Comment The scientific flaws weren't the problem. (Score 1) 460
The scientific flaws weren't the problem, but they do provide a clear illustration of the problem with the movie. If scientific flaws were all it took to destroy a science fiction film, what about Star Wars? (light speed, "the force", light sabers, and lasers that you can see..) Star Trek? With warp drive, inertial dampeners, transporters, etc? Or maybe Babylon 5's jump gates and all the humanoid, bi-pedal aliens?
The problem with the movie was that it didn't stay self-consistant with how it treated science (partially alluded to in the first part of the review). At least in Star Trek, you know which scientific laws to ignore in what degree to ignore them (inertia works on the small scale, but not on the large, ships always meet each other on a plane, like naval vessels, etc).
I actually enjoyed the film (which is usually the ultimate goal of a movie, isn't it?), but wished it stayed more consistant with the way it treated science. Oh well...
The problem with the movie was that it didn't stay self-consistant with how it treated science (partially alluded to in the first part of the review). At least in Star Trek, you know which scientific laws to ignore in what degree to ignore them (inertia works on the small scale, but not on the large, ships always meet each other on a plane, like naval vessels, etc).
I actually enjoyed the film (which is usually the ultimate goal of a movie, isn't it?), but wished it stayed more consistant with the way it treated science. Oh well...
