AD ASTRA | Science vs Cinema

Astrophysicist Andy Howell takes a look at the science of Ad Astra. For more see the article on Gizmodo:
gizmodo.com/wh...
#AdAstra

[@farolito74]

Let’s also talk about how all of the asteroid impacts on his shield would have slowed him to a stop and sent rocks hurling toward his ship (if he were accurate) or if he angled to deflect the rocks away from his ship he would have changed his own trajectory. Begin to hit rocks he wasn’t shielding himself from, and still come to a stop.

[@spikedesignworks]

farolito74 what idiot thought this was believable. I was cringing that whole sequence. So frustrating when movies insult my intelligence so blatantly. You could have still have an interesting action sequence without the idiotic hand waving of simple physics.

[@greyzone1996]

Sam Rodriguez lmao y’all are such nerds! It’s just a movie lmaooooo

[@XeroReflex]

@@greyzone1996 No, all we did was pass science class in the 9th grade... If that's being a nerd to you then my gosh.

[@MistedMind]

@@greyzone1996 And thanks to the stupidity demonstrated in it it was a really BAD movie. Thank God I found that review before spending time on that movie. I rather watch my cat sleep.

[@spinakker14]

I was thinking the same! Also, don't planetary ring consist of dust and ice rather than huge rocks?

[@lighty9023]

You left out the worst mistake. When Brad enters the rocket and they have the floating space fight on an aggressively accelerating rocket. They would be pinned hard in their seat.

[@JeffreyBue_imtxsmoke]

that scene was especially pathetic....

[@exhaustguy]

Only woman are affected by acceleration apparently (see the one who broke her neck slamming into the bottom of the capsule).

[@KurticeYZreacts]

Im not disagreeing... but is "interstellar" better in terms of realism? Why does everyone sht on this movie? I f'n loved every second of it. I like interstellar but... they didnt even try compared to this movie imo. Cant yall give it some credit? Lol

[@platinumpineapple9943]

they were already in soace

[@KurticeYZreacts]

@@exhaustguy she was the only one who didnt grab something to hold on to i believe, idk, idc, the movie was fantastic

[@ricp5401]

I particularly enjoyed the scene in which Brad Pitt's character somehow managed to grab onto a hatch and enter the rocket's going to Mars with 2 or 3 seconds on the countdown without a sweat. It looked highly realistic IMO.

[@phunkydroid]

I like the part right after that where they have a 0g fight while the rocket is accelerating.

[@conorl.g.7651]

That scene was just plain stupid. How would the crew not be alerted if a HATCH opened beside the engine exhaust at TAKEOFF.

[@boiledelephant]

I literally didn't follow that scene. He was climbing the outside of the launch structure and I was like "boy, it's gonna be REALLY hard for him to climb all the way up there in a full spacesuit in the next minute and somehow get into the rocket!" and the movie was like "actually super easy, barely an inconvenience!" and cut to him inside the hatch.

[@makaivanharen2309]

Conor L.G. The crew was alerted that is why the whole 0g fightscene happens.

[@dougb70]

they didn't have the budget to film the climbing up the rocket scene. It was cut.

[@spinakker14]

First I thought they were building a space elevator and I thought: cool Only after the film did I realize it was an antenna... So many missed opportunities

[@praneethachanta4089]

I thought it was a space elevator, didn't know it was an antenna till i read this comment, that's do dumb

[@spinakker14]

@@praneethachanta4089 yeah, when I look back I'm pretty sure they mentioned it being an antenna but I must have been so confident in my belief that I didn't register it Yeah, it's dumb

[@syringistic]

Yeah, wtf is the point of building an antenna that large from the ground up? Since space travel is commonplace, they could just put the whole thing in orbit away from Earth's interference....

[@armr6937]

This movie is just a sequence of bullshit ideas. Looks like a bunch of yes-men pandering to producers.

[@wisco9er536]

I read on a news article that astronomers using sattelites (on earth) are complaining about spacex satellites in space interfering with their observations. Could this be a good reason to use this large antenna; so that astronomers can make observations past the interferance?

[@gehinkun]

re: stowing away: how about that hatch that opens into/near the rocket exhaust?

[@FractalCodex7]

Exactly, so dumb.

[@frankthecat1660]

Much of that sequence was cut/edited, I wouldn't be shocked if additional footage resolves a lot about that confusing scene.

[@senorspice3896]

The science was so fantastical that throughout the movie I was pretty sure its all in Brad Pitt's head and in the end we find him strapped up in a straight jacket in some looney bin.

