Jump to content

Gravity (Movie)

Zacho

By Zacho
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

minerman30

minerman30

Posted
Posted

I found two things wrong with it:

1. George Cloony still had velocity even after being stopped by Sandra Bullock when they were near the ISS.

2. You can hear all the debris whisling through the "air" during the debris-field scene.

Still a great movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lajoswinkler

lajoswinkler

Posted
Posted
I found two things wrong with it:

1. George Cloony still had velocity even after being stopped by Sandra Bullock when they were near the ISS.

2. You can hear all the debris whisling through the "air" during the debris-field scene.

Still a great movie.

1. He was stopped relative to her, but the system Stone-tether-Kowalski was still slowly rotating around the station. Remember how they initially got to that position - Stone got caught into parachute ropes and straight line movement was turned into a rotation around the point where the rope holds to the Soyuz (is the point called a vertex in English? I can't find those terms, for the love of Newton). Impact of Kowalski never completely stopped the motion, but it was slowed down. However, even with low angular speed, the distance between the Soyuz and Kowalski was really long, so the force is significant. Stone is slipping from the grip of the rope so Kowalski decides to release the tether.

It's actually one of the great scientific moments in the movie and not an error.

2. I don't recall any whizzing. Maybe you've heard the soundtrack. The musical instruments were heavily used to increase the viewers' tension.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Godot

Godot

Posted
Posted

I also think it was just the soundrack.

There were rather consequent with regards to eliminatng noises in vacuum.

You could see this especially in one scene (dunno exactly which one, I think it was when George returned to Sandra and opened her capsule door) ...

one moment (when there was still air in the capsule) ayou could hear noises .. the other moment, when the hatch was opened and the air went away,

all noises stopped (only to reappear, when George, after entering, opened the valves in order to restore the atmosphere within the capsule))

Not sure about the rotation of he ISS however (when Sandras foot slowly slipped through the parachute straps)... this scene also seemed wrong to me with regards to the impulse left by him.

I have to agree however that the rotation of the ISS may indeed be an explanation for this scene.

What, of course, surely seemed wrong is the simple "point into the direction of the target and then accelerate"-orbital maneuvres.

But AFAIK this was part of deliberate simplifications made by Cuaron (so that Sandra/George wouldn´t have to explain to the (not KSP playing) viewers, why Sandra/George would have to accelerate in a total different direction than expected (by the viewers) in order to reach their destination) :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dynamo

Dynamo

Posted
Posted

To be honest, i was a little miffed about it. I went in with some reservations that the public would get a bad vibe about space travel after the movie, but i tried to keep an open mind.

The three biggest points i summarized my criticisms into boil down to this:

1. The "Action Box." As many of us have pointed out, Tiangong, the ISS, and Hubble wouldn't be nearly that close. Also, i find it hard to believe that much debris would pile up in the exact orbit of all 3 installations. It seems like they stuffed space into an 'action box' where everything is put in closer proximity for dramatic effect.

2. Early Warning. As far as i know, the US Air Force keeps a constant eye on the tracking of debris in orbit. Any spacecraft in danger of a collision would be informed well before 'imminent impact', during which time the craft could raise or lower its orbital plane to miss the oncoming debris

3. "Interpretive Physics." I know Hollywood gets kind of a free pass on this one, and most sequences were stunningly accurate. But a few scenes that contributed to the plot did annoy me.

-First, no space program in their right mind would let astronauts get to the propellant and oxygen reserves to the levels Bullock and Clooney dealt with, in anticipation of some disaster similar to the movie's. I don't think Bullock would've burnt as much oxygen as she did on her ride to the station anyway. Plus, when she grabs Clooney in the parachute rig scene, shouldn't she have canceled his rel-V with the Station?

- I don't see how he could've accelerated without any exterior force after detaching from Bullock. He shouldn't have run out of pack fuel anyway, as Bullock couldn't have "slowed him down" on the approach to the station (as she said); one short burst prograde to the station would've let them coast there without a drop more of propellant (and he gave no indication of critical fuel before departing the shuttle, anyway.)

