The concept of this film is LAUGHABLE !!

They clearly knew they weren't making a documentary, and Danny Boyle has apparently said he won't do another science fiction film, but here are some relevant quotes from the scientific advisor, Brian Cox:

Why is the future of the sun—and mankind—in jeopardy in the movie?
The sun is dying, and we're going to try to do something about it. [Screenwriter] Alex [Garland] and [director] Danny [Boyle] contacted me and said, "We've got a film, and this is what happens. Can you think of any way in which that might occur?" My first reaction was, "Well, no. It's going to die in five billion years, and that's it." But I asked a lot of friends at CERN—there's a good collection of brains there—and we managed to come up with a wild scenario involving new particles, which we expect we might discover at CERN.

What's the wild scenario?
One theory is that there are particles called Q-balls, which would've been created in the big bang and would be drifting around. If they drifted into the heart of a star, and if they were more stable than the matter the star is made of, then they could start eating the star from the inside out.

Scary.
Well, it's almost certain that if these things are there, they wouldn't go into the sun because the sun's not dense enough to [hold] them. But if you get a really dense star, it could possibly cause a problem. We imagined that this Q-ball object is beginning to damage the core of the sun.

It's theoretically possible?
Just about, yeah. It was very soon after I came on board that I convinced everybody that if the sun had gone out, there was nothing you could do—you're not going to be able to relight the sun. But if a cancerous little thing had drifted in there and was causing trouble, then you could imagine removing it.

The movie wasn't about the sun, it was about the behaviour of the human collective aboard Icarus 2. Furthermore, the movie takes place in its own universe, it's not real.

______
Joe Satriani - "Always With Me, Always With You"
http://youtu.be/VI57QHL6ge0

All of what you say is all theory. Thats how long they think the sun has. That is how they think the sun will die.

No one knows for sure. Theoretically this could happen.

I can understand when people are ranting and raving about how unrealistic a movie is when it advertises itself as being very scientifically informed and its plot as very plausible (i.e. "Interstellar").

However, when people are ranting and raving about how unrealistic a movie is and how its plot "would never happen", and the movie is, low and behold, not a documentary but was actually made for entertainment purposes, it's silly to discount the movie's entertainment value or give it a super low rating because of its tendencies toward the unrealistic. There are obviously things in movies that lower the verisimilitude, but IMO people decide way too often that "this is crap" because of some "error(s)" in the plot.

I mean, it's a sci-fi movie. "Sci-fi" meaning science fiction. "Fiction" meaning not true and not needing to adhere to the basic truths of real life. That's what makes so many movies (and shows, and books, and paintings, etc.) wonderful to watch. They're pieces of art (not implying that they're always good or great art), and therefore there's a thing called "artistic license" or "creative license" that the creators use to make it interesting and fun for the viewers.

Or at least, "creative license" and "suspension of disbelief" used to exist, before IMDb forums where everyone seems hell-bent on picking apart everything that's "wrong" with each movie. What's the point of fiction if everything in it has to be true and based on what we currently think will probably happen?

Science fiction invents its own possibilities!! "Sunshine" doesn't have a text before the movie starts telling us "this is all based on astronomers' current projections, and could probably happen in real life". It's fiction. Often things that people saw as "crazy" in older sci-fi stories actually ended up becoming true, so try having some imagination and suspending your disbelief sometimes. ;)

I think what you meant to say is "While all normal people enjoy films and ignore any impossibilities and plot holes for the sake of entertainment, I on the other hand want to try to convince complete strangers on the internet that I'm smart by pointing out obvious imperfections in the story"

Whenever I was younger, sometimes I would watch movies and think to myself "That's not possible, I know the intricacies of the subject and I can prove there is a hole in this plot. I should tell someone so they know of my discovery" But fortunately when most people become adults they stop worrying about how people perceive them...

What I'm trying to say is: if you worry about the scientific validity of every films plot then you're going to miss out on a lot of enjoyable films

I am shocked to know that this movie is directed by Danny Boyle.

First of all, our sun is nowhere near it's death, it still has a couple of billion years to exhaust it's nuclear power, this won't be happening in the 2050's and the idea of it is just absurd and uneducated.

econd of all, how can they compare the sun's unimaginable nuclear fusion to ANY KIND OF MAN-MADE BOMBS ??? are they really that naive to think that a quadrillion gazzilion bombs can actually affect or even reach the sun's surface?? people should read and learn about physics before coming up with such horrendous ideas.

Boyle should stay away from Sci-Fi films.

Yes, the concept is laughable but the execution is terrific.

"...I reserve the right to change my opinion on a movie at any point in time."

terminator is laughable too.

time travel, lol, so unrealistic.