[@mrs111198]

You must be 10-12 years old to suggest that

[@riot2136]

Mohit Singh or just a regular person making a *joke*

[@derekofbaltimore]

I didn't think he was crazy but I did guess that maybe the whole thing was faked by the space organization to test Brad's mental capability of handling such situations. Like the Star Fleet officers test

[@senorspice3896]

@@derekofbaltimore That one crossed my mind as well...

[@senorspice3896]

@@riot2136 looks like the meaning just flew over his head.......oh well

[@kymourdarkmyth799]

i know you only do movies but i would love to know your thoughts on The Expanse, especially the TV series.

[@Shatterer101]

I definitely second that!

[@wymcoupe9335]

3rded. The Expanse is much more accurate than Ad Astra but they do get a few things wrong for the sake of good storytelling. The writers/showrunners own up to it though unlike James Gray. Ad Astra could have been great but it fell way short in the science department and had an okay story to go along with it. At least it was visually stunning.

[@syringistic]

Aside from the sci-fi Protomolecule stuff, the only hard sci-fi laws that the Expanse breaks is the propulsion, which they do explain in a hand-wavey way that some Martian entrepreneur was messing around with settings on his engine and discovered a way of optimizing engines. With that one little science problem explained away, The Expanse does a really good job of showing things like high G maneuvers, pressurization issues, climate control, etc.

[@bryanjahava2610]

@@syringistic they don't really break laws with the Epstein drive. It's unrealistic because it's so so much more advanced than we currently know about fusion technology or propulsion.

[@kymourdarkmyth799]

@@bryanjahava2610 if I recalled Epstein said he found a way to increase the fusion drive's efficiency. I think fusion is used as an energy source for a hyper-power ion drive. I may well be wrong with this though.

[@jadenthomas1169]

Watch Ad Astra for the cinematography, the acting, and the soundtrack, not for the science. :)

[@Blue-hf7xt]

It’s only under Science Fiction genre.

[@dougb70]

i wish the plot/storyline was stronger too. The "like father like son" trope is way over done.

[@Blue-hf7xt]

doug b Yes, this is 2020... and movies don’t offer anything greater. The writers are smoking too much skunk.

[@dougb70]

@@Blue-hf7xt what strain do you recommend for better movies?

[@Blue-hf7xt]

doug b Strain? Being free of drugs will produce better movies.

[@seanmaclean706]

My favourite part was all the talk of it being a full-moon on the way but once on the surface of lunar they look back at earth and it is also illuminated... um, that’s not how it works. The side of earth facing them should have been in darkness. Oh, and IRL we’ve been flying boosters back to the landing site for years now, yet in this future we’re still discarding spent first and second stages? Okay...

[@obtsfan]

Sean MacLean what makes you think the boosters are discarded? Just because you don’t see them land? They’re never shown burning up in the atmosphere either.

[@MizaT11]

@@obtsfan Probably the lack of visible recovery hardware.

[@obtsfan]

@@MizaT11 meh, it's the future, and it's fiction. That's really splitting hairs. If the boosters aren't shown burning up in the atmosphere, then I consider them as being landed.

[@MizaT11]

@@obtsfan I would argue that visible recovery hardware of some sort is equally as important, if not, more so than showing the boosters "burn up in the atmosphere" as otherwise you're grasping at straws.

[@unclejimmy7]

@@obtsfan I think that the boosters were probably not recovered because they showed no signs of having any attitude control after separation. In current rockets, recovered boosters will begin steering into an attitude to start a retro burn immediately after separation. All of the boosters that we see were just tumbling out of control after separation.

[@fortuna19]

Just to clarify: they have stated they aren’t traditional guns, but more like “rail guns” which accelerate the projectile via electromagnetic forces

[@Cutecrusher25]

Apparently they're "stilletos" i.e. basically handheld versions of Mass Effect Thanix Cannons.

[@davidm5707]

It's not the propulsion, it's that they're shooting projectiles in a spacecraft.

[@z-beeblebrox]

It figures that they over-explain the one aspect of the movie that didn't need a justification.

[@wastelesslearning1245]

Love how space pistols and like 6 moon guards are all they need to protect this world saving mission from space pirates. Were is space armor for vehicles or personal. Where are the space military machines guns?

[@dumpeeplarfunny]

@@wastelesslearning1245 Exactly. If it's that important, they should have a military escort. Also, the military eliminates pirates in the real world, so it's dumb not to do it on the moon in this movie.

[@kendomyers]

Why didnt they make the structure a space elevator? The accident could have damaged the elevator and necessitated the rocket launch scene

[@derekofbaltimore]

I though the structure was an antenna which was needed to pull in signals from their far off projects...

