Entertainers and educators are the best teachers for learning. I had a biomolecules prof like this in college and I did surprisingly well in his class because you could tell he loved teaching. The rest of my profs just teach because they made a deal with the university to teach if they can conduct research using our labs. Soooo they essentially give zero entertainment to learning which really hurts the marks.
@@jacobevansonsolomon9326 A similar but by far not that dramatic manual dock has been done by the repair team of Salyut 7. Still, spinny things on several planes involved
there is (i think) just one thing wrong with the docking scene from interstellar . The space station would not fall down to the planet just because of an explosion. Because an object in orbit stays in orbit unless a retrograde burn (or an opposing force) is acted upon it.
lol, docking scene is not bogus, but practically impossible to do manually. If you had an advanced supercomputer maybe it would work, or if you're inhuman at docking. Still technically possible. But allso remember it is for dramatic effect. if you dont care about the dramatic effect i would suggest you watch a documentary instead. They are based on realism.
Even the expanse uses it sparingly becasue of how expensive it is. Most of the time they're under thrust "gravity" and most of the rest using magnetic boots, where the conviniently forget hair, clothes etc. would be floating and so would their arms when resting.
"When you have a grip of George Clooney you don't let go" "Any movie with a talking raccoon is okay in my book" Can you guys bring him again for another rating of space movies, because he is a great entertainer and educator
The impacts from debris would have caused catastrophic depressurisation of the space station. Could the scene about George Clooney sacrificing himself be explained by the space station being in an uncontrollable spin due to these decompressions?
I also love when he reviews Interstellar with Sean Connery inside a dimension that consists alot of bookcases and it’s better when Sean says to the person in front of the books, “Hey, say away from the black hole!” Also in Star Wars where they put Luke in the background which is a Ski resort and Han Solo in a telemarketing office.
@tsolias27 technically he said "when you have A grip OF George Clooney". That means when you have a masculine grip like George Clooney, don't waste it and die.
Damn you Sandra Bullock! I could forgive you for almost made the little girl in Bird box to check out in the river, but never for let go Clooney in the space... I just can't 😣
It's nice that he's evaluating the scenes for what they are, but also giving honest assessments of the movies overall. I feel like most of these reviewers put a lot of their personal opinions into their ratings of the movie's realism.
@@abdesakib4424 no. The whole story arc is pure Hollywood style fake tension. In the book they calculated it correctly, the MRM returns and he is rescued by the specialist, the end. The commander also does what she does best, assess the whole situation and give good commands. Nobody needs a worthless action scene I a good science! Fiction book. The tension is about the scientific does it work stuff and not the action.
@@Zero11s Yes, I as a extra terrestrial alien from planet D-14 can confirm the earth is flat, mooon is flat, sun is flat .. the whole solar system is 2D infact
@@Zero11s I am not supposed to tell you all this but... You all are in a simulation my alien race are running for a test and that is also a reason why the new Cybertruck looks the way it does, There was a glitch and now it doesn't render properly
As an engineer, I appreciate his love of Apollo 13. The movie and the event are often discussed in engineering school. It’s a shining example of what engineering is all about. Space exploration was and still is one of the greatest engineering feats of humankind. On this particular mission, it wasn’t mountains of textbooks, hours of verification and design reviews, and precision machining that saved their lives. It was quick thinking, good collaboration, and the raw determination to not let themselves and their friends die. Engineering of the highest caliber got them there. Engineering in its rawest form brought them home.
@@MJAce85 funny? You realize the U.S. made more than one trip to the moon, right? The United States made seven trips. And only one of those seven did not put man on the moon. But you can continue to deny. That’s your right. Just like I will continue to deny a woman/man cannot change her/his gender. Thus there is NO such thing as a transgender person.
“Whyyyy....why does she have to let him go?!” Genuinely made me laugh out loud 😂 it’s like the old time Dilemma of whether or not Rose has enough room for jack on the door in Titanic lol she had also mentioned she’d never let go..😭
Jowey De La Nota that was debunked on the science channel myth busters. 2 people would had fit without sinking and if rose had put her life vest under the door it would had floated perfectly.
@@austinodell9046 Haha you are hilarious. I don't even know where to start but mythbusters is budget tv show and they rarely acounted for the right variables of the cases they were trying to debubk or validate. There are so many wrongs with mythbusters scientific approach to the things they were trying to debunk that resorting to them for validation is laughable. Herr are a few key variables they didnt account for when debunking the scene: The density of freezing salt water, the type of wood of the door plus its overall density, the buoyant force at of the icy sea water and the combine weight of Jack+Rose+door, etc... These variables are the difference between something floating or sinking in those conditions and that's just the beggining beczuss then you would have to account for the denseless way for Leo to climb up so their combine weight doesn't exceed the buoyant force of the raft (reason why the raft turn around when he tried to climb it). You can make a case that potentially putting the vest under the raft could have help but that leads to leaving Rose unprotected as freezing temperatures.
These kinds of videos cringes me out so hard. Anyone with a basic understanding for anything allready know this. This genre of film is drama. It's not necassarily supposed to be 100% realistic.
Play a few hours of KSP and your perspective on Sci-Fi movies will change drastically. Pre-KSP I didn't really understand the correction burn and re-entry angle and all that. "I guess they accelerate towards Earth to make sure they don't miss?" Post-KSP it actually makes a lot of sense. "Ah, I see, they're burning towards the anti-radial vector to lower the periapsis enough to slow down enough to get the apoapsis below the atmosphere. Too low though and they'll encounter too much aerodynamic drag and literally burn up, yes I see."
@@lxlcaesarlxl Star Wars is not what it used to be. Interest in it is lower than it used to be because of Disney, Kathleen Kennedy, Jar Jar Abrams, and Ruin Johnson.
He did say that he couldn't believe he was asked to rate the scientific accuracy of some of these movies. They are not necessarily about space travel, but stories that include it. Apollo 13 was about spice travel.
@@helenclarke4735 You can edit your comments. Hover the pointer over it, three dots appear on the upper right. Click on them and Edit is an option. You can fix things like that if you catch them like you did.
He actually graduated from my high school, Alma mater. I met him when I was 14 years old. He had just got back from space and did an assembly at my middle school.
If it was a choice between him and Neil DeGrasse Tyson to become an advisor on an up-coming SF film....I'd have a lot of trouble choosing! They are both soooooo good!
As long as you have the budget to follow his advice. Plus, dumb audiences today have a deficit attention disorder. If you don't blow stuff up or make a big spectacle, they fall asleep. The more expensive the movie, the wider the audience needs to be, the more pressure to get the money back. You can't really just blame the filmmakers for everything. Movies that want to be accurate have no money. Movies that have money can't afford to be accurate.
