I would argue Bladerunner wasn't the worst offender, only because it set in the distant future. Maybe 2019 is so distant, but I could see technology that rebuilds an image out of the reflection of a cabinet in a time where flying cars are abundant. I am dissapointed more so when such technology is used in present day settings.
#9 - invisible force field isnt science. it's not a movie mistake. heck it's not even tech. it's a superpower just like spiderman/superman and all super heroes.
lights can be bent actually, see gravitational lens.
#11 - meh.... it's not the worst, it just makes a good story line no tech involve.
#12 - i play metal solid gear 4, must not ruin it. same as #11
#15 - mythbusters ACTUALLY made a remote controlled car. it's still plausible.
Zorro is really the worst for bullets. In one scene, a man is jumping through the air until he is hit by a bullet which sends him flying in the opposite direction. Meanwhile, the shooter is not moved at all. Where did all that extra force come from?
And yet, are these Movies called SciFi or Action or Thrillers..... you really can't possibly expect such movies to be Real.... or they might just need to be put into a different Genre all together.
Kate , I don't think you've had a chance to see TRON as yet...... or Push, or Jumper.... really. Of course each one is welcome to his/her pov but this is really pushing it a bit too far, people aren't going into to watch Star Wars to see Operation Desert Storm the first, they want to see the Death Star and Darth Vader no, GW Bush in action. With Reese and Gang as the sidekicks or the Senate Members..... Though public Opinion would want to see Palin as Demi Moore in Striptease but... try asking her that. Reality and Movies/Hollywood.... are 2 different dimensions we Humans Like to live in.
I could agree with you only on the IT related stuff, but yes, as you have very correctly stated it's for the benefit of the viewers who have never seen or worked on a computer console.
[citation][nom]izmanq[/nom]most of these so called "mistakes" are actually plausible :| perhaps kate gammon has lack of creative mind[/citation]
Being able to justify it in your creative mind does not mean they are plausible
What about the security guys fending off hackers at their keyboard
Tap tap tap – “Woah this guys good” tap tap tap “Ha – got him”.
What the hell are they typing to each other? – it’s like a computer dance-off!
In reality you just block the incoming connection.
And when a private system is being hacked, you block all incoming connections – the cost of having a system off line is far lower than what the hacker will cost you.
So, as we figured out in the previous page, lasers are visible light. Anything that stops visible light will stop them – anything visible light can pass through, they can pass through. So how on Earth do they get stopped by invisible fields?
What if i argue (since it's fun) and say that light is energy, and invisible force fields absorb energy. A sort of kinetic barrier. Photons have no rest mass, but they have mass in motion, and hence have momentum. So the force field can do sh*t to the light beam or whatever.
[citation][nom]alyoshka[/nom]My god, how many times have I had people frown at me for laughing at a perfectly thrilling scene.[/citation]
Haha. I know what you mean. Rajnikanth. :lol:
Kate, you obviously have never used Microsoft Windows as an operating system if you state computers no longer make noises during use.
Windows is constantly making beeps on errors, chimes, e-mail alerts, clicking noises moving from one directory to another or just selecting files and opening them, clicking on hyperlinks, changing themes, logging on or off, waking up from sleep mode, or entering sleep mode, warning about low battery levels, some enhanced options make it speak to you and interact without typing! (reserved for disabled or otherwise normally) need I go on??? come on!! ;-) not an accurate statement at all. I'd say they make many more sounds these days
Dunno why my last replay didn't post either. strange!
Kate, one more bone to pick, then i'll leave you alone. Genetic Memory. Please explain how if what you say is true that "There's absolutely no scientific evidence that any living organism can store its experiences in its genetic code and pass it on to its offspring." how a baby knows when to breath, move it's eyes, suck it's thumb, cry or stop crying. How about a bird know how to call for food, eat, know how to snuggle. What about the pre-programmed ability to self program and learn! i'd say this is all passed on in a genetic assembly and good evidence to support it too. Call it reflex if you will, it is passed on and i'd even call it amazing abilities to an extent. Life would not be possible without some sort of passed on information for working. Hard wired maybe ;-)
shades_aus has a point.
About Star Trek, being a fan and all, Shinzon was not a perfect clone. The plot says that his DNA was altered to enable accelerated aging at a specific age in Shinzon's life(which is not a small feat). Trouble is that Shinzon is abandoned by Romulus, and the accelerated aging is never triggered. This was not suppose to happen, and leads to his DNA illness. I can not remember if his condition could be cured.
Leaving all this aside... I find part of this article misleading because it picks on SF movies, which are created around this Science - FICTION base, if you get my meaning,.
I agree with the author too, but only on some of her points(I'm an IT guy). Points 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 15 and 16 I agree with. The rest, are debatable.(for example point 2, adobe has some excellent tools, like "deblurring" filter, and this is right now, not with future tech)
Although I criticized the article, I also enjoyed reading it, and I liked that someone points out that the movies are not a good place to learn how the world really works and science in particular.