[@kendomyers]

@@derekofbaltimore Yeah...to my disappointment it was an antenna, not a space elevator

[@tomhahnl1927]

I loved 'Ad Astra'! All things you pointed out a correct, still enjoyed the movie very very much!

[@brianmessemer2973]

Tom Hahnl it’s true. I was fully aware from early on that this movie had flawed science and flawed premises, but it still gave some lovely ideas too.

[@Total1Now]

Yes . . . HELLO nerd man Andy. I feel you may have spoiled this movie for yourself. It's a bloody work of art. You prob ably didn't notice this because your nerd brain was too busy nit picking. Hmph!

[@elizabethpetersen3860]

I didn’t mind it, there were some minor holes (mostly these scientific ones) and I didn’t really like how it didn’t leave much for the viewer to analyze because often times things would be flat out said. Like early on in the movie I was picking up that Roy was disconnected emotionally and once I started to learn more about his father, I started to connect the dots and suppose the two were related. But Roy straight up stated something like “there’s this rage, this rage I see in my father and now i see it in myself. I build up walls” or whatever. Like drop me clues and let me figure that out. Or when his s/o was like “even when you’re here you feel distant”. Don’t flat out say that, that’s poor writing. It could have been way better if they just said something like: “I hate to say it but it’s easy for me to just forget that you’re gone because nothing feels like it’s changed”. Tell me he’s distant without actually saying it. But I did like the over arching theme that it’s possible to overcome the scars of your upbringing (that’s the theme I took away at least).

[@yumazster]

Had the same with Interstellar. I had a five pages long list of bullshit science to rage at but I just couldn't. The music, the acting and the sense of otherworldliness made Interstellar for me the way Ad Astra failed to. Sorry to say because I was looking forward to this movie.

[@toshiyaar7885]

Good to know. Tnks

[@lowmax4431]

I thought the most ridiculous part is when he stowed away on the rocket, he was climbing it AS it was taking off. He would have immediately lost his grip and would be pinned down to whatever surface was below him. There was no way he's be able to hang on with the acceleration of the rocket.

[@stanleyshannon4408]

They should have brought in Matt Damon as a science adviser...

[@carlosarniz7439]

😂

[@mrs111198]

No, Matt Damon should have been the one to rescue

[@stvdagger8074]

Don't forget that Liv Tyler played Brad's estranged wife. She should have known better as she previously was the girl friend of a man who went into space to set off nukes {see Armageddon (1998)}

[@Blue-hf7xt]

I gave this movie 5 minutes, if Matt D. Was in it I would not have bothered at all.

[@maxmouche]

Science: "I exist" Ad Astra: "Hold my beer..."

[@eteryczny_sklep]

You need to educate people, especially those dealing with films. There is too little realism in the movies, which makes them so stupid. And people watch it and think that the world is shallow.

[@silasmayes7954]

This movie was so close to being good. Fantastic cinematography but the movie just got worse and worse as time went on.

[@10aDowningStreet]

I am disappoint

[@moeshalabi7205]

I agree with you. I thought it was just awful. It had potential, definitely doesn’t compare to interstellar. But it fell flat

[@circularsky]

This is one of the best films of the year, and it's clear that people who didn't like it just didn't understand what the film was doing and the way in which it's a subtle exploration of its themes.

[@moeshalabi7205]

@@circularsky That's your opinion and opinions, as they say, are like farts. I personally watch movies for their stories not themes. Although theme is important, it doesn't compensate for a bad story and Ad Astra had one heck of a bad, bad story. Terrible characters too.

[@carlrs15]

@@circularsky Oh yeah? Care to illuminate us?

[@wpatrickw2012]

When I first saw it in the trailer, I thought the tower scene was going to be a from a space elevator. That would have helped explain all of the human activity in deep space. Also, they should have had earth hit by a massive EMP emitted by Tommy Lee Jones' ship. Instead of having Pitt ride the shock wave, they should have built tension by having him try to reach minimum safe distance before the detonation. The tension can be climaxed by his ship almost being destroyed by the effects of the nuke going off.

[@danielright1515]

Oh you fucktard casual cinemaphills!!!! Ad Astra is made not for entertainment but for delivering a huge message that only few had figured out. Maybe you will feel stupid after years of enlightment.

[@burton926]

I was so caught up on the fact that his tears roll down his cheek in zero g that I totally missed all of this. DOWN HIS CHEEK PEOPLE! He'd be blinded by a ball of space tears until he wiped them away.

[@oscarleon4183]

It was an improvised tear by Brad Pitt, the director liked it and decided to keep it as it was, Pitt told him that he had to make it float with CGI but the director said no way, its a movie guys sometimes reality isn't that important

[@J5L5M6]

@@oscarleon4183 Hahaha

[@truepontiac8000]

They had a scene in season 3 episode 11 of "The Expanse" that did just that (the pool of tears in her eyes). The attention to detail was pretty cool. It's @ 21:17 into the episode, give or take a few seconds.