@@SS-xl9th no, in the movie he has to fly, in the book, the crew member gets to his module, cuts him out of his seat, and pulls him out. no character is ever untethered for a second, ensuring zero chance of getting lost in space. Exactly the precautions that would be done in real life. Also in the book, the commander never leaves her seat. She lets the EVA specialist(who is also the doctor) do his job. and doesn't change the plan last minute, she trusts her crew and remains in the position to make emergency calls from the command module rather than being on the front line. no military commander in real life would respond the same way she did in the movie and replace the specialist in the middle of a heavily planned and rehearsed operation.
We didn't need to imagine we had telescopes capable of looking at the moon's surface hundreds of years before we could go to space or that movie lol. Just like we knew what parts of Mars would like before we even got a rover on it. Mar's atmosphere is about 1/3 as thick as Earth's. Our moon has no atmosphere blocking our view of it. Moon dust even reflects sun light better than snow! Venus has a very thick atmosphere (it could easily crush metal) so we can't see its surface directly.
Thats part of why that movie is so wonderful! It was ahead of its time, maybe not scientifically, but for the entertainment industry it absolutely was! Same with Star Trek and many other sci-fi at the time.
I've been re-watching all these films the last few days, they're some of my favourites. 'Ad Astra' was slightly better than I expected. That George Clooney moment in 'Gravity' really is the "fly in the ointment" of an otherwise great movie. 'Moon', starring Sam Rockwell, has to be my favourite though.
*I like when he say that the "Gravity" movie could end immediately once the woman pull the rope. They make the movie so complicated when it could be a happy ending in a simple way*
Every time I notice hear something new about 2001 a Space Odyssey I just love it so much more. Greatest movie of all time, and Kubrick was such a phenomenal Genius!
@@pierreo33 It was literally backed by a Nobel laureate physicist and known for it's nearly accurate science, but ok. Also it's called a science fiction movie, not science documentary.
@@nine-vi7rw Yes, and the physicist literally had to convince Nolan NOT to do time travel - you should not need a professional to KNOW it wouldn't work. Interstellar treats itself as a realistic, ground-breaking piece and should be rated on that grounds. Which is where the movie fucks up. It's just not anywhere near as smart as it pretends to be
@@thatgirlinautumn5995 I think that was just the press buzz you're talking about. I have the book by Kip Thorne that breaks down the scientific truths, hypothesis, and speculations in the movie. Just because the buzz was about it's realism doesn't negate the "fiction" part in "sci-fi".
Remember that in the book, Watney specifically says that the iron man stuff, the last movie save, and the hugging in the air lock was all too Hollywood to be reel. The fact that Ridley Scott and Drew Goddard put that in the script / movie just shows how much respect they had for the materials
Christopher Nolan does not fool around with his movies. He goes to great lengths just to avoid CGI. He even had a physicist Kipp Thorne on the sets to guide them so that movie has to be the most scientifically accurate one made so far! And on the other end we have that movie of Bruce Willis which is shown to astronauts to find out as many mistakes as they can.
@@robynsmith4164 I am talking about that movie where they land on a crater, dig up a hole in it and plant a bomb so that it explodes and doesn't hit Earth and Bruce Willis gives up his life so that the protagonist can marry his daughter.
i think the errors is up to 1500 now in the apple for all mankind inside the moonbase and inside the mars rover gravity is 1g outside on the surface it is 1/6th 1/3rd
With regard to the artificial gravity question to the Battlestar Galactia makers (too expensive special effects), this was also true for the 'beam me up Scotty' teleportation device in the original Star Trek series, here too to avoid spending lots of money into special effects traveling to and from planets.
"ur watching a movie and you see a big explosion and it's silent, it doesn't feel right" *Right after, reviews Interstellar, a movie that shows a silent explosion that's actually impactful*
It's probably not gonna work so well in a 1970s cowboy-in-space movie. Especially when Intersteller was also designed to be as accurate as possible, whereas Star Wars...wasn't.
I never stopped to think about how terrifying space debris may be in real life. He said he literally heard debris hitting the station multiple times, what if one hit you during EVA - especially if one is on a retrograde orbit, would it be fatal?
Well, he got interstellar completely wrong. The reason he sees book shelves is because he is stuck in a moment in time in his daughters bedroom which just happens to have a big bookshelf. The multiple rows of the same moment are actually moments in time. Each one is a second, or an hour or a day apart from each other and thats why they go on endlessly.
@@ShawnTheDriver Yea, I dont think he actually watched the movie. I think he was given the plot and then just watched that one scene and took it completely out of context. A better scene for him to have explained was the moment where they landed on a planet that was closer to the black hole where time is skewed due to the immense gravity of the black hole.
He said they could put a paper instead of tesseract.i think its not possible to just write it and show. The whole idea was that gravity is the only thing that is constant through all the dimensions. Cooper communicated with gravity.which is logical and realistic.and i dont know how cooper could move the hands in the clock and why did he send those coordinates to nasa what made him do that?. Ps. The astronaut is not so realistic😛
@@tarunyellangar8565 if gravity is the only thing which is common for every dimension, then how would the watch still show the data that cooper encoded? the should have been placed precisely in the same spot for the watch dials to show morse code
master shooter64 there is a possibility that cooper did it repeatedly until the tesseract dissapeared,which according to the movie is the sign that it worked.cooper typing the code and murph retrieving it happened at the same moment .if you ask me how she got to know at the same moment,according to the movie love made her come and check the watch when cooper was encoding those formulae.
7:20 No, the tesseract is representative of the fourth dimension which is the physical dimension of time. This means the bookshelf isn’t _made_ it’s his past that can be interacted with because y’know ITS PHYSICAL
Also, it wasn't some advanced alien race that built it - it was Humans maybe millions of years in the future that figured out the physics of SpaceTime and how to utilize Black Holes to our advantage - something I can definitely see happening... Not my generation, or the next few, but sometime in far future...
@@hannahpumpkins4359 exactly true. That advanced human civilization or "They" as called in the movie, made that physical space in the black hole for Cooper specifically because its the love for his daughter that transcend even time and space.
Also he uses the watch in the tesseract because gravity is the only force that can cross dimensions. The guy in the video maybe didn't know the whole movie plot.
Very cool stuff. I was of the generation of kids who sat in front of the TV during the Apollo missions. I also got to see visual effects in space movies evolve too. I agree with you on the visual accuracy of Apollo 13 the movie. Ron Howard chose to use the Vomit Comet aircraft to shoot many of the micro-G scenes. My biggest letdown in the movie was the casting of Tom Hanks as Jim Lovell. In the mid-70s, Lovell came and spoke at our local community college. After his 90-minute talk, and after the crowd left, he hung around and chatted with 5 or 6 of us for about 20 minutes. Hanks' portrayal of Lovell in that movie wasn't even close.
