What was the last film you watched?

[ian]

I'm thinking we base it on Rentaghost. Really, I'm writing the script in my head right now.

[Wascally Weasel]

It seems to be the way of ageing male SF writers towards the end of their careers to flog to death the very things that made their names.  Arthur C. Clarke with his pretty bad later Rama books (the less said about the third Odyssey book the better)* and Frank Herbert taking a huge dump on the Dune franchise, although nowhere near as badly as his son Brian and Kevin J. Anderson did, with prequels that made the Star Wars prequels look like Shaft. That was a veritable airstrike of ordure.

Ridley Scott is just continuing in that fine tradition through the medium of film.  I genuinely wonder if he is ruminating on mortality and his thoughts are turning towards the spiritual – hence Kingdom of Heaven**, Exodus: Gods & Kings and the religious aspects of Prometheus?  I remember towards the end of Johnny Cash’s career his songs got a lot more questioning (although he did record a lot of Gospel songs way back too).  A far cry from the wonderful nastiness of “I shot a man in Reno, just to watch him die”.

He can feel Satan’s hand-mine clutching at his ankle maybe. 



*Arthur C. Clarke got a lot of the science around space travel very right in his early books, hardly surprising considering he was contributing to the actual science at the time.  Like an awful lot of SF authors, he wasn’t that accurate about computers – either overstating their potential development (HAL) – or understating it.  There’s a bit in one of his books, possibly Odyssey 2010 where a character speculates on a line, I think from Shakespeare and then sets a computer to find out where it’s from. I can’t remember but it takes something like 15 to 20 minutes to churn it out.

On rereading the book at some point in the mid 2000s I idly speculated on how long it would take an actual computer to do that now.  I think from thinking that to finding it out took about three minutes, most of which was time spent walking to the room my PC was in and then powering up and logging on.

Now, finding that out would probably only take as long as the time to type or speak the search line into my phone.

Very few people really truly predicted the absolute ubiquity of hand held mobile computing that we now experience.  Iain Banks at a book reading was talking about the ‘Terminals’ that people in the Culture use – he held up his iPhone and said “This is it, here and now” (actually he was talking about SF at the time so I suppose it was Iain M. Banks talking but he was physically co-located with Iain Banks at the time. Neither seemed to mind).***

** Which is a fine film, especially in the Director’s Cut.  No it is. Shut up.

*** I was once told categorically by a bookshop owner on the Kentish Town Road that they were two different people and would not be convinced they were one of the same, I think because of genre fiction prejudice reasons.  My assertion that I had met them both about a fortnight before and bought them a beer it at a book signing fell on wilfully deaf ears (only one beer. They shared it).

[mrcharly-YHT]

Ridley Scott is just continuing in that fine tradition through the medium of film.  I genuinely wonder if he is ruminating on mortality and his thoughts are turning towards the spiritual – hence Kingdom of Heaven**,

I'm pretty sure that the last words said in that film are "If this is the kingdom of heaven, god can keep it." or something very like that.

I actually liked that film, and liked it more when I found out it was largely based on historical events (it was three brothers who bankrupted themselves ransoming the citizens of the entire city).

[hillbilly]

Hunger Games: Mockingjay part 1

Quite faithful to the book, which is a problem because the last book of the trilogy was boring.  As always for films with this budget, there were some good scenes. The night raid springs to mind.  But it just doesn't have a strong enough progression.

[Asterix, the former Gaul.]

Everest  Not i-max.  Very believable portrayal of what it must be like both the trophy-hunting competitiveness to the way in which extreme conditions can bite you on the bum very fast.   

[hillbilly]

Everest convinced me that the very small part of me that was thinking about how cool it would be to climb to the Roof of the World can STFU.  It's just not in my DNA to put myself in that kind of position.  Even when the conditions looked good in the film, it still appeared a hostile environment.  I guess that means that it is a fairly good representation of the challenge such things represents.

[LEE]

The Martian.

Pretty good.  7/10.

Rather like Gravity but slower-paced.  I liked the problem-solving aspect that ran throughout the film.  Like a tense version of Lemmings.

Watched it in 2D as I've had enough of wearing Buddy Holly glasses for limited benefit.

I've not been to the cinema for a while now and, to be honest, I think it's only worth going if:

1) You absolutely must see the film right now (it's bloody expensive)

2) You don't have a big TV, Blu-Ray player and external sound system. (The quality on a decent home system is right up there now).

3) You don't mind the distraction of everyone around you feeding their face for 2 hours. (I do mind it.  I never understood the link between watching a film and constant grazing).

[T42]

Everest convinced me that the very small part of me that was thinking about how cool it would be to climb to the Roof of the World can STFU.  It's just not in my DNA to put myself in that kind of position.  Even when the conditions looked good in the film, it still appeared a hostile environment.  I guess that means that it is a fairly good representation of the challenge such things represents.

