Plausibility? First off, as I said before, mankind's understanding of the universe is infantile at best so to say something is or isn't plausible, based on our current knowledge, really is laughable at best. You have absolutely NO CLUE what will or won't be possible in the future as mankind continues to advance and unlock the secrets of the cosmos. For all we know, there are ways of completely breaking the laws of physics as we know them right now and yes, that includes relativity. Sorry, but you just have NO CLUE and to suggest otherwise really is laughable at best! As long as the characters and story are good, the more outlandish the better in my book as I understand going in that we know next to nothing right now and have no clue what will or wont be possible in the future. Not to mention, were actually talking about FICTION here. How plausible is something like the Wizard of Oz, lol? That doesn't stop it from being the AMAZING film that it is. How plausible is something like Inception? Star Wars? The Matrix? Guardians of the Galaxy? The Avengers? Plausibility, lol. Based on our current knowledge, those films are about as implausible as implausible gets. That doesn't stop them from being HIGHLY entertaining films, as long as you can sit back and enjoy a good piece of fiction, which clearly many people cannot. Plausibility, lol. Thats just another way of saying people have no imagination.
No offense, but posts like these always have been a joke and always will be a joke as they are based on our current understanding of the cosmos, which again is infantile at best right now. We just throw things in to help balance equations. When the mass of the universe didn't add up, we just created Dark Matter. When the expansion of the universe didn't add up, we just created Dark Energy, even tho we have no clue what either of them really are. So basically your entire methodology for deciding plausibility is so flawed that its not even worth debating it.
People like yourself should just stop watching Sci-fi. end of story.
And to say that it simply isn't true that most laws will be rewritten is once again laughable at best. The scientific communities have been trying for years to come up with a single unified theory and it has FAILED horribly. In fact, its been one of the biggest failures in the entire history of science and its because our understanding of everything is so infantile. We still don't understand most of the phenomena that takes place in the universe. In other words, well just agree to disagree. We have a LONG LONG ways to go before we even come close to understanding all of the laws of the universe and how they work together. Were not even close right now and once again, for all we know, we will learn ways of completely breaking the laws of physics as we know them somewhere down the line, which will make even the most implausible.....well, plausible.
Do yourself a BIG favor and the next science fiction film you walk into, just sit back and watch it and enjoy it for what it is, a piece of fiction. Turn your brain off and just let the director tell his story. You will thank me in the long run. Or of course, you can continue to let your HIGHLY flawed ideas on plausibility pollute your movie going experiences. It doesn't matter to me one way or the other as I will continue to enjoy sci-fi as I always have.
Laws can't be rewritten? We have already done so many times.
The law of the Conservation of Energy is a perfect example of a scientific law that has changed over time. It was originally a balance between potential and dynamic energy that was expanded to include chemical, heat, light, and mass. The atomic structure went from the Thompson model to the Rutherford model then to the Bohr model followed by the de Broglie and Dirac constructions. Numerous other extensions that are less publicized have been added since the 1950s.
Newton's Law of Gravity was changed to Einstein's General Theory of Relativity
Here is a good article regarding the possibility of changing our current laws.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/07/100707-science-proton-smaller-standard-model-quantum-physics/
Laws can be rewritten. All it takes is a simple discovery that changes something we thought we already knew. It has happened before and it will happen many more times as we continue on. Just because we declare something a law doesn't suddenly make it infallible as once again our understanding of the cosmos is incomplete. Nothing we know about the cosmos right now is infallible, except maybe some of the very basics like the speed of light and whatnot. Your confidence in mankind's current knowledge is HIGHLY misplaced.
Here is another one for you regarding radioactive decay:
http://www.naturalnews.com/033101_sun_particles_radioactive_decay.html
Again, just because we put LAW in front of something doesn't suddenly make it 100% infallible.
I can say this with 100% certainty, if Hollywood had to abide by what is or isn't plausible in regards to making films....well, Hollywood would be boring as hell. Thankfully, that isn't the case as there are tons of writers and directors out there who actually have an imagination and aren't afraid to make films that push the boundaries in regards to what is or isn't possible. 90% of my favorite films wouldn't exist at all if Hollywood shared your opinions on this matter. They don't and that definitely something to be thankful for!
Still Shooting With Film!
reply
share
Dejay
10 years ago
First, please chill out a bit mate :)
So you disagree that stories should "make sense" in some way? What is wrong with more plausibility with what we know. That doesn't preclude creating interesting stories at all, it just makes it more challenging. Hence it's called lazy writing if people don't work at making their stories consistent etc. Using your logic you can't criticize any movie for anything. And again, I didn't say I didn't enjoy the movie, I just dislike the bionic fubar.
My argument isn't even about the possibility to do something, even if you can do something why do it in a "stupid way"? For example if they "magically" make his hip bones strong and fast enough to withstand the forces and speed and heat that would be created by his stunts, why remove his legs at all? If they can do that to his hips, why not do it to the rest of his body?
BTW, slightly OP but I'm curious now: Do you believe in man made climate change? I'm asking because I'm wondering if you have a kind of "unbelieving" attitude towards science.
reply
share
El_Guapo_Caballo
10 years ago
Now you are scuking Dick to a smarter man while trying to keep a descent facade, failing at all levels.
reply
share
andimacg
10 years ago
Well said. I'm so sick of people talking about what is isn't possible when it comes to science fiction movies.
News flash folks, we don't know everything, we don't even know a tiny fraction of everything.
If you told some one 50 years ago that you would be able to instantly communicate with people on the other side of the world, see their face in real time on a machine with no wires attached it, or use that same machine to pull information, images, movies etc out of thin air in a matter of seconds that person would tell you "that's not possible." Yet here we are doing exactly that, within the life times of those people.
When my father was my age VHS tapes gad just come to the market, now you can fit 100's of movies onto a micro sd card smaller than the nail on my pinky.
My point is: don't going around saying what will never be possible, chances you are wrong.
Herman Goering is a "bit dodgy"?!
reply
share