Suspension Of Disbelief; or, A Plea For Consistency
Over the last week, I have written (and re-re-written) a more thoughtful review of
Star Trek 11, although I haven't posted my article yet. For the most part, I pretty much liked the new movie. Yeah, pretty much. It entertained me, which is what it was designed to do. I'll have more to say
(
Read more... )
Comments 4
I loved the new movie, although it has holes in the science that you could drive a Klingon battle-cruiser through.
I mean, a planet's core is converted to black hole material and the gravitational pull suddenly increases? There's still the same mass as there was before...
Reply
I saw Blakes 7 in your list of interests, and--if I recall correctly--there was a very strange episode of B7 where they actually WENT INTO a black hole and met a bunch of punk rocker-looking people. Even so, B7 is revered for being a bold, adventurous show (not a textbook on astrophysics or anything like that).
Similarly, most of my own science fiction--at least what small fraction of it I've managed to get published so far--is better labeled as 'speculative' because, as I'll readily admit, some of my 'science' is of the 'sonic screwdriver'/ 'Babel Fish' variety.
Spock on... and thanks again for the post!
Science_Officer
P.S.: for an additional laugh, you may enjoy my earlier Star Trek Memories article (scroll down when looking at my LJ).
Reply
And the science is even worse than Blake's 7 (purely because less B7 episodes had a plot with a science hook, which gives it an advantage when it comes to the law of averages)
Reply
Blake's 7 was a great show, and I miss it. They did seem to have fewer Science Very Fiction moments, but that may have been the emphasis on the "EEK, It's Servalan! Everybody run!" basic plot throughline of B7.
Reply
Leave a comment