Yeah I get it's a movie about toys that come alive, but beyond that there wasn't any indication that the toys had additional magic powers. One of my favourite childhood movies but I never understood that part.
share
I don't think he was flying as much as gliding. He was launched at high speed.
He clearly flies upwards avoiding crashing into the ground.
share
Buzz didn't have any magical powers for flight. When I was a kid, I used to play with those balsa gliders. Just thin pieces of wood that would fly short distances because it had wings. Depending on how the wings were set, the glider could also fly upwards even though it had no power of its own. Those gliders were initially powered by my throw.
Buzz was under rocket power that gave him altitude. Since he had wings, he could sustain flight for a short while after the rocket burned out until he lost enough velocity which would cause a stall. He got to Andy's car before he ran out of velocity. So yes, he could fly a bit but that doesn't mean he can fly like a bird, or a plane, or Superman.
You really cranked the gears with that explanation. You wouldn't be able to fly directly back up the way he did, a second before he was about to crash into the ground. Re-watch the scene. If he just slowly glided down the whole way that would maybe be more plausible.
shareYou wouldn't be able to fly directly back up the way he did, a second before he was about to crash into the ground.
With enough velocity, anything with wings of the proper shape can develop lift.
Yes you can. It's how you slow down for pulling your parachute, it's called a flare.
shareJust like a pendulum kinetic energy (speed) can be traded back and forth with potential energy (height) in a gravitational field as long as the sum total doesn’t change. I’m ignoring any possible loss due to friction (heat) and any energy that can be added or subtracted from interaction from air currents.
share
Correct. Sometimes I wonder if some people are just trolling to suck us into debating with them..
I think OP started off with what he thought was a funny comment that we could agree and laugh with.
But upon realizing that he was woefully uneducated, he tried to counter argue but not really having any substance. He could have just claimed that Buzz's movement was unrealistic (and I think it is, kinda like how countdown timers in movies are not realistic lol) but he dug too deep already.
Nope, wasn't trying to be funny. Just pointing out a stupid scene in an otherwise great movie. Comparing a space shuttle (which still wouldn't be able to replicate the movement shown in the movie) to a bulky toy with no aerodynamics and a whole cowboy doll hanging off it is not a legitimate argument. Just because you put forward an argument doesn't mean it's valid.
Nice attempt at trying to avoid replying to me though and circle jerking with your buddies above who completely ignored you.
lol, trust me, I don't have buddies on moviechat. And I definitely wouldn't want any.
Also, do you really expect everyone to respond to you? I had nothing to say to you that hadn't already been said. Not gonna dogpile on the same points.
Someone thought maybe you were trolling. I replied to them saying that I didn't think you were trolling. I thought you tried to be funny, but no one bought it. And I still think that. What do you want from me exactly?
I know they're not your buddies, but you wanted them to be and you got ignored. Maybe next time.
share
What do you want from me exactly?
Buddy, just because you put forward an argument doesn't mean your argument is valid. You tried to apply scientific theoretical scenarios to a bulky toy with no aerodynamics and a cowboy doll hanging off it and failed miserably. That's why you stopped replying. Because you're ignorantly conflating two things that are incompatible and can't defend it beyond a shallow theory.
Buzz Lightyear action figures exist by the way, so you can attempt to even make it glide let alone what we saw in the movie. Let me know how that goes.
You tried to apply scientific theoretical scenarios to a bulky toy with no aerodynamics and a cowboy doll hanging off it and failed miserably.
That's why you stopped replying.
Lol as I thought, no attempt to defend your shallow argument whatsoever. How convenient.
Like I said, you're conflating two things with no ability to reconcile them when prodded. Now you're running off with your tail between your legs.
Buzz Lightyear action figures exist by the way, so you can attempt to even make it glide let alone what we saw in the movie. Let me know how that goes.
OK, against my better judgement I'll go one more reply.
Maybe if you were more specific with your complaint. For instance, we know that pretty much any shape except a sphere can generate lift with enough velocity and enough angle (well, people who understand a smattering of physics do).
So considering that Buzz actually has wings, is your problem with wing loading? Do you think he's too heavy relative to his frame and surface area of his wings? How do you know what his mass actually is?
Or perhaps maybe you have a problem with the shape of the airfoil specifically? It's hard to tell because the closeups of his wings aren't that good, but it looks like a reasonable laminar wing. In any case, I doubt kids would cry foul over the shape of the airfoil if they weren't perfect.
Or are you suggesting that the commercially produced action figure perhaps has too high wing loading for the speed the cartoon character was flying at? And since this actually a CARTOON, any commercially made action figure only looks like the animated one (you know, for merchandising bucks).
