What was the last film you watched?

[Socks]

Peterloo (on all4 i-player.). Directed by Mike Leigh, great cast including Maxine Peak, Rory Kinnear, Philip Jackson and many other quality actors. 

If you haven't seen this film it is worth watching.  And look out for any differences or similarities with what is happening 200 years later.

[rogerzilla]

The Dam Busters.  It really doesn't need remaking.  Besides the infamous dog issue, CGI Lancasters will look shit compared to real ones.

[Kim]

The Dam Busters.  It really doesn't need remaking.

They already did:  It's called Star Wars.

[andrewc]

An article on Michael Caine's suits https://clothesonfilm.com/take-me-to-my-tailor-michael-caine-in-the-italian-job/33309/   led me to watching "The Italian Job" , which I don't think I've seen in 40 years.  Very enjoyable.

[Ashaman42]

Galaxy Quest.

Again.

It's very silly but rather good fun.
Plus, well, Sigourney Weaver.

[TheLurker]

Angels One Five.  Mainly because Hurricanes.  Oh, so many lovely Hurricanes.  Such a pity about all the acting in between. 

And the child who said, "CGI Lancasters" can do 1,000 lines, "I must not pollute the discourse of civilised society with profane language, nor must I upset my elders and betters by airing vile heresies."   And take a week's detention.  Harrumph!

It's a shame really, given the potential for the tech. but I've yet to see decent CGI flying sequences. There's an aerial equivalent of the uncanny valley about those I have seen.

[TimC]

CGI can be brilliant, but it needs to be done by people who understand the subject. Most CGI aircraft scenes are wrecked because the modeller (or the director) didn't understand physics.

[TheLurker]

...CGI aircraft scenes are wrecked because the modeller (or the director) didn't understand physics.

Or, if they have got a grasp of (most of) the physics the concept of Vne and, "Oh!  Where did the wings go!?" is foreign to them.

[Kim]

It's a shame really, given the potential for the tech. but I've yet to see decent CGI flying sequences. There's an aerial equivalent of the uncanny valley about those I have seen.

See also: CGI spacecraft, and how any attempt at realistic physics is striking by its rarity.  (I'll accept some degree of handwaving for fictional propulsion systems, but if your spaceship is propelled by some mysterious blue light coming out the back, then it still ought to be accelerating in the appropriate direction.)

[Mr Larrington]

It's a shame really, given the potential for the tech. but I've yet to see decent CGI flying sequences. There's an aerial equivalent of the uncanny valley about those I have seen.

See also: CGI spacecraft, and how any attempt at realistic physics is striking by its rarity.  (I'll accept some degree of handwaving for fictional propulsion systems, but if your spaceship is propelled by some mysterious blue light coming out the back, then it still ought to be accelerating in the appropriate direction.)

What's that, you say?  WW2-stylee dogfighting?  In space?  Isaac Newton?  Never 'eard of 'im!

[Kim]

It's a shame really, given the potential for the tech. but I've yet to see decent CGI flying sequences. There's an aerial equivalent of the uncanny valley about those I have seen.

See also: CGI spacecraft, and how any attempt at realistic physics is striking by its rarity.  (I'll accept some degree of handwaving for fictional propulsion systems, but if your spaceship is propelled by some mysterious blue light coming out the back, then it still ought to be accelerating in the appropriate direction.)

What's that, you say?  WW2-stylee dogfighting?  In space?  Isaac Newton?  Never 'eard of 'im!

CGI aerodynamics only work properly in a vacuum.

[fuzzy]

It's a shame really, given the potential for the tech. but I've yet to see decent CGI flying sequences. There's an aerial equivalent of the uncanny valley about those I have seen.

See also: CGI spacecraft, and how any attempt at realistic physics is striking by its rarity.  (I'll accept some degree of handwaving for fictional propulsion systems, but if your spaceship is propelled by some mysterious blue light coming out the back, then it still ought to be accelerating in the appropriate direction.)

Don't forget that the mysterious blue propulsion system might be facing fo'ard and therfore be a mysterious blue anti propulsion system a'la The Expanse.

[spesh]

It's a shame really, given the potential for the tech. but I've yet to see decent CGI flying sequences. There's an aerial equivalent of the uncanny valley about those I have seen.

See also: CGI spacecraft, and how any attempt at realistic physics is striking by its rarity.  (I'll accept some degree of handwaving for fictional propulsion systems, but if your spaceship is propelled by some mysterious blue light coming out the back, then it still ought to be accelerating in the appropriate direction.)

Don't forget that the mysterious blue propulsion system might be facing fo'ard and therfore be a mysterious blue anti propulsion system a'la The Expanse.

I think that's actually the ship flying "backwards" after rotating around one axis so that the main engine can be used to decelerate.

AKA "Flip and burn".

