Sunday, May 16, 2010
Monday, May 3, 2010
Monday, April 26, 2010
Monday, April 19, 2010
Scientific Fact or Cinematic Fiction?
Scientific Fact or Cinematic Fiction?
For as long as there have been science fiction movies, there have been the misinterpretations of simple physical laws. Can we blame directors and special effects artists for their uneducated conceptions of how space works? After all, before 1968, no man had ever set foot on anything other than Planet Earth’s soil. Surely after this rare and intriguing experience, most would have the knowledge to implicate much needed science into science fiction. The tragic answer to this would be a giant “no!” Even to this day, high budget, highly ambitious science fiction movies are victims to the ignorance of their creators. Should we feel cheated? Should we feel ripped off? The answer to these questions would also be a giant “no!” Imagine watching Star Wars: A New Hope (1977) and half the movie being in silence. Imagine watching the compelling introduction to Superman (1978) without so much as an exploding Krypton. Surely, Michael Bay’s story-less but highly-budgeted special effect-crammed Armageddon (1998) would be rendered worthless without breaking some laws of outer space. The fact of the matter is, is it’s been proven that explosions in space differ vastly from explosions on Earth. Without oxygen there is nothing to carry a fiery mushroom cloud, and nothing to carry a sound wave. Could it be that our fascination for space can only be kept through lies and glitzy deceptions?
Research has brought us to the conclusion that sound does not travel in space. Since sound is simply a product of sound waves, it uses molecules to travel from the source of the sound to our ears. Simply put, there are air molecules on Earth whereas there are no molecules within the deep vacuum of space. With this in mind, explosions would not be heard on the outside of a space ship, or outside the atmosphere of a planet.
What about a fiery explosion? Could one exist in outer space? Nathan A. Unterman of the NASA Space Science Education Research Directory answers this question online after it’s asked by a firefighter. Unterman explains that there have been controlled experiments in outer space over the years, and all of them have concluded with the fact that there is no gas for oxidation. Without oxidation, there is no combustion. What would an explosion look like? It would probably be nothing more than cracking, colliding and chipping away.
In 1977, Star Wars (later to be renamed Star Wars: A New Hope) blew up in the box office and became, almost by luck and accident, a commercial success and pinnacle sci-fi film. Possessing story elements heavily borrowed from Akira Kurosawa’s The Hidden Fortress, George Lucas was able to eventually bring his space opera to new heights and eventually create a six-movie series. Upon watching this initial, necessary film, one can’t help but notice some of the odd space physics that would later bleed into the other five movies. One scene that comes to mind right away is the Death Star trench scene toward the end of the presentation. The Rebel Alliance carries out an attack on this giant floating orb, and is immediately met with resistance from surface turrets and TIE Fighters (manned space fighters). The fifteen minute scene is jam packed with loud, bright explosions and crashes, and although very exciting, very wrong. All evidence points to the fact that the Death Star is a space station that operates without any traces of atmosphere. Though there are no articles to completely disprove this, it’s apparent in researching the nature of atmosphere in general that leads to this conclusion. Earth’s atmosphere is indicated by a layer of blue gases which from a distance looks like a ring. The Death Star, for all intents and purposes, has no layer of any kind around the outer shell. With no atmosphere, there can be no Earthly explosions.
One year after Star Wars came out, Warner Bros. released Superman: The Movie, starring the late Christopher Reeves as Superman, Gene Hackman as Lex Luthor, and the late Marlon Brando as Superman’s father Jor-El. The movie brought comic-inspired cinema to a new level, ushering in what would eventually be a comic dominated movie market. All of that aside though, it simply had some scientific inconsistencies. There is a scene toward the beginning of the movie where the planet Krypton simply explodes into a million pieces. Apparently this happened because of intense subterranean geothermic activity. Aside from the fact that seismic activity wouldn’t blow up a planet, but at the most just shift it around and cover the surface in ash (the worst recorded in Earthling history was in Tambora, Indonesia, killing 92,000), the issue would once again come back to the fact that the planetary explosion would be silent and rather unromantic.
The following clip shows Krypton being blown up via the Superman: The Movie trailer. In 1:05 of the trailer, Planet Krypton blows up and scatters into a million pieces.
It’s hard to believe that a series of harsh volcanic explosions would blow a planet to bits when (in the following clip) a giant asteroid crash would keep a planet like Planet Earth in tact.
Evidence points to the fact that our planet isn’t made of glass, and if Krypton is supposed to be synonymous of Earth, then chances are likely it wouldn’t explode, just be covered in ash, which would serve the story of Krypton’s destruction just as well.
Surely, the mother of all terribly thought-out science fiction movies has to be Michael Bay’s 1998 blockbuster Armageddon. For most of the movie, the United States government is training Bruce Willis and his ragtag team of oil drillers to eventually land on the surface of an incoming asteroid and reroute its trajectory. The movie is all good and fun, aside from the lackluster acting and dialogue, but when the third act of the movie starts and the cast lands on the actual antagonistic asteroid, all believability goes down the toilet. Watch the following clip.
