Technical inaccuracies in the movie Gravity - SPOILER ALERT

MaxQ

Tripoli 2747
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
4,484
Reaction score
119
Location
Central Viginia - USA
Think you nailed most of them....particularly #1 and #3, but despite the technical errors which started right out of the gate I still got into it.
The great scenery and the compelling feeling of being in the movie by virtue of the 3 D made it very tolerable, even enjoyable.
So, I'm going to say what I said in a previous post on this subject...if you don't ante up for the 3 D you're wasting your time on this one.

I don't look to Hollywood to get anything right, they have always always either distorted or taken liberty with historical facts or technical accuracy for the sake of entertainment, even Ron Howard did it on Apollo 13.

This movie didn't irritate me near as much as "Another Earth", where the lovely young heroine of the story describes an incident involving the first man in space having to get used to an annoying clicking sound in the space capsule and finally psychologically tuning it out for the duration of the mission which she said was a week.
The premise of this movie...that there could even be another earth in orbit around the sun, was absurd from the git go...but I was willing to go with it for the sake of the story...but getting a basic fact like this wrong - I was so irritated at what was a simple correctable error that I lost respect for the rest of the movie before it was over - so I understand where you are coming from.

It is one thing to get technical facts wrong but to misrepresent basic historical fact - ridiculous.

But then you have movies like the "300", where they portrayed the persian king xerxes like a bling laden Rupaul.
Given the way things are these days, the way entertainment is over amped up...basic facts just don't cut it anymore.
But then it has given rise to a whole new TV genre...the "Real Story" version of (insert your movie title here) to set things right.


"Ignoring for a moment that they're all in different inclinations...the Hubble, the ISS, and the Chinese space station are all within sight of each other. That's as believable as a movie about a sinking cruise ship way out in the Pacific ocean, and 2 other major cruise ships just happen to be a couple of miles away."

Yep...that was the biggest piece of nonsense of the whole movie.

But as for ships on the ocean... I think people are still trying to figure out why a steamer within visual range of the Titanic did nothing while the Titanic went down, unbelievable then, still puzzling now.

As for the observation of orbital mechanics, one of the foremost experts on orbital mechanics saw the movie and enjoyed it.
Buzz Aldrin.

At least people are talking about space again.
I'm so disgusted with 90 % of what is in the theater these days, and the 15 minutes of trailers I had to endure to see this movie reminded me of the reason I rarely go anymore.
I've seen Gravity twice...first in 3D and second in 3D IMAX.
Yes, it is that good.
 
Last edited:

proflaser

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
104
Reaction score
21
I was depressed by the general symbolism of everything of value and accomplishment in orbit being washed out of the sky in one bad day. All of this was being shown during the government shutdown and suspension of NASA work. On Comedy Central Steve Colbert announced NASA was closed and then showed a clip from 'Gravity' of the ISS shredding. The space train wrecks were scientifically inaccurate but politically valid observations.
 

DJDeadParrot

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2009
Messages
708
Reaction score
2
This movie didn't irritate me near as much as "Another Earth" ... The premise of this movie...that there could even be another earth in orbit around the sun, was absurd from the git go...but I was willing to go with it for the sake of the story...

One of my new favorite films! Though, yeah, you do have to suspend a pretty serious amount of disbelief about planetary motion, etc, etc.
 

Tronman

Dept of Redundancy Dept
TRF Supporter
Joined
Oct 11, 2010
Messages
1,063
Reaction score
3
I've been watching Flash Gordon (1936) on Hulu for the past week. Talk about technical inaccuracies! But I don't care. It's still very enjoyable in a corny sort of way. No interest in seeing Gravity though.
 

Datsmeharse

New Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2014
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am a film buff, not a science buff, and I came to this forum via search engine to validate my thoughts about what I thought must be goofs of science. I know this is an old thread but I want to thank Mushtang for his insight. I always find it easier to forgive inaccuracies when the story is more "heroic". You'll laugh me off this forum, but I could forgive the claptrap of "Armaggedon" and enjoy that film more because of all the derring-do and over-the-top effects and that while that film's director Michael Bay takes himself WAY too seriously, the writers (including JJ Abrams) knew it was just silly fun. Sandra Bullock is not a hero here, she's really just a survivor, and the adventure is not a Saturday Afternoon Popcorn-type of adventure. Not to get filmic, but cliches like her in a fetal position, George Clooney floating away, the oxygen and time running out constantly, which all reflects on the poor writing (by the director's son), made this film unoriginal to me, and only interesting as a technical achievement. But even there, it's easy to be appear groundbreaking in the digital age. Many of the effects were done previously in "Avatar" "I, Robot", etc. already. So, what's the point of bothering with fake drama? Flash over substance doesn't cut it, to any kind of fan, film or science.
 

Winston

Lorenzo von Matterhorn
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
9,556
Reaction score
1,722
"Gravity" is now available in Redboxes.

Much better endings for "Gravity":

1. Capsule descends under 'chute, radio silent
2. Capsule impacts water
3. Interior shot, hatch blown
4. Capsule sinks, occupant deploys small raft
5. Occupant looks 360 degrees, water in every direction
6. Occupant looks straight up, screams, receding shot from directly above pans all the way back into space showing that occupant is in the center of the Pacific ocean

for humor:

5a. Continuous whoopee cushion sound heard
5b. Raft occupant looks at side of raft
5c. Label marked "Made in China" (in Chinese with English subtitle) flaps in the wind from a large leak

Even more Twilight Zone(ish):

7. Occupant wakes up from a fever in a navy sick bay
8. At first relieved until occupant finds out sick bay is in a sub approaching crush depth

Or:

7. Occupant wakes up from a fever in a medical facility
8. At first relieved until occupant finds out they're stranded in a Mars colony that's out of water and nearly out of air
 

Winston

Lorenzo von Matterhorn
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
9,556
Reaction score
1,722
Dang, and I thought we were done stressing over this flick...



Sent from my Electronic Leash using Rocketry Forum
Oh, I'm not stressing, I just thought those would actually be better endings for this typical, mass market, trite "happy ending" flick. Well, the first one anyway. :)
 
Top