First time I watched Apollo 13 with my mother she said she remembered when the actual event happened and the whole world was riveted, waiting for news - mostly on TV but also in newspapers, magazines, the radio. One thing she was adamant about is no matter how grim the reports were, she never doubted those guys were coming back home because they had the best scientists on the ground working 36 hours a day (hyperbole) to solve every problem that popped up.
Watch it a few more times and it begins to make sense,. I really like this movie because you keep finding more things about the movie than last time you saw it and it's very 'deep'
I really love Garrett Reisman! He did an AMAZING job comparing those space movies vs. real life and was SO HILARIOUS too! I would really enjoy watching him breakdown other parts of "space movies", he is a great speaker and breaks down extremely hard topics into something the average person can understand. I am so happy he is with SpaceX now! 🚀
All that stuff had been discussed for two decades, and many rudimentary plans had started. But indeed he did pick and choose the most plausible ones. And after a lot of effort, tada, it just worked out pretty well.
Actually, a friend of mine solved the Star Wars/sound in space issue. Its true you normally can't hear sound in space, but this particularly explosion was really, REALLY loud. So, you know, no problem.
Always wondered why the hell Clooney let go. She saved him for crying out loud lol... Wonderful movie, but things like that when you have "Gravity" as the name of the movie just kills it.
His point is that the tesseract is needlessly complex for the purpose it's supposed to serve. He says we don't know what black holes look on the inside. The film is not getting downrated (much) for complex things being in there.
A black hole doesn't have infinite energy it has the energy of it's mass. Though they can be used as mass energy converters so that's handy. Energy actually does actually escape black holes through hawking radiation. You can also get energy from spinning black holes because of how they warp space outside of the event horizon.
It's because (spoiler) the super future humans that created the black hole are 5th dimensional beings and therefore are not themselves able to pinpoint a specific point in time and 3 dimensional space. Because future science reasons, I guess. That's literally what they say in the movie. So they use Matty C Spaceman as a pawn, creating this entire elaborate plan to bring him into the center of the black hole by ruining his life and killing at least 3 others. And they create a sort of link through higher dimensions between the center of the black hole and spaceman's old house when his daughter was young so that he could use magic gravity powers to communicate using morse code to her like a hundred Earth years in the past now because gravity is the only force that can travel both forwards and backwards in time. Apparently. And the tesseract thing is the visual way the future beings chose to show spaceman so that he could locate the specific points in time they needed him to and basically unknowingly continue his infinite cycle of suffering the loss of everything he loves by causing his past self to start this whole journey in the first pace.
In the book The Martian he does not poke a hole in his glove to reach the other ship because the author Andy Weir knew it was BS. The character even says/thinks that -"if this was a Hollywood movie i would poke a hole in my glove and fly like Iron Man" so it´s all Ridley Scotts fault that it´s in the movie. Also the only thing in the book that is not scientifically plausible is that there can be winds strong enough to tip a spacecraft over, the thin air on Mars is not enough to build up that much airpressure. Andy Weir knew this but could not come up with a better solution on how the guy would get stranded alone on Mars. So the book The Martian should get a 9/10 and the movie like 7 or 8/10.
Agreed, the book was better in numerous ways! But there are exactly three things that are better in the movie than in the book: 1. Where it ends. When I first read the book I was left wondering if they all survived or if Johanssen had to [redacted]! 2. SEAN BEAN at the COUNCIL OF ELROND. 3. That 'Starman' sequence is the most beautiful thing to have ever graced a screen. Vogel blowing water bubbles at his kids is so pure and joyful. And then the way the music fades out as the Hermes pulls away, like Contact in reverse... it's just, I can't even describe it, it's just magic.
uh no not really cuz Neil has bachelor's degree in Physics from Harvard University and a doctorate in astrophysics from Columbia University. Garret is just an astronaut.
7:45 Because the effects from within the tesseract had to travel across time. He was communicating from his future self. Also, there is an element of theoretical physics and sci-fi.
The photo of the real Apollo 13 crew shows the original line-up including Ken Mattingly. He was, of course, replaced on the actual mission by Jack Swigert.
14:26 I love that he brings up why they are giving him goofy movies to review. I see the same mistake in other videos. You want to give these professionals the kind of movies that try to be realistic, and they either succeed because the staff did enough homework or failed because they want it to look cool and entertaining. That's it! Good job pointing it out! If it's a talking raccoon, it's GoG and sci fi! Of course it's gonna be unreal!
Ngl on the interstellar part I dont think he understood the end. The alien species did not "build" a bookshelf tesseract thing, that was TARS trying to visualise the 4th dimension to the human.
yeah he misunderstand the concept of that scene trying to deliver. if anyone from higher dimension send message to someone from lower dimension, it might be impossible to quickly understand. That tesseract and wormhole was build by someone from higher dimension because they experienced time-space differently as they already know the future(the time consuming equation problem succesfully solved by the space-crew) and past(that genius daughter who save humanity with her eureka effect). Its possible that higher dimension people can control time but somehow they dont want us to go extinct so they built wormhole first to give people easier access to the future through time-space. Since they knows that Mathew and TARS are the only right person to be given opportunity to access the past and in order to avoid temporal paradox or breaking laws of our time-travel(not allowing others to discover that object), the only possible place to build the tesseract is within event horizon since the slowing of time within that region is extreme and once its already been used, it went inside black holes to destroy itself while pushing out mathew and Tars slingshot towards the wormhole back.
Interstellar is one of my all time favorite films. It’s the movie that got my really curious about astrophysics. It’s amazing how your way of thinking changes the more you learn.
I’d love him as a Teacher to be honest, he literally does what a Science Teacher that talks about Space should be doing. Teaching the truth about space
How many people thought of this video as a chat call and him telling you a story as if he's live telling you about space. Kinda like the chat circle from FB after a text. Lol 😆 loved this video.
Interstellar: Did you not watch the movie?? Its very clear that the only thing that can transcend dimentions is gravity. Which he uses in an elaborate way to communicate with his daughter. That's the premise of the movie. Ofc this wouldnt be possible since he would be spaghettified once getting close to the black hole. And a noodle cant communicate past dimentions. This shit is bogus, but the point of the movies is that he is able to communicate to the past. lol.
With supermassive black hole, spaghettification is not a problem : on the horizon, the tidal forces are weaker than on a regular black hole because gravity gradian on a supermassive black hole is distributed on a larger area. That make possible to fall through the horizon without dying.
@@saphired02 Romilly said Gargantua is a older spinning black hole and that's why they call them Gentle. And talked about finding the Quantum data and transmitting it.
@@JoeNekoniko Fascinating. Yet he does fall through the horizon and into the black hole. Wont the gravity inside the black hole rip him apart? I mean the gravity is so strong that light cant even escape, if that is the case gravity at his feet would be much more intense than at the head assuming you're falling feet first. Even for such a short distance? My comment was really aimed at where he made fun of the movie because they overcomplicated the method of communication :)
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
This guy is an entertainer as well as an educator, more of him pls.
