Quote:
Originally Posted by Shot From Guns
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripler
Well, c'mon now. . . it is called "science fiction." For a good tale, you have to have serious credibility with each, individual term.
|
There's fictional physics that legitimately allows you to suspend disbelieve (e.g., transporters), and there's fictional physics that's just retarded (e.g., a supernova crumbles a planet in a completely different solar system, with no warning and no travel time for the blast wave, so that no one can evacuate... although somehow Spock knew it was going to happen in time for the Vulcan Science Academy to outfit him with a ship with enough "red matter" to probably destroy the entire quadrant).
Which isn't to say it wasn't a fun film. I liked it a lot. I just have no illusions about how retarded a lot of the science (and plot) was.
|
Well, as Tripler made perfectly obvious, he was only talking about the opening scene. Hell, even
Phil Plait agrees with that.
I agree that the rest of the movie's physics is horrible beyond belief, but that matters not a whit to what once again, Tripler actually said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripler
The opening scene from the new Star Trek. Part the emotion and action, part the cinematography (I know half of it's CGI), and most of it is that they get the physics right!
|