[@YavorM-Yash]

@@AndrewTFenn and Brad Pitt's character just floating in the very exact room.

[@noneofyourbeeswax01]

A US astronaut once actually got into great difficulty with sweat inside his helmet, it obscured his vision and threatened to build up so much moisture inside his helmet as to compromise his breathing.

[@looshbgoosh]

This is so great! I love your work and you explained so many things I thought sounded dumb in the film. Although overall, I actually enjoyed Ad Astra--for the sound design, epic daddy issues, and Brad Pittness.

[@promcheg]

Fire in space: Don't need to imagine, just watch The Expanse.

[@katherineblackwater6717]

Yep. Season 3.

[@linesinthedirt]

@@katherineblackwater6717 Season 4 Soon!!

[@cccircuit8296]

I saw this earlier this week, I could tell from the trailer it was not going to be science focused, was still pretty good though. Thank you for your analysis, You did a great job as always.

[@Furrrburger]

I'm a huge space fan and was pumped for this movie...I fell asleep.

[@painterQjensen]

The James Webb shenanigans is the real killer, This movie I see as a pure snooze. Not gonna waste my time and money to go see it,

[@eyes7775]

Already waste my money for this movie , got sleep on the theatre , why can't they make some thing like the 2001 space oddesey

[@thothheartmaat2833]

I fell asleep at the Ryan gosling space movie twice... I mean I saw it twice and fell asleep both times.. through the whole thing..

[@pjustice2222]

That was a blessing. Consider yourself lucky.

[@scania1982]

I liked it but the physics are weak.

[@idjles]

You didn’t talk about the laser communication and why being on Mars makes no difference

[@andyhowell9517]

There was a ton we had to cut for time. There is a line in the movie that the secure Mars facility was the only one left after the bursts. But yes they could have recorded Brad Pitt anywhere. I talk about this in my Film Threat review that should come out soon.

[@Old_Ladies]

Also getting a response seconds later... it should take at least 8 hours to get a response if they were communicating at the speed of light.

[@xponen]

the movie covered it, remember; 1) they said Mars is the "last secure" base to transmit that signal, also as laser , 2) the movie opening Text hint there's other country, in conflict, not just the United Airforce Space military, and 3) the movie clearly shown a "cut" where Brad Pitt walking back & forth, indicating time passes.

[@mnm8818]

All the laser communications on earth were hit by the emp/ antimatter emp thingy. Mars had an underground facility that stopped the emp/antimatter thingy. So that's why he had to go there.

[@CykoruKun]

@@xponen true that there was a cut but are we supposed to believe Brad Pitt sat there for 9 hours? IMO the movie failed to convey that.

[@MsCharlesbets]

My first thought when Brad Pitt decides to use the the shockwave of the nuclear blast to propel him back to earth was, "Wait . . . He's on the other side of the rings of Neptune. Isn't the shockwave going to hit the rocks first, turning the whole explosion into a giant nuclear shotgun blast and shred Brad and his ship into tiny dime-sized pieces?"

[@storminmormin14]

I’ve just come to accept that all space movies, except for the Martian, give their ships unlimited delta V

[@davidm5707]

I just tried to assume they had some kind of advanced engine that could go directly from planet to planet without requiring refueling.

[@MrPabgon]

Exactly, and that's because Andy Weir is an excellent sci-fi writer that takes these things into account. That's how these should be made.

[@boiledelephant]

@@MrPabgon It's a hard sell with the execs, I imagine, because 95% of audience members won't notice or care about accurate physics.

[@MrPabgon]

@@boiledelephant Yes yeah I get that. I mean more how I'd like them to be. If it isn't like that in the movie, it doesn't really bothers me. I just like it more if it's more "realistic". What bothers me is the Earth-like Moon gravity in ad Astra or propulsing from an exploding bomb. That does bother me. The delta-v is more of a thing I like when it's correct, but it doesn't really bothers me if it isn't.

[@ANWRocketMan]

I want to see a proper space opera series. one with realistic physics and showing what humanity would probably actually look like if we had a Solar civilzation. The expanse is good and far more believable than anything, but I want a show where people need to deal with horrendously long travel times as ourdescendants will probably have to. And as our ancestors used to.

[@coffeestainedwreck]

That feeling when the story of the Mir fire makes a better movie than all of Ad Astra.

[@RadioactiveGoose]

Damn.. I loved this movie a lot. The atmosphere was perfect.. I have to be honest, it bums me out to know that the science is so inaccurate.