Yeah, I like him, he's fun. :D
Entertainers and educators are the best teachers for learning. I had a biomolecules prof like this in college and I did surprisingly well in his class because you could tell he loved teaching. The rest of my profs just teach because they made a deal with the university to teach if they can conduct research using our labs. Soooo they essentially give zero entertainment to learning which really hurts the marks.
Nah, just an entertainer...
@@truthinentertainment1028 truth in education rather.
@@Hussein_Nur Sorry, I forgot: an indoctrinator as well...
he should have reviewd the docking scene in Insterstellar
Luiz Felipe Bastião part 2 please
Yea.... That felt somewhat very very hard to do in real life...
@@jacobevansonsolomon9326 A similar but by far not that dramatic manual dock has been done by the repair team of Salyut 7. Still, spinny things on several planes involved
there is (i think) just one thing wrong with the docking scene from interstellar . The space station would not fall down to the planet just because of an explosion. Because an object in orbit stays in orbit unless a retrograde burn (or an opposing force) is acted upon it.
lol, docking scene is not bogus, but practically impossible to do manually. If you had an advanced supercomputer maybe it would work, or if you're inhuman at docking. Still technically possible. But allso remember it is for dramatic effect. if you dont care about the dramatic effect i would suggest you watch a documentary instead. They are based on realism.
ur telling me I watched George Clooney die unnecessarily
😂😂😂😂😂
That fucker
he was pulled and also a infinite vacuum would rip any space suite to shreds
Zero11s uh...
That's correct
“How realistic is Space balls?”
“Well, uh, It’s possible to find a desert in space.”
16:17 'Let me tell you a story, I was up in the space station...'
The greatest pick up line ever.
W space rizz
"why do all sci-fi movies have artificial gravity?"
"because it's cheaper."
"cof cof" the expanse
king james488 Also, makes story telling harder when you have to write stuff like that in.
Even the expanse uses it sparingly becasue of how expensive it is. Most of the time they're under thrust "gravity" and most of the rest using magnetic boots, where the conviniently forget hair, clothes etc. would be floating and so would their arms when resting.
Because it only exists in movies... it's like mr. curvature. To see those two, you need pop corn and a footstool....
@@manorun7587 oh no
"When you have a grip of George Clooney you don't let go"
"Any movie with a talking raccoon is okay in my book"
Can you guys bring him again for another rating of space movies, because he is a great entertainer and educator
I was expecting him to give Guardians of the Galaxy a 10/10 stars just because of Rocket Raccoon
The impacts from debris would have caused catastrophic depressurisation of the space station. Could the scene about George Clooney sacrificing himself be explained by the space station being in an uncontrollable spin due to these decompressions?
I also love when he reviews Interstellar with Sean Connery inside a dimension that consists alot of bookcases and it’s better when Sean says to the person in front of the books, “Hey, say away from the black hole!”
Also in Star Wars where they put Luke in the background which is a Ski resort and Han Solo in a telemarketing office.
"When you have a grip of George Clooney you don’t let go"
Lol
@tsolias27 technically he said "when you have A grip OF George Clooney". That means when you have a masculine grip like George Clooney, don't waste it and die.
@@zaidizainal2495 No he didnt. You are wrong
@@pierreo33 no u
@Dustin Reid yes thank you my friend
Damn you Sandra Bullock! I could forgive you for almost made the little girl in Bird box to check out in the river, but never for let go Clooney in the space... I just can't 😣
“BOGUS. TOTALLY BOGUS”
3/10
...
...
“But the rest of the movie was like a 9.”
It's nice that he's evaluating the scenes for what they are, but also giving honest assessments of the movies overall. I feel like most of these reviewers put a lot of their personal opinions into their ratings of the movie's realism.
To be honest, the hole in the glove scene in The Martian was not in the book. He joked about doing it, but never did it.
@@Aequitas84 It's fun! See if your library has the audio book of it.
So true. The only part they made up is garbage. The rest of the movie is awesome!
So he dies in Mars in the book?
@@abdesakib4424 No.
@@abdesakib4424 no. The whole story arc is pure Hollywood style fake tension.
In the book they calculated it correctly, the MRM returns and he is rescued by the specialist, the end.
The commander also does what she does best, assess the whole situation and give good commands.
Nobody needs a worthless action scene I a good science! Fiction book. The tension is about the scientific does it work stuff and not the action.
Can we get: "A Real Cop Reacts to Brooklyn Nine-Nine"?
can we get A Real Pig Reacts to Cops
@NintendoCyborg lmao!! Your comment made my morning. Thanks
kertzgesact
Hi kurzgesagt earth
Or Ed Kemper reacts to Mindhunter. I don't know if that'd be moral though, interesting, yes.
That moment when "star wars" is more realistic than "gravity"
The physics and sequence of events in gravity was quite ridiculous. But the effects were good. That's the only thing.
none of it is realistic, both play in a fantasy world of earth being spherical and being in a fantasy world
@@Zero11s Yes, I as a extra terrestrial alien from planet D-14 can confirm the earth is flat, mooon is flat, sun is flat .. the whole solar system is 2D infact
@@Mercilessonion planets are not physical objects and the solar system doesn't exist, the center of the universe is the north pole
@@Zero11s I am not supposed to tell you all this but... You all are in a simulation my alien race are running for a test and that is also a reason why the new Cybertruck looks the way it does, There was a glitch and now it doesn't render properly
As an engineer, I appreciate his love of Apollo 13. The movie and the event are often discussed in engineering school. It’s a shining example of what engineering is all about. Space exploration was and still is one of the greatest engineering feats of humankind. On this particular mission, it wasn’t mountains of textbooks, hours of verification and design reviews, and precision machining that saved their lives. It was quick thinking, good collaboration, and the raw determination to not let themselves and their friends die. Engineering of the highest caliber got them there. Engineering in its rawest form brought them home.
Absolutely correct
Travel to space has to be one of man’s best and complicated engineering marvels of all time.
I reckon the dildo gun from Saints Row is.
If only it had actually happened
@@MJAce85 give it up denier.
@@Velo1010 Where's your proof that it did?! 😆
@@MJAce85 funny? You realize the U.S. made more than one trip to the moon, right? The United States made seven trips. And only one of those seven did not put man on the moon.
But you can continue to deny. That’s your right. Just like I will continue to deny a woman/man cannot change her/his gender. Thus there is NO such thing as a transgender person.
This is as we need as an educator or teacher or professor . Teaching is not about lecturing, its about ignite the passion in each student.
This guy is hilarious, more with him please!
Yeah he is. You can see more of him on the Joe Rogan podcast.