Upon much thorough study, this compelling scene breaks the laws of space physics, but also breaks the laws of Earth physics. At exactly 14 seconds, a huge spire collapses and crumbles to the ground. When it collides with the asteroid floor, little mini explosions appear upon impact. Would a glacial mass (with an internal temperature of about -100 degrees F) spark an explosion even on Earth? The following footage, though it can only be considered a rough comparison, can possibly serve as an indication that these explosions wouldn’t happen even on Earth.
Even piecing together the evidence that asteroids are made of minerals and rock (specifically remnants left over from the creation of the Solar System), the fact remains that the impact portrayed in the movie would realistically be a lot less dramatic.
Alas, there is still hope for science fiction movies. There have been a few studios that have followed the laws of physics while still making worthwhile and great films. Recently, a “believability report card” was made and posted on the internet:
listing a few names including the Alien Movies, Stargate, and most noticeably 2001: A Space Odyssey. All three were careful about the depiction of explosions in space, either leaving out the issue in general, or portraying them realistically. The truth is that cheesy and unrealistic special effects will never go away, unless directors start filming movies in space, but even then some sound editor will add in explosions in Protools and splice in visual effects to heighten drama. As time goes on though, and we learn more about the universe, these common misconceptions will begin to disappear, and a new and improved standard for science fiction movies will be conceived. Until then, we’ll have to settle with Michael Bay and his middle school education when it comes to reality.
For as long as there have been science fiction movies, there have been the misinterpretations of simple physical laws. Can we blame directors and special effects artists for their uneducated conceptions of how space works? After all, before 1968, no man had ever set foot on anything other than Planet Earth’s soil. Surely after this rare and intriguing experience, most would have the knowledge to implicate much needed science into science fiction. The tragic answer to this would be a giant “no!” Even to this day, high budget, highly ambitious science fiction movies are victims to the ignorance of their creators. Should we feel cheated? Should we feel ripped off? The answer to these questions would also be a giant “no!” Imagine watching Star Wars: A New Hope (1977) and half the movie being in silence. Imagine watching the compelling introduction to Superman (1978) without so much as an exploding Krypton. Surely, Michael Bay’s story-less but highly-budgeted special effect-crammed Armageddon (1998) would be rendered worthless without breaking some laws of outer space. The fact of the matter is, is it’s been proven that explosions in space differ vastly from explosions on Earth. Without oxygen there is nothing to carry a fiery mushroom cloud, and nothing to carry a sound wave. Could it be that our fascination for space can only be kept through lies and glitzy deceptions?
Research has brought us to the conclusion that sound does not travel in space. Since sound is simply a product of sound waves, it uses molecules to travel from the source of the sound to our ears. Simply put, there are air molecules on Earth whereas there are no molecules within the deep vacuum of space. With this in mind, explosions would not be heard on the outside of a space ship, or outside the atmosphere of a planet.
What about a fiery explosion? Could one exist in outer space? Nathan A. Unterman of the NASA Space Science Education Research Directory answers this question online after it’s asked by a firefighter. Unterman explains that there have been controlled experiments in outer space over the years, and all of them have concluded with the fact that there is no gas for oxidation. Without oxidation, there is no combustion. What would an explosion look like? It would probably be nothing more than cracking, colliding and chipping away.
In 1977, Star Wars (later to be renamed Star Wars: A New Hope) blew up in the box office and became, almost by luck and accident, a commercial success and pinnacle sci-fi film. Possessing story elements heavily borrowed from Akira Kurosawa’s The Hidden Fortress, George Lucas was able to eventually bring his space opera to new heights and eventually create a six-movie series. Upon watching this initial, necessary film, one can’t help but notice some of the odd space physics that would later bleed into the other five movies. One scene that comes to mind right away is the Death Star trench scene toward the end of the presentation. The Rebel Alliance carries out an attack on this giant floating orb, and is immediately met with resistance from surface turrets and TIE Fighters (manned space fighters). The fifteen minute scene is jam packed with loud, bright explosions and crashes, and although very exciting, very wrong. All evidence points to the fact that the Death Star is a space station that operates without any traces of atmosphere. Though there are no articles to completely disprove this, it’s apparent in researching the nature of atmosphere in general that leads to this conclusion. Earth’s atmosphere is indicated by a layer of blue gases which from a distance looks like a ring. The Death Star, for all intents and purposes, has no layer of any kind around the outer shell. With no atmosphere, there can be no Earthly explosions.
One year after Star Wars came out, Warner Bros. released Superman: The Movie, starring the late Christopher Reeves as Superman, Gene Hackman as Lex Luthor, and the late Marlon Brando as Superman’s father Jor-El. The movie brought comic-inspired cinema to a new level, ushering in what would eventually be a comic dominated movie market. All of that aside though, it simply had some scientific inconsistencies. There is a scene toward the beginning of the movie where the planet Krypton simply explodes into a million pieces. Apparently this happened because of intense subterranean geothermic activity. Aside from the fact that seismic activity wouldn’t blow up a planet, but at the most just shift it around and cover the surface in ash (the worst recorded in Earthling history was in Tambora, Indonesia, killing 92,000), the issue would once again come back to the fact that the planetary explosion would be silent and rather unromantic.
