statistics handling in movies in general is kinda painful, with crucial misuse of basic terms and principles.
- the movie of I. Robot is crrrrrap!
- if you really want scientifically plausible s.f. movies and television, then Firefly/Serentity is spot-on, both in technology and plotting that comes from actual adult concerns with ambiguous and untidy endings.
So I've let myself get caught up in a couple of recent threads.
How depressing.
Go further down in the thread on Purdue and you'll find a few good comments but still.
Saw the latest Wachowski bros. tip a couple days back. Bleagh! Not good. Very not good. It was like a two hour beer ad. A not very original beer ad. No content, slick colors, by-the-numbers directing. A few flashy visual tricks. Several intrusive bits of special effects business. But the thing that got me most is how reliably they didn't even really believe their own shtick.
Just looked today at the package that Vonage is pushing through (gag) CompUSA. No signup (+$50, get back $50), pretty looking Uniden two line system, supposed discount on rates thoough it didn't sound that great to me.
What does that mean? Well, this neighborhood in specific and New York in general has huge quantities of planters, big 'uns three or four feet to a side, that are, at best planted with some ill-cared for single species or in many cases, simply empty, with the occasional empty bottle, a few cigarrette butts, and the like.
If I want girly I'll go somewhere like this.
A girly
-Rustin
I cannot believe that God plays dice with the cosmos. -- Albert Einstein, on the randomness of quantum mechanics