“Whyyyy....why does she have to let him go?!” Genuinely made me laugh out loud 😂 it’s like the old time Dilemma of whether or not Rose has enough room for jack on the door in Titanic lol she had also mentioned she’d never let go..😭
The door could only sustain enough weight afloat withoit sinking
Jowey De La Nota that was debunked on the science channel myth busters. 2 people would had fit without sinking and if rose had put her life vest under the door it would had floated perfectly.
@@austinodell9046 He has to let go, otherwise they dont have the movie, it ends there with a happy ending. Boring
@@austinodell9046 Haha you are hilarious. I don't even know where to start but mythbusters is budget tv show and they rarely acounted for the right variables of the cases they were trying to debubk or validate. There are so many wrongs with mythbusters scientific approach to the things they were trying to debunk that resorting to them for validation is laughable.
Herr are a few key variables they didnt account for when debunking the scene: The density of freezing salt water, the type of wood of the door plus its overall density, the buoyant force at of the icy sea water and the combine weight of Jack+Rose+door, etc...
These variables are the difference between something floating or sinking in those conditions and that's just the beggining beczuss then you would have to account for the denseless way for Leo to climb up so their combine weight doesn't exceed the buoyant force of the raft (reason why the raft turn around when he tried to climb it).
You can make a case that potentially putting the vest under the raft could have help but that leads to leaving Rose unprotected as freezing temperatures.
@@aelxkethdam8491 I'd be happy if that movie didn't exist.
I love this series; experts pointing out how unrealistic classic movies are is quite informative.
did you really think star wars was real?
These kinds of videos cringes me out so hard. Anyone with a basic understanding for anything allready know this. This genre of film is drama. It's not necassarily supposed to be 100% realistic.
Play a few hours of KSP and your perspective on Sci-Fi movies will change drastically. Pre-KSP I didn't really understand the correction burn and re-entry angle and all that. "I guess they accelerate towards Earth to make sure they don't miss?" Post-KSP it actually makes a lot of sense. "Ah, I see, they're burning towards the anti-radial vector to lower the periapsis enough to slow down enough to get the apoapsis below the atmosphere. Too low though and they'll encounter too much aerodynamic drag and literally burn up, yes I see."
@@OKuusava You don't know any adults watching Star Wars? Uh what. Star Wars is the biggest franchise in the world. MILLIONS of adults watch Star Wars
@@lxlcaesarlxl
Star Wars is not what it used to be. Interest in it is lower than it used to be because of Disney, Kathleen Kennedy, Jar Jar Abrams, and Ruin Johnson.
Starlord's dad is a planet, so that might explain thing or two... Oh, and the movie also has a talking and walking tree.
I'm Groot :D
He did say that he couldn't believe he was asked to rate the scientific accuracy of some of these movies. They are not necessarily about space travel, but stories that include it. Apollo 13 was about spice travel.
Sorry, spAce travel. :)
Is there a desert on his dad?
@@helenclarke4735 You can edit your comments. Hover the pointer over it, three dots appear on the upper right. Click on them and Edit is an option. You can fix things like that if you catch them like you did.
I love this guy. It's like Scorcese wrote an astronaut character.
I can see it now... *Galactic Mob: A Martin Scorsese Film*
He actually graduated from my high school, Alma mater. I met him when I was 14 years old. He had just got back from space and did an assembly at my middle school.
I love that Gravity has the same rating of Spaceballs.
So..
Consult this guy when making a movie in space.
Got it
Ashon Woodbury he actually has done consulting for space films
@@ale131296 I'm glad! He's a must have!
Or any other astrophysicist
If it was a choice between him and Neil DeGrasse Tyson to become an advisor on an up-coming SF film....I'd have a lot of trouble choosing! They are both soooooo good!
As long as you have the budget to follow his advice. Plus, dumb audiences today have a deficit attention disorder. If you don't blow stuff up or make a big spectacle, they fall asleep. The more expensive the movie, the wider the audience needs to be, the more pressure to get the money back. You can't really just blame the filmmakers for everything. Movies that want to be accurate have no money. Movies that have money can't afford to be accurate.
To be fair, the movie "The Martian" ignored the ending of the book, and went with a throw away joke in the book as a serious solution. ;)
Wht do u mean?
R u talking about that Silly Scene where Matt demon started flying like Iron man?
@@HeartHacker2727 in the book, one of the crew members goes out to get him, reaches him, and they're both pulled back to the ship
@@NeverNude in the movie, it still does
@@SS-xl9th no, in the movie he has to fly, in the book, the crew member gets to his module, cuts him out of his seat, and pulls him out. no character is ever untethered for a second, ensuring zero chance of getting lost in space. Exactly the precautions that would be done in real life.
Also in the book, the commander never leaves her seat. She lets the EVA specialist(who is also the doctor) do his job. and doesn't change the plan last minute, she trusts her crew and remains in the position to make emergency calls from the command module rather than being on the front line.
no military commander in real life would respond the same way she did in the movie and replace the specialist in the middle of a heavily planned and rehearsed operation.
Why there's no one talking about 2001: A space audessey being so perfect at the time no one can imagine ?
We didn't need to imagine we had telescopes capable of looking at the moon's surface hundreds of years before we could go to space or that movie lol. Just like we knew what parts of Mars would like before we even got a rover on it.
Mar's atmosphere is about 1/3 as thick as Earth's. Our moon has no atmosphere blocking our view of it. Moon dust even reflects sun light better than snow! Venus has a very thick atmosphere (it could easily crush metal) so we can't see its surface directly.
Thats part of why that movie is so wonderful! It was ahead of its time, maybe not scientifically, but for the entertainment industry it absolutely was! Same with Star Trek and many other sci-fi at the time.
Honestly….probably because the story and pacing of the movie is pretty bad.
I've been re-watching all these films the last few days, they're some of my favourites. 'Ad Astra' was slightly better than I expected. That George Clooney moment in 'Gravity' really is the "fly in the ointment" of an otherwise great movie. 'Moon', starring Sam Rockwell, has to be my favourite though.
Moon is such an amazing movie. The soundtrack is a classic.
*I like when he say that the "Gravity" movie could end immediately once the woman pull the rope. They make the movie so complicated when it could be a happy ending in a simple way*
Why write in bold. I mean come on
cuz that's how life works hahahaha
Brad bat naman naka highlight lahan nang kinoment mo? dafuq.
That's because Women like complications.
chi billll
Id like to sit on a bar and have few beers with this guy.
Why on a bar?
@@rztrzt maybe it's one of those long shiny bars with seats bolted on top with steps underneath. Then again maybe not. Maybe he means in a bar.
@@goonerinSP get your ass to bars. No one has ever gone into 'space'
@@eddiethailand Tf was that? Made me cringe a little
“BOGUS”
-ASTRONAUT GUY 2019
Astro-Bogus
Every time I notice hear something new about 2001 a Space Odyssey I just love it so much more. Greatest movie of all time, and Kubrick was such a phenomenal Genius!