The following clip shows Krypton being blown up via the Superman: The Movie trailer. In 1:05 of the trailer, Planet Krypton blows up and scatters into a million pieces.
It’s hard to believe that a series of harsh volcanic explosions would blow a planet to bits when (in the following clip) a giant asteroid crash would keep a planet like Planet Earth in tact.
Evidence points to the fact that our planet isn’t made of glass, and if Krypton is supposed to be synonymous of Earth, then chances are likely it wouldn’t explode, just be covered in ash, which would serve the story of Krypton’s destruction just as well.
Surely, the mother of all terribly thought-out science fiction movies has to be Michael Bay’s 1998 blockbuster Armageddon. For most of the movie, the United States government is training Bruce Willis and his ragtag team of oil drillers to eventually land on the surface of an incoming asteroid and reroute its trajectory. The movie is all good and fun, aside from the lackluster acting and dialogue, but when the third act of the movie starts and the cast lands on the actual antagonistic asteroid, all believability goes down the toilet. Watch the following clip.
Upon much thorough study, this compelling scene breaks the laws of space physics, but also breaks the laws of Earth physics. At exactly 14 seconds, a huge spire collapses and crumbles to the ground. When it collides with the asteroid floor, little mini explosions appear upon impact. Would a glacial mass (with an internal temperature of about -100 degrees F) spark an explosion even on Earth? The following footage, though it can only be considered a rough comparison, can possibly serve as an indication that these explosions wouldn’t happen even on Earth.
Even piecing together the evidence that asteroids are made of minerals and rock (specifically remnants left over from the creation of the Solar System), the fact remains that the impact portrayed in the movie would realistically be a lot less dramatic.
Alas, there is still hope for science fiction movies. There have been a few studios that have followed the laws of physics while still making worthwhile and great films. Recently, a “believability report card” was made and posted on the internet:
listing a few names including the Alien Movies, Stargate, and most noticeably 2001: A Space Odyssey. All three were careful about the depiction of explosions in space, either leaving out the issue in general, or portraying them realistically. The truth is that cheesy and unrealistic special effects will never go away, unless directors start filming movies in space, but even then some sound editor will add in explosions in Protools and splice in visual effects to heighten drama. As time goes on though, and we learn more about the universe, these common misconceptions will begin to disappear, and a new and improved standard for science fiction movies will be conceived. Until then, we’ll have to settle with Michael Bay and his middle school education when it comes to reality.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Outline for Research Paper
Introduction
Most movies involving space explosions depict the explosions as being similar to explosions on Earth.
In physical terms, this is wrong.
At least three movies break this physical law.
- Superman (1978)
- Star Wars (1977)
- Armageddon (1998)
Body Paragraphs
Paragraph 1
- There is no sound or oxygen in space.
- Therefor, oxygen would not be able to expand, and "explosions" wouldn't be heard or seen.
- Explosions in the vacuum of space would be very different from Earth explosions.
Paragraph 2
- The image of explosions in space are different from explosions within an atmosphere.
- Superman depicts the explosion of Krypton and it's sun in a very hockey, 1970's way.
- Star Wars is riddled with space explosions. Everything from Alderon to the Death Star exploding.
- Armageddon is the worst! Explosions happen all over the antagonistic asteroid and the law of physics never apply.
Paragraph 3
- Some movies follow the physics of space, like Firefly/Serenity.
- Battlestar: Galactica
Conclusion
- Sci fi has a reputation for not following physics.
- Though breaking the rules makes for better movies, it also makes the movies that much more fantastical.
- Sci fi is slowly trying to become more credible.
Introduction
Most movies involving space explosions depict the explosions as being similar to explosions on Earth.
In physical terms, this is wrong.
At least three movies break this physical law.
- Superman (1978)
- Star Wars (1977)
- Armageddon (1998)
Body Paragraphs
Paragraph 1
- There is no sound or oxygen in space.
- Therefor, oxygen would not be able to expand, and "explosions" wouldn't be heard or seen.
- Explosions in the vacuum of space would be very different from Earth explosions.
Paragraph 2
- The image of explosions in space are different from explosions within an atmosphere.
- Superman depicts the explosion of Krypton and it's sun in a very hockey, 1970's way.
- Star Wars is riddled with space explosions. Everything from Alderon to the Death Star exploding.
- Armageddon is the worst! Explosions happen all over the antagonistic asteroid and the law of physics never apply.
Paragraph 3
- Some movies follow the physics of space, like Firefly/Serenity.
- Battlestar: Galactica
Conclusion
- Sci fi has a reputation for not following physics.
- Though breaking the rules makes for better movies, it also makes the movies that much more fantastical.
- Sci fi is slowly trying to become more credible.
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Stop-Motion Character Animation
The road to making Yolked was a long, tedious one, involving strenuous efforts by the co-creators, Jay Hasrajani and Michael Harding. The original idea was set in stone, but often the objects used for the characters were changed and modified until we could use something affordable and convenient for stop motion animation. Voice acting played a very important role, along with other featured sound effects and music. We are very proud to present our short film Yolked.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)