I won't even address the point that you're complaining about a cartoon figure with wings gliding through the air when the same movie shows toys that are actually living beings - the same movie that shows a Fisher Price pre-school remote car doing 35mph, or a potato head that can see remotely by putting an extra pair of eyes around a corner. So a plastic spaceman toy with wings flying is where you draw the line of disbelief??
Wow. Really?
So there you go. None of that will make any sense to you but I thought I'd indulge you and make one more post anyway.
Now blow.
Lol you're about as easy to manipulate as a child. Throw a few insults in there and you're crawling back trying to piece your ego back together.
...is your problem with wing loading?
maybe you have a problem with the shape of the airfoil specifically? It's hard to tell...
I won't even address the point that you're complaining about a cartoon...
I thought I'd make one more post
Classic. You got reamed here buddy.
shareNo, the OP is a full-time troll. Look at his replies, they are almost always antagonistic and insulting. I've also gathered that he's not particularly intelligent, because even his trolling isn't very good.
shareThat's hilarious coming from the likes of you Mr. 8000 posts. You routinely post dumb threads and get upset when people call you out on it - https://moviechat.org/tt10954984/Nope/62fba0573c6a283a015474fa/The-falling-items
I don't think you're a troll though, you just have a very low IQ.
Oh, so that's what the other post was about. I hurt your feelings so you post stalked me.🤣 What a sad bitch move. It negates anything you say moving forward, because anything beyond this point is clearly just a cunty tantrum. Have some self respect. Fuckin tools, I swear...
shareDon't flatter yourself darling, your 8000 posts are hard to avoid. You must be a devil with the ladies with that much experience posting on forums.
shareBeen on here 5 years. If you think 8k posts is a lot, you aren't very fucking observant... oh wait, you're a pouty cunt, I don't give a shit what you think. You may fuckoff now, I'm done with you.
shareOuch a double reply, I must've really hurt your feelings. Triggered little douchenozzle. No you're right, 8000 posts proves that you're really cool, my bad.
shareCartoon physics. The plot required it. Get used to it. :)
shareTrue I think that's where they slightly messed up I mean they should've crashes into the ground lol.
shareHe wasn’t flying, he was falling..with style.
shareLOL
Exactly
shareHe wasn't. He flew directly upwards before crash landing. Plot hole.
shareHe was fucking gliding. Ok. It may have been embellished but its called gliding. He stands had some upward momentum when the rocket exploded. Now STFU about this nonesense....😂😂
sharehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8jrFbNFRrM&ab_channel=ABCTV - 3:26
That isn't gliding you blind donkey. He flies directly upwards before crash landing. Next time watch the scene again before typing nonsense dickhead.
Dont be a fucking moron. First it's a cartoon you prick. Second it's called momentum and buzz moved his body with the help of the wind. Go fucking nitpick something set in the real world....idiot...😂😂
Ah the old 'it's a cartoon' argument when you've been thoroughly proven wrong. LOL at Buzz moved his body with the help of the wind. Clearly you have no concept of basic physics. Fucking tard.
shareGo watch the scene again while you do what most idiots do best here. Eat.
He clearly lifts up from the momentum caused by the rocket falling off of him. He is now also lighter. So now STFU about this ridiculous complaint...
The only reason you'd use such a specific insult is because you're projecting. Way to expose yourself you obese cunt.
He's falling towards the ground for 5 whole seconds before he flies back up you colossal fucktard, the momentum is against him. Go back to school.
I dont know
shareBuzz performs a stall-down, exchanging speed for a small increase in height until his velocity is no longer sufficient to create lift. As air speeds up, its pressure goes down. So the faster-moving air above exerts less pressure on the wing than the slower-moving air below. The result is an upward push on the wing—lift!
shareI just literally checked out the scene in question that you're bothered about not two minutes ago: streaming media, it really is a blessing in disguise.
Sid's rocket is what launched Buzz and Woody high up into the air, after first discarding the useful RC into the disbelieving Mr. Potato Head, and Buzz said himself he was "falling with style", but they were still able to fly past the removals truck and to Andy's car, and I suppose Buzz just straightened himself out vertically to stop overshooting the car, gain altitude slightly as a result, and then for both of them to drop down into the box next to Andy.
What is the problem? I never had one with this scene or any part of the movie, considering they're walking, talking sentient toys when not seen by humans!
Because the rest of the movie follows the general laws of physics. It's far from being congruent with the rest of the movie.
shareAs someone else said, maybe the wind was strong and on their backs? Yes, the whole climax scene looked devoid of wind with totally still trees and their leaves not moving at all, but that was the limitations of CGI then, and it was the first fully CGI movie.
LiquidOcelot, I just wouldn't let it bother you that much, just go with the flow. I've seen moments in the non-magical or non-scifi parts of Spielberg and Lucas movies that look odd, but they never bothered me, not even when I personally didn't notice them for years and others pointed them out.