See also the human spacecraft in Babylon 5 festooned with thrusters for attitude control, the Starfury fighters in particular.

[sg37409]

Hostiles.
I like a good western and this was quite good.  A bit too long though, and too many scenes trying to make Christian Bale seem moody and magnificent, I thought some scenes where he wouldn't reply or speak were pretty crap. But it was a good story and great scenery.

[Kim]

It's a shame really, given the potential for the tech. but I've yet to see decent CGI flying sequences. There's an aerial equivalent of the uncanny valley about those I have seen.

See also: CGI spacecraft, and how any attempt at realistic physics is striking by its rarity.  (I'll accept some degree of handwaving for fictional propulsion systems, but if your spaceship is propelled by some mysterious blue light coming out the back, then it still ought to be accelerating in the appropriate direction.)

Don't forget that the mysterious blue propulsion system might be facing fo'ard and therfore be a mysterious blue anti propulsion system a'la The Expanse.

As I say, accelerating in the appropriate direction.  B5 and The Expanse are notable for trying to get it right.  If you want to change the velocity of a spacecraft quickly, you point the big engine in the opposite direction to the one you want to accelerate in.

(Does *anything* get orbital mechanics right, vis speeding up to move to a higher orbit in order to fall behind the thing you're trying to rendezvous with, and vice-versa?)

[Steph]

I shall mention this yet again: the scene in whichever shite Mars film it was with Tom Hanks, where they have to move across a gap while in orbit, and he gets stranded halfway because he, er, runs out of fuel and therefore stops moving...

Mysterious blue light drive MAY be a Bussard ramjet, and therefore would come out of the 'front' (in direction of travel)whichever attitude the craft had, even in 'flip and burn'

[Jakob]

CGI can be brilliant, but it needs to be done by people who understand the subject. Most CGI aircraft scenes are wrecked because the modeller (or the director) didn't understand physics.

Oh they do..they just don't care...along with 98.5% of the audience.
Making realistic aerial combat sequences would make quite boring cinema. The distances and speeds of anything beyond WW1 makes it very hard to fit in the camera in a presentable manner.

[Jaded]

Crank with Jason Statham.

It's not good, but that doesn't mean don't watch it! It is a barking vehicle for Stathem, with a thin plot and some action.

[Manotea]

I shall mention this yet again: the scene in whichever shite Mars film it was with Tom Hanks, where they have to move across a gap while in orbit, and he gets stranded halfway because he, er, runs out of fuel and therefore stops moving...

Is this a good time to mention the GI Joe film where the baddies autodestruct measures blew up the ice shelf overlaying their undersea lair, and icebergs the size of houses came raining down...

[Jakob]

"Justice League" The Snyder Cut. Definitely a better movie. Pacing is much much better and less random.I still, though, dislike the superhero movies where they have to defeat apocalyptic events and near-god like opponents. Marvel fell down the same path.

As an example, Crave then suggested I should watch "Batman Begins" afterwards, which I did...and it's just so much better than any of the newer Marvel/DC stuff. It kinda fell apart after Captain America 2, when they had to keep scaling up the spectacle.

[TimO]

talking about parts of the ISS:

(click to show/hide)

... but couldn't that be something relatively small like the gyroscopes on the ISS?

(click to show/hide)

Seriously? As I recall, the CMGs are the heaviest individual items on the ISS, around 300kg each.

They need to have a substantial mass to be able to provide a significant control authority, since there are limits to how much energy can be contained with a realistic spin rate.

(Sorry about being very late to the party!)

[Kim]

talking about parts of the ISS:

(click to show/hide)

... but couldn't that be something relatively small like the gyroscopes on the ISS?

(click to show/hide)

Seriously? As I recall, the CMGs are the heaviest individual items on the ISS, around 300kg each.

They need to have a substantial mass to be able to provide a significant control authority, since there are limits to how much energy can be contained with a realistic spin rate.

Yeah, but they're a lot smaller than the rotating arm with the living quarters of the fictional spacecraft I was comparing them to.

(Yes, I appreciate that mass is more important than volume, and that there's an argument for that mass being useful living/lab space instead of a lump of flywheel, but my only real point was that you don't need counter-rotating sections on your spacecraft to do artificial gravity.  It's not a helicopter.)

[hubner]

25th Hour.

Spike Lee, Edward Norton, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Brian Cox, but it's very slow, boring, has no sympathetic characters. Nothing much happens in the plot, some scenes were just ridiculous, that would only exist in movie-land. The opening credits with static shots of New York at night lasting 5 minutes sums up the rest of the film. I watched most of it at 2 or 3 times the normal speed.

[Jaded]

Six minutes to midnight

Bland, easy watching. Undemanding.

[Jakob]

"Arctic" with Mads Mikkelsen. Quite good.