Haven't seen Everest.  Touching the Void remains the best climbing film I've seen, though North Face is pretty good too.

[Kim]

The Martian.

Pretty good.  7/10.

Rather like Gravity but slower-paced.  I liked the problem-solving aspect that ran throughout the film.  Like a tense version of Lemmings.

The rumours on the interwebs are that it's surprisingly Not Shit.  I eagerly await ian's review.

I've not been to the cinema for a while now and, to be honest, I think it's only worth going if:

1) You absolutely must see the film right now (it's bloody expensive)

2) You don't have a big TV, Blu-Ray player and external sound system. (The quality on a decent home system is right up there now).

3) You don't mind the distraction of everyone around you feeding their face for 2 hours. (I do mind it.  I never understood the link between watching a film and constant grazing).

I'm inclined to agree.

also:

4) You don't mind someone else setting the sound level (invariably slightly too high, unless it's a sufficiently small or arty cinema that still employs projectionists).

5) Subtitles.  Good luck with those, unless it's in Forrin.

6) Crap seats, mobile phones, smells, sticky floor, lack of loo breaks, etc.


Also, as my vision has deteriorated to the point where big screens are limited to PAL resolution without wearing my glasses (which are inevitably scratched and smudged, if not actively uncomfortable), I've developed a general preference for watching small screens at close range.  With headphones, because a decent set of cans beats umpty.1 surround any day.  This makes me a philistine, I'm sure.

[ian]

Hmm, I'm not scheduled to see The Martian yet. It might make a decentish movie, Robinson Crusoe vs. Apollo 13. That's a big stretchy elastic inadvertent-whack-you-in-the-face band of a might.

I only see movies in the Imax these days which offers a very big screen (the biggest in the UK or Europe, depending on who's doing the intro and what day it is) and a vaguely civilized environment, the ticket prices keep the riff-raff out and we book the posh seats at the back, so generally there's no mobile phone interruptions or chronic chatterers. They still hold with the idea that crunchy, scratchy food and gloopy sauces are compatible with (a) watching a movie and (b) in the dark. Generally the Imax sound is seismically loud enough to drown out the most determined tortilla chip cruncher and the torch function on a mobile phone ensures you don't sit in the last showing's spilled cheesy gloop and salsa.

The last time I went to normal cinema it was basically like sitting in the grubby living room of a family of inveterate crisp munchers who weren't about to pause their mobile conversation for anything other than to shovel more junk into into their maw.

[T42]

The Martian.

Pretty good.  7/10.

Rather like Gravity but slower-paced.  I liked the problem-solving aspect that ran throughout the film.  Like a tense version of Lemmings.

The rumours on the interwebs are that it's surprisingly Not Shit...

(click to show/hide)

... apart from the lander being in danger of being tipped by the wind.  In the BBC's Space Odyssey: Voyage to the Planets they show a bloke walking through a Martian tornado without a stumble. They got it right.

I suppose the author couldn't think of any other emergency that would suit.

[Kim]

The Martian.

Pretty good.  7/10.

Rather like Gravity but slower-paced.  I liked the problem-solving aspect that ran throughout the film.  Like a tense version of Lemmings.

The rumours on the interwebs are that it's surprisingly Not Shit...

(click to show/hide)

... apart from the lander being in danger of being tipped by the wind.  In the BBC's Space Odyssey: Voyage to the Planets they show a bloke walking through a Martian tornado without a stumble. They got it right.

I suppose the author couldn't think of any other emergency that would suit.

(click to show/hide)

Yes.  We know.  Science fiction's allowed one plot device.  Anyway, it's a sequel to Sharknado 3, so that's not just any storm...

I agree that something more scientifically plausible might be better, but I suppose it would have to be a chain of improbable events (as real world disasters so often are), which doesn't lend itself to good drama.

[fuzzy]

Question re the science relating to The Martian.

How dense is the atmosphere on Mars at 'Sea Level' in relation to at the summit of Everest?

I ask cos the air is almost too thin to breathe on Everest but it can truly cause serious damage can't it?

[ian]

Question re the science relating to The Martian.

How dense is the atmosphere on Mars at 'Sea Level' in relation to at the summit of Everest?

I ask cos the air is almost too thin to breathe on Everest but it can truly cause serious damage can't it?

Atmospheric pressure at whatever passes for sea-level on Mars is about 0.09 psi (just over half a per cent Earth mean sea level)

Everest is about 5 psi (I use old units because we're bicyclists), so the pressure on Mars is about 2% the top of Everest. It's also mostly (95%) carbon dioxide.

Not much scope for a windy day.

High altitude is bad in two main ways, oxygen deprivation and oedema caused by the reduced pressure. You'd die pretty quick outside on Mars.

