Gargantua Black Hole

Use a rocket to launch from the Earth, use one of those tiny shuttles to launch from a planet with more mass than Earth...

I found it took a lot of liberties with science, but I enjoyed it, or would have if I had not had a migraine during about half of the movie.
The wizards doing the things was fine. What bothered me was
how fixing the gravity equation fixed all of their food problems so they can populate super stations with Earth-like conditions instead of tossing everyone into stasis. Also, that 70 years later, they still haven't gone through the wormhole to settle the planet (which became completely moot with their super stations). With all the time that passed, Hathaway should have arrived to find the planet already settled with Plan A (having sent more recon missions to scout the planets).
 
Last edited:
I have not watched that yet. I heard so many mixed reviews that I just haven't got around to it. Been re-watching Firefly instead, which I know you'll appreciate based on your avatar. :)
Iinterstellar is not a film about the story of the people involved. It is a story about science.

That is to say, the science is the main character, and everyone else is following it.

When watched from this perspective, the movie is fascinating.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

The wizards doing the things was fine. What bothered me was
how fixing the gravity equation fixed all of their food problems so they can populate super stations with Earth-like conditions instead of tossing everyone into stasis. Also, that 70 years later, they still haven't gone through the wormhole to settle the planet (which became completely moot with their super stations). With all the time that passed, Hathaway should have arrived to find the planet already settled with Plan A (having sent more recon missions to scout the planets).

They didn't, because they had absolutely no need to. It takes more work to terraform a planet than it does to build an orbital station. It simply isn't cost effective.
 
Iinterstellar is not a film about the story of the people involved. It is a story about science.

That is to say, the science is the main character, and everyone else is following it.

When watched from this perspective, the movie is fascinating.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



They didn't, because they had absolutely no need to. It takes more work to terraform a planet than it does to build an orbital station. It simply isn't cost effective.

Err...Interstellar is a movie about the power of love and its ability to transcend distance and time. It's not about science. Much of the science in the film is actually pretty iffy. It's my favorite movie in quite some time though. I don't get why some people don't like it.
 
They didn't, because they had absolutely no need to. It takes more work to terraform a planet than it does to build an orbital station. It simply isn't cost effective.
There's no reason to park their stations so far from the Sun where solar intensity is tiny if they are permanent. Or to park their stations near the wormhole if they have no intention of going through.
 
Err...Interstellar is a movie about the power of love and its ability to transcend distance and time. It's not about science. Much of the science in the film is actually pretty iffy. It's my favorite movie in quite some time though. I don't get why some people don't like it.
Umm. No it isn't.

The "power of love" thing was a minor subplot, and that was only Brand's initial choice to go to the dude she loved's planet first. Its literally about theoretical physics. You need to pay closer attention to the movie. Communicating with his daughter had nothing to do with love, it had everything to do with humans introducing a causality loop because they have transcended "distance and time", not the petty emotions of a couple people. They stated that it was "love", from the characters standpoint, but the whole point of every minute of the movie was the science behind how it happened.

The idea is that humankind needed to crack gravity, but it was a loop in time caused by what is speculated to be us at a point so far in the future we exist outside of time, and thus can control it.

Much of the science in the film was in fact based on what we currently know, and has been lauded by many physicists, including bill nye and NGD, aka black science man. Whoever told you the science sucked was wrong. The director himself has even stated that much of what took place in the film, especially the effects, was kept as accurate as possible except where certain liberties had to be taken in the interest of advancing the plot.

In fact, many critics have complained that the movie puts the characters aside too often in an attempt to convey a scientific explanation for things.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

They put it there partly to study the wormhole, and partly as a bit of a monument to the events that saved humanity.
 
Last edited:
Interstellar is mediocre movie at best. One time show. My disappointment was almost on same level as with the Prometheus.

With that said, Gargantua is a pretty cool name :)
 
"Sphere of Annihilation" would be great for a black hole... :)
Being completely nocked out by influenza right now, I think I will have to give Elite a break and lie down on the sofa watching "The Black Hole" and "Event Horizon" back to back... the have... peculiar similarities.. :)
 
Yeah.. the last part was worse than I remembered it... Think I prefered The Black Hole today... the humongus Cygnus is just classier than the more reasonable-sized Event Horizon.... and my tolerance level for goofy robots was way high today.
 
Umm. No it isn't.

The "power of love" thing was a minor subplot, and that was only Brand's initial choice to go to the dude she loved's planet first. Its literally about theoretical physics. You need to pay closer attention to the movie. Communicating with his daughter had nothing to do with love, it had everything to do with humans introducing a causality loop because they have transcended "distance and time", not the petty emotions of a couple people. They stated that it was "love", from the characters standpoint, but the whole point of every minute of the movie was the science behind how it happened.

The idea is that humankind needed to crack gravity, but it was a loop in time caused by what is speculated to be us at a point so far in the future we exist outside of time, and thus can control it.

Much of the science in the film was in fact based on what we currently know, and has been lauded by many physicists, including bill nye and NGD, aka black science man. Whoever told you the science sucked was wrong. The director himself has even stated that much of what took place in the film, especially the effects, was kept as accurate as possible except where certain liberties had to be taken in the interest of advancing the plot.

In fact, many critics have complained that the movie puts the characters aside too often in an attempt to convey a scientific explanation for things.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

They put it there partly to study the wormhole, and partly as a bit of a monument to the events that saved humanity.

You completely failed to understand the movie. Christopher Nolan always directs movies with a certain central concept, and trust me, in this one it wasn't "science". That would be like saying Memento was about memories or Inception was about dreams. You have mistaken the means for the end. And no one told me the science sucked. I know the science sucked (not all of it, but some of it), because I know the basics of physics and Newtonian space travel. From the way they could land and take off from planets in a ship that needed rocket boosters to escape Earth's gravity, to the completely unrealistic way the gravity of the black hole worked (where do I even begin?), to the seemingly instant travel speeds between various worlds on the other side of the wormhole, to the existence of a planet within the gravity field of a black hole, there's so much wrong with the science in that movie. Interstellar is about the connections between humans and their ability to transcend our "four dimensions", or in other words the power of love. I have no idea how you came to the conclusion that the connection between the Coopers was a "minor subplot" since it is what allows virtually everything in the movie to happen, and again much of what happens, especially "inside the black hole" is very unscientific.
 
Explaining wormholes with folded paper and pencil...patronising. Lovely looking film, decent action sequences, too much exposition, 3rd act utter tosh.

In defence, Exposition is hard to get around when the population at large is ignorant of the science. Really...how would you explain the concept of the Einstein Rosen Bridge to say...a 12 year old kid? There is a reason some of it happens, and while it is not cool...there is no way around it.
 
Back
Top Bottom