-When Bullock tries to use the RCS thrusters on the Soyuz to free its parachute from the ISS, she applies retrograde RCS thrusting, demonstrating its capability to adjust its linear motion as in KSP. Now, when she departs for Tiangong, she 'cannot turn on the engine', driving her near to suicide when she thinks she's out of options. Why not use the linear RCS thrusters?! Sure, it might take a while, but you never said you were out of hypergolic fuel, and it's certainly a better option than a suicide attempt!

Other than those itty nitpicks (and a few others not worth listing), i think it was an amazing showcase of our proudest projects we, as a species, have made in space, even if they did get torn to pieces. I still maintain that the producers are making profit of the intellectual property of kerbals - they made an action movie about a normal Kerbal workday. Besides, we deorbit space stations for fun around here!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
suxfevi

suxfevi

Posted
Posted

I really liked this movie.

But I think there is another mistake that no one is considering: the trajectory of the debris.

It should pass every 90 minutes right? But why? It has a very different speed from the shuttle/ISS/chinese station, and therefore its trajectory should be different as well.

Also the debris hits the shuttle...then after 90 minutes hits the ISS, and 90 minutes later the Chinese station....And the three objects are in different locations and trajectories.

I mean....the trajectory of the debris is not very realistic....

Am I right?

Don't get me wrong I loved this movie. I just wanted to make sure if what I spotted is a mistake or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
loknar

loknar

Posted
Posted
I really liked this movie.

But I think there is another mistake that no one is considering: the trajectory of the debris.

It should pass every 90 minutes right? But why? It has a very different speed from the shuttle/ISS/chinese station, and therefore its trajectory should be different as well.

Also the debris hits the shuttle...then after 90 minutes hits the ISS, and 90 minutes later the Chinese station....And the three objects are in different locations and trajectories.

I mean....the trajectory of the debris is not very realistic....

Am I right?

Don't get me wrong I loved this movie. I just wanted to make sure if what I spotted is a mistake or not.

How DARE you question the movie! You just don't GET it man! I mean.. where do I begin??

The movie is not about space or physics or space stations or orbits or... wait I lost my train of thought...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
loknar

loknar

Posted
Posted

10 more innacuracies of Gravity:

1. NASA analysts would be able to predict a deadly debris field long before it hit their spacecraft.

2. When Ryan cries, her tears float away. However, even in space, surface tension would cause them to remain on her face.

3. Kowalski's subsequent claim that "space tears" contain mystical properties are unfounded.

4. You can't lift up your helmet and drink from a can of Sprite while in a vacuum.

5. Earth is approximately 90 million miles away from the sun. As such, Kowalski's suggestion they "swim on over there and get our bearings" is reckless.

6. "Second star to the right, and straight on 'til morning" is NOT how to locate the moon when adrift in deep space.

7. NASA-issued Emergency Escape Pods do not have external engines, much less one large enough for a goose to fly into upon re-entry.

8. At 1:07:54, a boom mic can be seen clearly in the reflection of Bullock's helmet, as can the boom operator, Sandy, who is not wearing a spacesuit.

9. Bucky, the hyper-intelligent NASA chimpanzee who attacks and kills George Clooney in the final scene, is referred to several times as a "monkey". She is in fact an ape.

10. Everyone didn't immediately die at the start of the movie.

(source) http://www.collegehumor.com/article/6924570/10-more-scientific-inaccuracies-in-gravity

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eric S

Eric S

Posted
Posted
Also the debris hits the shuttle...then after 90 minutes hits the ISS, and 90 minutes later the Chinese station....And the three objects are in different locations and trajectories.

Actually, in interviews done before the movie came out, they discussed that they knew that those were normally in different orbits, but they put them in similar ones for purposes of the story.