He is so entertaining to watch! Props to the video editor as well
This guy is freaking hilarious!
Great video XD
My new favorite word: *Bogus*
I grew up in the 80's, and this comment makes me feel, _like,_ totally old. 😒
@@LisaBowers prepare yourself for an 'ok boomer' comment
Ali Blablabla hahahah oof
@@dardoura Even though I'm a GenX'er, if I ever start a conversation with, _"Well, back in _*_my_*_ day,"_ I'll expect to get an "Ok Boomer." 😁
@@LisaBowers same shit, and I'm only 29
Just here to check if he rates interstellar good
sheep movie for pseudo-intellectuals
@@pierreo33 It was literally backed by a Nobel laureate physicist and known for it's nearly accurate science, but ok. Also it's called a science fiction movie, not science documentary.
@@nine-vi7rw Yes, and the physicist literally had to convince Nolan NOT to do time travel - you should not need a professional to KNOW it wouldn't work. Interstellar treats itself as a realistic, ground-breaking piece and should be rated on that grounds. Which is where the movie fucks up. It's just not anywhere near as smart as it pretends to be
@@thatgirlinautumn5995 that's why it's a sci fiction .
@@thatgirlinautumn5995 I think that was just the press buzz you're talking about. I have the book by Kip Thorne that breaks down the scientific truths, hypothesis, and speculations in the movie. Just because the buzz was about it's realism doesn't negate the "fiction" part in "sci-fi".
Dr. Reisman, you are a joy! You & the production team have delivered an entertaining & educational vid. Kudos!
Remember that in the book, Watney specifically says that the iron man stuff, the last movie save, and the hugging in the air lock was all too Hollywood to be reel.
The fact that Ridley Scott and Drew Goddard put that in the script / movie just shows how much respect they had for the materials
Thats what i was thinking, in the book he suggests it, but Lewis does not let him do it. In the movie, they make it a vital part.
Christopher Nolan does not fool around with his movies. He goes to great lengths just to avoid CGI. He even had a physicist Kipp Thorne on the sets to guide them so that movie has to be the most scientifically accurate one made so far!
And on the other end we have that movie of Bruce Willis which is shown to astronauts to find out as many mistakes as they can.
Did you mean the movie with
Arnold Schwarzenegger and not Bruce Willis? Just curious! 😁
@@robynsmith4164 I am talking about that movie where they land on a crater, dig up a hole in it and plant a bomb so that it explodes and doesn't hit Earth and Bruce Willis gives up his life so that the protagonist can marry his daughter.
i think the errors is up to 1500 now
in the apple for all mankind inside the moonbase and inside the mars rover gravity is 1g outside on the surface it is 1/6th 1/3rd
@@philiprice7875 although I sympathize with his condition now but I don't think he was that desperate for money to do such movie!
Is Interstellar more accurate than Space Odyssey?
Someone needs to tell this guy about The Expanse.
THE EXPANSE LEGION ASSEMBLE HERE
Ugh, i really want to like that series, but main characters seem like assholes basically. Who exactly is intended to be protagonist(s) in that show?
Expanse into what?
@@eddiethailand the TV show.
@@hakont.4960 Just like in real life
With regard to the artificial gravity question to the Battlestar Galactia makers (too expensive special effects), this was also true for the 'beam me up Scotty' teleportation device in the original Star Trek series, here too to avoid spending lots of money into special effects traveling to and from planets.
His reaction to being asked to comment on Spaceballs earned this an instant like!
This guy is great. Of course Elon hired him.
That being said, let's give the editor some credit too. Great work on the FX and editing.
You can tell he’s a good teacher when he can come up with a scientific tidbit about Spaceballs.
"Don't fly in buses at home!":-D
When you have a firm grip on George Clooney you do not let go no matter what the laws of physics say you do not let go 😏
I'm a straight man and I agree.
"ur watching a movie and you see a big explosion and it's silent, it doesn't feel right"
*Right after, reviews Interstellar, a movie that shows a silent explosion that's actually impactful*
It's probably not gonna work so well in a 1970s cowboy-in-space movie. Especially when Intersteller was also designed to be as accurate as possible, whereas Star Wars...wasn't.
Too bad there's no *real* ogre to review shrek movies
lol haha
😄😂
Nah! Maybe historians and fairy tale writers can review Shrek because it's a parody of fairy tale stories after all.
You forgot about Khloe K. lol
My gym high school teacher is available, she cold make that review
I never stopped to think about how terrifying space debris may be in real life.
He said he literally heard debris hitting the station multiple times, what if one hit you during EVA - especially if one is on a retrograde orbit, would it be fatal?
Apollo 13 is by far the best space movie ever !
"no matter what the laws of physics say, you hold on"
words to live by
Well, he got interstellar completely wrong. The reason he sees book shelves is because he is stuck in a moment in time in his daughters bedroom which just happens to have a big bookshelf. The multiple rows of the same moment are actually moments in time. Each one is a second, or an hour or a day apart from each other and thats why they go on endlessly.
I was waiting on someone to say this. That actually kinda pissed me off. Interstellar isn't that hard of a movie to understand.
@@ShawnTheDriver Yea, I dont think he actually watched the movie. I think he was given the plot and then just watched that one scene and took it completely out of context. A better scene for him to have explained was the moment where they landed on a planet that was closer to the black hole where time is skewed due to the immense gravity of the black hole.
He said they could put a paper instead of tesseract.i think its not possible to just write it and show. The whole idea was that gravity is the only thing that is constant through all the dimensions. Cooper communicated with gravity.which is logical and realistic.and i dont know how cooper could move the hands in the clock and why did he send those coordinates to nasa what made him do that?. Ps. The astronaut is not so realistic😛
@@tarunyellangar8565 if gravity is the only thing which is common for every dimension, then how would the watch still show the data that cooper encoded? the should have been placed precisely in the same spot for the watch dials to show morse code
master shooter64 there is a possibility that cooper did it repeatedly until the tesseract dissapeared,which according to the movie is the sign that it worked.cooper typing the code and murph retrieving it happened at the same moment .if you ask me how she got to know at the same moment,according to the movie love made her come and check the watch when cooper was encoding those formulae.
0:03 - This is also how I watch this scene. At least one thing in common with this great man.
@3:48 in the back, the EarthRise photo!!!! my favourite photo
7:20
No, the tesseract is representative of the fourth dimension which is the physical dimension of time. This means the bookshelf isn’t _made_ it’s his past that can be interacted with because y’know ITS PHYSICAL
Also, it wasn't some advanced alien race that built it - it was Humans maybe millions of years in the future that figured out the physics of SpaceTime and how to utilize Black Holes to our advantage - something I can definitely see happening... Not my generation, or the next few, but sometime in far future...
@@hannahpumpkins4359 exactly true. That advanced human civilization or "They" as called in the movie, made that physical space in the black hole for Cooper specifically because its the love for his daughter that transcend even time and space.