[hillbilly]

You die pretty quickly outside on Mars? Yes, I remember that from Total Recall

[Chris S]

In fairness, the author does admit he stretched credulity with the wind strength. Shame it was such a fundamental plot point  .

[mattc]

You die pretty quickly outside on Mars? Yes, I remember that from Total Recall

Bzzt

(click to show/hide)

That was during an implanted memory,  so should not be taken as science "fact".

(just to be safe... )

[Jaded]

You die pretty quickly outside on Mars? Yes, I remember that from Total Recall

Bzzt

(click to show/hide)

That was during an implanted memory,  so should not be taken as science "fact".

(just to be safe... )

(click to show/hide)

You can't be serious?

(click to show/hide)

[Mr Larrington]

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

That looks like Noddy Holder having a VERY bad day

[spesh]

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

That looks like Noddy Holder having a VERY bad day

(click to show/hide)

Belting out 'Rock & Roll Preacher' can do that to a man... 

[T42]

The Martian.

Pretty good.  7/10.

Rather like Gravity but slower-paced.  I liked the problem-solving aspect that ran throughout the film.  Like a tense version of Lemmings.

The rumours on the interwebs are that it's surprisingly Not Shit...

(click to show/hide)

... apart from the lander being in danger of being tipped by the wind.  In the BBC's Space Odyssey: Voyage to the Planets they show a bloke walking through a Martian tornado without a stumble. They got it right.

I suppose the author couldn't think of any other emergency that would suit.

(click to show/hide)

Yes.  We know.  Science fiction's allowed one plot device.  Anyway, it's a sequel to Sharknado 3, so that's not just any storm...

I agree that something more scientifically plausible might be better, but I suppose it would have to be a chain of improbable events (as real world disasters so often are), which doesn't lend itself to good drama.

Yebbut it's so fucking elementary.    Even Gravity didn't strain physics quite so offensively.

[ian]

My gripe about That Book wasn't the liberties with science, but that people keep saying it's so accurate. Which since it starts with a clanger (sadly not an actual Clanger) and then in the couple of chapters I managed, several others, it's evidently not very accurate.

[Kim]

My gripe about That Book wasn't the liberties with science, but that people keep saying it's so accurate. Which since it starts with a clanger (sadly not an actual Clanger) and then in the couple of chapters I managed, several others, it's evidently not very accurate.

It's really not.  Even without the storm or the complete failure to address radiation^[1], the hydrazine thing is ridiculously impractical.  And let's not mention the natural curiosity of potatoes.  And when's the last time you transcribed hundreds of bytes by hand without cocking it up?  While wearing a spacesuit?  It's hard enough in a computer lab.

But hey, it's mainstream fiction with real science (rather than fantasy science^[2] or technobabble) driving the plot.  Where engineering competence - and, indeed, failure - is celebrated, rather than feared.  People are saying it's so accurate, but what they mean is that it's making a proper effort not to dumb things down, that this is refreshing, and they want more.

It's MacGyver for the generation who don't remember mullets.  MacGyver was awesome.  Yes, he frequently got the chemistry (deliberately) wrong, and credibility was stretched several times per episode.  But the other half was plausible, and he was an all-American scientifically competent hero who brought a swiss army knife to a gunfight, and won.  Repeatedly.

More of this sort of thing.  Then it can get better.  Maybe people will make exciting films about expeditions to Mars where nothing goes catastrophically wrong.  Maybe people will see them, be inspired, and go on expeditions to Mars.

Or they could just give up and make another film about gangsters and lawyers instead, because nobody^[3] whines about those being unrealistic.


^{[1] Except by hanging a lampshade on the RTG.
[2] The delightful Tony Stark is disqualified on this basis, sadly.
[3] I'm sure there's a legal equivalent of badastronomy.com out there somewhere.}

[citoyen]

And when's the last time you transcribed hundreds of bytes by hand without cocking it up?  While wearing a spacesuit?  It's hard enough in a computer lab.

Never. I've absolutely NEVER managed it. I used to spend hours upon hours typing in code from Commodore 64 magazines back in the 80s, and I don't think I got a single one of those programs to work. EVER. And yet I would never learn my lesson, putting myself through the whole Sisyphean rigmarole again when the next month's issue came out...

[mattc]

It's MacGyver for the generation who don't remember mullets.  MacGyver was awesome.  Yes, he frequently got the chemistry (deliberately) wrong, and credibility was stretched several times per episode.  But the other half was plausible, and he was an all-American scientifically competent hero who brought a swiss army knife to a gunfight, and won.  Repeatedly.

Point of Order (whilst noting that I basically agree with the Hon Mem's speech):
I don't think anyone in the UK remembers MacGyver. I know him/it through bazillions of references in other US popular culture that *did* reach these shores.

Of course we were lucky enough to get the A-Team and Knight Rider