Jump to content

Gravity (Movie)

Zacho

By Zacho
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

Camacha

Camacha

Posted
Posted (edited)
Con column anything related to orbital mechanics, life support, etc.

They took a couple of pretty relevant liberties, but also got a lot right. The typical issues you see in other movies seem to be largely avoided.

Bullock was pretty good, though a convincing female astronaut she was not. I understand this was needed for the movie, but somehow feel it might have been better if things were executed a little more subtle, rather than the helpless-girl-in-space-act. That might also have helped with the general perception of women in STEM professions and in space, as there are some wonderful human beings involved in the various real life programs which were a little short-changed because of these choices. It did make for a couple of good tear jerking scenes though.

Edited by Camacha
Link to comment
Share on other sites
KerbMav

KerbMav

Posted
Posted (edited)
Now I just wish I would have seen it in theatres, as I think the pretty pictures are much more impressive there and I cannot even imagine what it looks like in 3D.

I make a point to not paying extra for 3D movies whenever possible, rare exceptions for friends' birthdays etc., but this one time was really worth it.

Bullock was pretty good, though a convincing female astronaut she was not. I understand this was needed for the movie, but somehow feel it might have been better if things were executed a little more subtle, rather than the helpless-girl-in-space-act.

Training is one thing, the mulch hitting the fan something else entirely - how many real men were reduced to a sobbing mess (nothing wrong here) by their dog dying, their child missing, their first enemy contact ...

Although I kinda doubt that NASA's psych evaluation would have missed her trauma - but would that have been reason enough to exclude her from the program?

Edited by KerbMav
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tater

tater

Posted
Posted

Perhaps I just tend to concentrate on what they got wrong. I was more concerned with the debris hitting all 3 spacecraft, including enough mv change to debit the chinese station in 90 minutes. This implies the same orbit, but in the opposite direction. You could assume shuttle and ISS being co-orbital, but a chinese station? Why, when their space center is a few degrees south of Baikonur (~41 vs 45 degrees)? The whole point the spacecraft at a target 100km away and drive there, which is intuitive to anyone unfamiliar with orbital mechanics, and unintuitive to anyone who is.

It looked good, and was a fun, action movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
A1Ch1

A1Ch1

Posted
Posted

Debris traveling retrograde would intersect every 45 minutes. An elliptical debris field in a polar orbit of maybe 250 km x 800 km and an argument of perigee near ISS orbital plane would intersect every 90 minutes, as unlikely as that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Camacha

Camacha

Posted
Posted
Training is one thing, the mulch hitting the fan something else entirely - how many real men were reduced to a sobbing mess (nothing wrong here) by their dog dying, their child missing, their first enemy contact ...

They portray her as a mess before anything goes awry. Never does she look like the typical astronauts we know and love.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
Alshain

Alshain

Posted
Posted

Saw it just recently. There were really only 2 things that bugged me about this movie.

1. the fact that they went from Hubble to the ISS to the chinese station with an EVA pack while dragging someone. Isn't the ISS in a polar orbit and the Hubble in an equatorial orbit? That EVA pack had that much Delta V?

2. When George Clooney fell off a cliff had phantom forces pulling him away from her despite that she had already halted his relative momentum. Did he really have to die? I mean, if she let go, wouldn't he stay where he was, or really when she pulled the strap, he would have come back to her.

I just want to thank Squad and Kerbal Space Program for ruining movies for me :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bill Phil

Bill Phil

Posted
Posted
Saw it just recently. There were really only 2 things that bugged me about this movie.

1. the fact that they went from Hubble to the ISS to the chinese station with an EVA pack while dragging someone. Isn't the ISS in a polar orbit and the Hubble in an equatorial orbit? That EVA pack had that much Delta V?

2. When George Clooney fell off a cliff had phantom forces pulling him away from her despite that she had already halted his relative momentum. Did he really have to die? I mean, if she let go, wouldn't he stay where he was, or really when she pulled the strap, he would have come back to her.

I just want to thank Squad and Kerbal Space Program for ruining movies for me :P

Actually, Hubble is probably at 28.5 degrees, and the ISS at about 51.6.

Not only that, but also the fact that they're at different altitudes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nikolai

Nikolai

Posted
Posted
When George Clooney had phantom forces pulling him away from her despite that she had already halted his relative momentum.

Careful photographic analysis in this very thread has rather conclusively demonstrated that she had not halted his relative momentum. (Angular momentum is a thing.) So you can reduce the number of things that bug you about this movie to one. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cydonian Monk

Cydonian Monk

Posted
Posted
1. the fact that they went from Hubble to the ISS to the chinese station with an EVA pack while dragging someone. Isn't the ISS in a polar orbit and the Hubble in an equatorial orbit? That EVA pack had that much Delta V?
Actually, Hubble is probably at 28.5 degrees, and the ISS at about 51.6.

That's only, what, ~3000m/s of ∆v for the first plane change? Surely most MMUs have that in the pack. (With an error of +/- 2990m/s, of course.)

Movie was recommended to me.. then I saw the cast.... Hollywood trying to make it 'attractive'.... NEXT !! :cool:

I might watch it one day... if I'm really.. really bored.. but that would be a rare occasion..

It really isn't a bad movie, but it's also not much of a movie story-wise. It's does have its issues. Very pretty to watch for the most part, especially so in IMAX. (It's far less impressive at home.) When I saw it in the theater I spent more time looking over the HST and the particulars of the Atlantis' cargo bay than I did the "movie" parts of the movie. (And I'm still amused that the accompaniment music for the Space Shuttle scene is identified on the Soundtrack as "Atlantis" instead of the name the shuttle was changed to for the movie.)

And besides, it's got Ed Harris in it hiding somewhere down in Mission Control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Superfluous J

Superfluous J

Posted
Posted

It was a fun "(wo)man vs nature" movie, where 'nature' was mostly man made stuff and handwavy physics. If you go into it thinking you're going to see War and Peace in Space, then that's your own problem. If you don't go to see it because George Clooney is too pretty, then not only is that your own problem but you probably made the right choice because you won't like the movie.

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...