Also he uses the watch in the tesseract because gravity is the only force that can cross dimensions. The guy in the video maybe didn't know the whole movie plot.
Why would you try to defend that ridiculous scene?
Because technically there is at least some reason to add it (however it is just speculation) but that was real astrophysics
I was hoping to see him talk about the movie Contact with Jodie Foster
Me too!
Yeah.
that's not happens cuse Contact is not a space movie, it's a fantasy..
Apparently the dad on Mars didn’t look very much like Jodie Foster’s dad. They should have got Angelina Jolie to play her part.
@@domet80 And yet Guardians of the Galaxy was a documentary.
Very cool stuff. I was of the generation of kids who sat in front of the TV during the Apollo missions. I also got to see visual effects in space movies evolve too. I agree with you on the visual accuracy of Apollo 13 the movie. Ron Howard chose to use the Vomit Comet aircraft to shoot many of the micro-G scenes. My biggest letdown in the movie was the casting of Tom Hanks as Jim Lovell. In the mid-70s, Lovell came and spoke at our local community college. After his 90-minute talk, and after the crowd left, he hung around and chatted with 5 or 6 of us for about 20 minutes. Hanks' portrayal of Lovell in that movie wasn't even close.
what was lovell really like?
Good personal insight, thanks.
I met Gene Kranz a decade ago. Heh, they nailed it with that guy, what a character!!!
Jim Lowell played a little role as captain of the aircraftcarrier, his wife as a spectator after the launch of the Apollo 13.
First time I watched Apollo 13 with my mother she said she remembered when the actual event happened and the whole world was riveted, waiting for news - mostly on TV but also in newspapers, magazines, the radio. One thing she was adamant about is no matter how grim the reports were, she never doubted those guys were coming back home because they had the best scientists on the ground working 36 hours a day (hyperbole) to solve every problem that popped up.
This was a great video! And I love your sense of humor, too. Thanks for sharing!!!
i like this very much the way you told us,,thanks
Watch him on Joe rogan
*Earth is a planet*
-Science Guy
Gravity was a comedy to me once I saw that scene, I laughed so loudly.
Watch it a few more times and it begins to make sense,. I really like this movie because you keep finding more things about the movie than last time you saw it and it's very 'deep'
I just yelled Aww, c'mon! And the wife told me to sit down, it's just a movie, dear. That did suck, though.
"Shame! Shame!"
He is charismatic and funny. i loved when he said 'i can't believe you actually want me to comment on the scientific realism of space balls'
The editing of this video is very great. Both entertaining and educating
I really love Garrett Reisman! He did an AMAZING job comparing those space movies vs. real life and was SO HILARIOUS too! I would really enjoy watching him breakdown other parts of "space movies", he is a great speaker and breaks down extremely hard topics into something the average person can understand. I am so happy he is with SpaceX now! 🚀
Ad Astra does the whole no sound explosion thing pretty well
but damn didnt realize you can travel back and forth in neptune just to rescue the men in black
Well, Kubrick did a pretty good research for 2001. He is really a master.
All that stuff had been discussed for two decades, and many rudimentary plans had started. But indeed he did pick and choose the most plausible ones. And after a lot of effort, tada, it just worked out pretty well.
Glad to hear your comment about The Martian at the end, “The rest of the movie is a 9”!
I love how Star Wars got a higher rating than Gravity.
This stuff travels ten times faster than a rifle bullet
I was onboard the ISS and it was hit several times during my stay
....I want THAT armor!
Youre an astronaut?
It's called the Whipple shield
My exact thoughts
Yeah, that was me bringing some pizzas for the astronots...
Astronaut: *mentions Apollo 11*
Editer: *puts a photo from Apollo 16* "Hmm, that doesn't seem right" *writes '1969'* "There you go!"
Do more of this please! Very entertaining
8:26 - Talks about Apollo 11, shows the photo of John Young of Apollo 16. Nice work producers
Also show a pic of the actual crew of Apollo 13 but it’s with Ken Mattingly before he was switched with Jack Swigert.
Actually, a friend of mine solved the Star Wars/sound in space issue. Its true you normally can't hear sound in space, but this particularly explosion was really, REALLY loud. So, you know, no problem.
OR the gasses from the inside and the explosion roared past the ship, I'm sure you would hear that just fine!
My school would have taken a whole month to explain the science, that his man explained in 20 minutes.
@GreenAndMeat paw I am not greedy for likes as you are. I just told what I thought.
@GreenAndMeat paw Just went through your channel. Its another definition of cancer. No doubt your mind is full of shit and crap.
@@Dev-nd5oc Don't worry bro. You will meet some crap people in life, They will say whatever shit there mind thinks.
@@sushilkumarsharma2131 Thanks bro. I know.
Always wondered why the hell Clooney let go. She saved him for crying out loud lol... Wonderful movie, but things like that when you have "Gravity" as the name of the movie just kills it.
This is why I gave up music studies. I don't want to know how the sausage is made, I just want to enjoy it. Great video Garrett!
5:45 another reason tlj is top 3 star wars movies. that lightspeed crash scene in the pure silence of space was crazy asf
*Interstellar* is still my favorite space movie.
Interstellar is the best space movie if you turn off the brain and enjoy the ride
@@nothke and here's an example of an idiot.
@@nothke except the science is pretty solid lol
@@MajorMlgNoob Interstellar is probably the most scientifically accurate space movie to date.
@@filmboy18 Yeah, falling into a black hole one-piece and alive is pretty scientific
I totally thought he’d mention that in Spaceballs they just kinda teleport from space to the surface as if atmosphere’s aren’t a thing
Aaahhhh, Spaceballs. We love you.
“They’re flying around space in a winnebago, with a dog man...” 😂
_Ludicrous speed, _*_GO!_* 🤣
The fact that he was able to sneak in that face at 0:09 😂😂😂😂😂
Absolutely a brilliant analysis!!
I think the point of the tesseract being in the black hole because it’s a singularity, ie. infinite energy?
His point is that the tesseract is needlessly complex for the purpose it's supposed to serve. He says we don't know what black holes look on the inside. The film is not getting downrated (much) for complex things being in there.
A black hole doesn't have infinite energy it has the energy of it's mass. Though they can be used as mass energy converters so that's handy.
Energy actually does actually escape black holes through hawking radiation. You can also get energy from spinning black holes because of how they warp space outside of the event horizon.
It's because (spoiler) the super future humans that created the black hole are 5th dimensional beings and therefore are not themselves able to pinpoint a specific point in time and 3 dimensional space. Because future science reasons, I guess. That's literally what they say in the movie. So they use Matty C Spaceman as a pawn, creating this entire elaborate plan to bring him into the center of the black hole by ruining his life and killing at least 3 others. And they create a sort of link through higher dimensions between the center of the black hole and spaceman's old house when his daughter was young so that he could use magic gravity powers to communicate using morse code to her like a hundred Earth years in the past now because gravity is the only force that can travel both forwards and backwards in time. Apparently. And the tesseract thing is the visual way the future beings chose to show spaceman so that he could locate the specific points in time they needed him to and basically unknowingly continue his infinite cycle of suffering the loss of everything he loves by causing his past self to start this whole journey in the first pace.