Other than that, yes, the debris trajectory is probably what bothered me the most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lajoswinkler

lajoswinkler

Posted
Posted
10 more innacuracies of Gravity:

1. NASA analysts would be able to predict a deadly debris field long before it hit their spacecraft.

2. When Ryan cries, her tears float away. However, even in space, surface tension would cause them to remain on her face.

3. Kowalski's subsequent claim that "space tears" contain mystical properties are unfounded.

4. You can't lift up your helmet and drink from a can of Sprite while in a vacuum.

5. Earth is approximately 90 million miles away from the sun. As such, Kowalski's suggestion they "swim on over there and get our bearings" is reckless.

6. "Second star to the right, and straight on 'til morning" is NOT how to locate the moon when adrift in deep space.

7. NASA-issued Emergency Escape Pods do not have external engines, much less one large enough for a goose to fly into upon re-entry.

8. At 1:07:54, a boom mic can be seen clearly in the reflection of Bullock's helmet, as can the boom operator, Sandy, who is not wearing a spacesuit.

9. Bucky, the hyper-intelligent NASA chimpanzee who attacks and kills George Clooney in the final scene, is referred to several times as a "monkey". She is in fact an ape.

10. Everyone didn't immediately die at the start of the movie.

(source) http://www.collegehumor.com/article/6924570/10-more-scientific-inaccuracies-in-gravity

1. Actually they wouldn't. They could predict the region of the higher probability to encounter the debris, but they could not account for every piece. Too much unknown variables play a role in this.

2. Yes, she was too static. If she was moving too much, they'd float away. It was done because of the artistic purposes, although I'd prefer reality here.

3. True, true. :P

4. I don't remember that. :o

5. You were joking the entire time, weren't you?

6. ...

Oh screw it. I've been trolled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
loknar

loknar

Posted
Posted
1. Actually they wouldn't. They could predict the region of the higher probability to encounter the debris, but they could not account for every piece. Too much unknown variables play a role in this.

2. Yes, she was too static. If she was moving too much, they'd float away. It was done because of the artistic purposes, although I'd prefer reality here.

3. True, true. :P

4. I don't remember that. :o

5. You were joking the entire time, weren't you?

6. ...

Oh screw it. I've been trolled.

Kekekeke... oh, I still have not seen "Gravity" but yesterday I watched a documentary about Space Junk (featuring Dr Kessler). Imax Space Junk: http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/9434/space_junk_3d.html

Beautiful images but it feels low-budget and too low-tech-level for most of you guys, but interesting nonetheless. Although I'm still skeptical about Kessler Syndrome, space programs definitely need to keep their shi* together.

*ship

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tech Support

Tech Support

Posted
Posted

I saw this movie a few days ago in 3-D, I had high expectations and they were met ! In my opinion this is probably among the best space movies made ( along with Contact and Apollo 13 ) the acting was excellent as was the soundtrack, watching Ryan change from being scared, dejected and lost to determined and resourceful heroine was beautiful (although I felt that the Greenland Ham radio scene was a bit tedious to watch), if you have the chance, do watch it in I-MAX or at least 3-D, Ps.I have been playing KSP for months now and ever since I saw Gravity, I have been trying to recreate some of the best Scenes :) looks like others have had better luck !.

and oh, one last irrational nationalistic outburst, Hollywood finally has an Indian out in space and he gets a hole in his face within the first 10 minutes ? :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
loknar

loknar

Posted
Posted

and oh, one last irrational nationalistic outburst, Hollywood finally has an Indian out in space and he gets a hole in his face within the first 10 minutes ? :(

lol !! Absolutely not irrational. I can predict this will be a cliché for space movies in the next 50 years. You don't want to be an Indian in a space movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheBadAstronomer

TheBadAstronomer

Posted
Posted

I recently saw the movie, it was great. I was at the edge of my seat the whole time! Even though some things are scientifically inaccurate, it's just a movie. I don't see why you would talk about the scientifically wrong things before the plot or the theme. For those of you who haven't seen it- go see it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...