Lazy Pharaoh OMG, the first explanation of that movies that makes sense to me - thank you!!
@@TheAkashicTraveller I guess you never met my wife.
In the book The Martian he does not poke a hole in his glove to reach the other ship because the author Andy Weir knew it was BS. The character even says/thinks that -"if this was a Hollywood movie i would poke a hole in my glove and fly like Iron Man" so it´s all Ridley Scotts fault that it´s in the movie.
Also the only thing in the book that is not scientifically plausible is that there can be winds strong enough to tip a spacecraft over, the thin air on Mars is not enough to build up that much airpressure. Andy Weir knew this but could not come up with a better solution on how the guy would get stranded alone on Mars.
So the book The Martian should get a 9/10 and the movie like 7 or 8/10.
Only Scenes are rated not the whole movie. And only for realism nothing more. But yes, the book was better then the movie.
I was looking for this comment about the glove.
And I also agree -- both were great, but the book was better.
Agreed, the book was better in numerous ways! But there are exactly three things that are better in the movie than in the book:
1. Where it ends. When I first read the book I was left wondering if they all survived or if Johanssen had to [redacted]!
2. SEAN BEAN at the COUNCIL OF ELROND.
3. That 'Starman' sequence is the most beautiful thing to have ever graced a screen. Vogel blowing water bubbles at his kids is so pure and joyful. And then the way the music fades out as the Hermes pulls away, like Contact in reverse... it's just, I can't even describe it, it's just magic.
@@EmonEconomist Oh, and Sean Bean didn't die in the movie! 😁
Can this guy be the new replacement for Neil Degrasse Tyson?
Yes please!! So much knowledge and personality without all the condescension
@@CibiCZ let him do an audition in Hollywood first. Just like Neil.
Wonderful idea!
uh no not really cuz Neil has bachelor's degree in Physics from Harvard University and a doctorate in astrophysics from Columbia University. Garret is just an astronaut.
@@SaimAsifThe_Weeb_Artist_420 "just an astronaut"
love this guy, Specially when he said " you really want me to comment on" hahahaha. you got a subscriber
7:45 Because the effects from within the tesseract had to travel across time. He was communicating from his future self. Also, there is an element of theoretical physics and sci-fi.
Ok but peter quill was also half celestial at the time so maybe that’s why he survived
He's a half Spartoi. He's half alien, not celestial. Unless you meant "alien" when you wrote "celestial".
Nir Shalev he’s half celestial because Ego - the living planet is his dad! 💁♂️
His gear was made for normal people. So other normal people are using this stuff in that universe. And nobody knew that at the time.
This guy would question the science of his being half celestial.
Imagine how hard it must be for him to watch a Sci Fi Movies 😅😅
The photo of the real Apollo 13 crew shows the original line-up including Ken Mattingly. He was, of course, replaced on the actual mission by Jack Swigert.
Wow such a knowledgable person giving away his thoughts like that is unbelievable
14:26 I love that he brings up why they are giving him goofy movies to review. I see the same mistake in other videos. You want to give these professionals the kind of movies that try to be realistic, and they either succeed because the staff did enough homework or failed because they want it to look cool and entertaining. That's it! Good job pointing it out! If it's a talking raccoon, it's GoG and sci fi! Of course it's gonna be unreal!
Ngl on the interstellar part I dont think he understood the end.
The alien species did not "build" a bookshelf tesseract thing, that was TARS trying to visualise the 4th dimension to the human.
yeah he misunderstand the concept of that scene trying to deliver. if anyone from higher dimension send message to someone from lower dimension, it might be impossible to quickly understand. That tesseract and wormhole was build by someone from higher dimension because they experienced time-space differently as they already know the future(the time consuming equation problem succesfully solved by the space-crew) and past(that genius daughter who save humanity with her eureka effect). Its possible that higher dimension people can control time but somehow they dont want us to go extinct so they built wormhole first to give people easier access to the future through time-space. Since they knows that Mathew and TARS are the only right person to be given opportunity to access the past and in order to avoid temporal paradox or breaking laws of our time-travel(not allowing others to discover that object), the only possible place to build the tesseract is within event horizon since the slowing of time within that region is extreme and once its already been used, it went inside black holes to destroy itself while pushing out mathew and Tars slingshot towards the wormhole back.
When star wars gets rated more accurate than the martian
Something's wrong. I can see it
its not the whole movie,they get to rate a single scene,he did say the rest of the martian appart from that scene was great
@@andrejabrkic1173 okay
Interstellar is one of my all time favorite films. It’s the movie that got my really curious about astrophysics. It’s amazing how your way of thinking changes the more you learn.
I love doc's sound effects 😄 Thank you, great video 🤩
The silent scream at the end! Pure gold! LOL!
There was enough room for Jack *and* Rose to survive. Related? Not even a little. Important? Very.
This guy is so funny,he would make one hell of a teacher
The people inside the death star would hear the explosion.
I’d love him as a Teacher to be honest, he literally does what a Science Teacher that talks about Space should be doing.
Teaching the truth about space
How many people thought of this video as a chat call and him telling you a story as if he's live telling you about space. Kinda like the chat circle from FB after a text. Lol 😆 loved this video.
Interstellar: Did you not watch the movie??
Its very clear that the only thing that can transcend dimentions is gravity. Which he uses in an elaborate way to communicate with his daughter. That's the premise of the movie. Ofc this wouldnt be possible since he would be spaghettified once getting close to the black hole. And a noodle cant communicate past dimentions. This shit is bogus, but the point of the movies is that he is able to communicate to the past. lol.
With supermassive black hole, spaghettification is not a problem : on the horizon, the tidal forces are weaker than on a regular black hole because gravity gradian on a supermassive black hole is distributed on a larger area. That make possible to fall through the horizon without dying.
@@JoeNekonikoit really depends if the black hole is spinning or not.
@@saphired02 Romilly said Gargantua is a older spinning black hole and that's why they call them Gentle. And talked about finding the Quantum data and transmitting it.
@@JoeNekoniko Fascinating. Yet he does fall through the horizon and into the black hole. Wont the gravity inside the black hole rip him apart? I mean the gravity is so strong that light cant even escape, if that is the case gravity at his feet would be much more intense than at the head assuming you're falling feet first. Even for such a short distance? My comment was really aimed at where he made fun of the movie because they overcomplicated the method of communication :)
TBH he's an astronaut, not a physicist. But yeah I do get your point lol