[@MrGermat]

A very fair and balanced review of what I considered to be a dreadful film in terms of basic science errors. Dr Howell makes some very useful suggestions on how the film could be improved. I am also a film scientific consultant, sometimes it can be a very difficult job as producers, directors script writers and model makers want to pull off in rather wild directions. Often it requires patience to work through the script and make sure everyone is aware of the changes. It is not clear what went wrong with this film. Did they even have a science director?

[@joyeternal2314]

What happened was director James gray wasn't invovled and taken off from final cut, edits, and additional reshots and post production. He came out and said it in an interview. It was an amazingly well made film which was ruined by the edits where it's original creators didn't have a say. It was sad all around.

[@MrGermat]

@@joyeternal2314 thanks for that, its never a good idea to mess with the director's original vision. This could have been a really good film, however I would still maintain there were some considerable errors in the original script.

[@caseybrand7919]

A great movie that is under-rated. Criticism of the science is certainly fair and fun, but the licenses taken here do not detract from the strength of the storytelling. While other movies in this genre have been very plot focused, the character arc and themes of this one make it the best of a very good era for these types of films. This one is the most artsy and most introspective with its 'into the wild' story frame. A framework seen in other films and in ancient stories (Apocalyse Now comes to mind, though far less grim than that movie). In that sense this film is easily the strongest of the bunch. While film is ultimately just make-believe, it is still good to keep gently prodding filmmakers to use as much realism as possible.

[@ThoughtWord]

I was totally content suspending disbelief when it came to the science. Plus, it's silly for Andy Howell here to say "keep all that *not dumb* stuff, just change the motivations." The search for-and failure to find-intelligent life beyond earth is the thematic core of the film. That motivation is essential and leads to Roy's most important piece of dialogue towards the end with his father: "We're all we've got." You don't get that payoff if Tommy Lee Jones is just a vague "explorer."

[@justo316]

I feel like there are a ton more problems with the science in this movie. It made me uncomfortably angry while watching and I found it distracted me from the story

[@dilanchavda6630]

100% agree

[@fullyawakened]

Or maybe you don't know as much as you think?

[@gebe9027]

You weren't distracted from the story because there was none to begin with

[@M4rtinK]

Actually I found the depiction of space travel in the movie to be so bad it was enjoyable. And you can't go wrong with a killer space monkeys of doom!

[@AlexeiAkaTechik]

Fun fact - when Russian astronauts on MIR station were fighting for survival and integrity of space vessel during the fire, American visitor, Jerry Michael Linenger was staying in reentry module, ready to evacuate. Like seriously.. They were briefed not to provide help. Michael Foale, after him broke this protocol and integrated perfectly into the crew and provided help and assistance.

[@kevinhillary4057]

I just started laughing at the end when he surfs through space, didn’t think the movie was gonna go that far but I guess I didn’t learn anything after seeing the monkey bit

[@SynysterNick]

I loved the movie SO MUCH! I knew right away the stupid physics they used in the movie, but the story was so strong to me that I completely ignored those mistakes. Which are far less than most space movies! Really really great review!

[@soggie7157]

Story? What story? It's the most self-indulgent and meandering movie I've ever watched.

[@alexamparo817]

Are you guys ever gonna do interstellar

[@frankdai]

They can't because that movie is so accurate

[@SB111058]

That is one dumb movie too!!!!!!!!!!

[@FabledGentleman]

@@frankdai You probably were sarcastic, but surviving falling into a black hole and go through a worm hole, isn't really accurate science.

[@ArniesTech]

That Princess Leia Marry Poppins fly killed me...😢

[@DeepEye1994]

To be fair the guns they used on the Moon chase scene didn't look like regular guns, they're probably some SciFi weapon that works in space, they vaguely even looked like blasters from Star Wars. I also take the spaceship being able to stop and start again, or be used for both a Mars and Neptune trip with a grain of salt because the movie is set in the future so maybe they're more advanced spaceships that surpassed the issues our current spacecrafts have.

[@solsospecial]

The fact that he doesn’t acknowledge that this movie was set in a distant advanced future just goes to suggest that all he cares about is his ‘content’.

[@stacykrett]

This channel occupies a great niche. I don't see any others like it (or haven't found them yet).

[@d.fxd262]

Could you do a review on The Expanse? It's an awesome series on Amazon Prime. Their perspective of future space living is well executed.

[@educostanzo]

About the movie: why is he recording his message in what it seems to be an anaechoic chamber?

[@Edino_Chattino]

So it would be the nicest recording in all the galaxy! lol

[@davidm5707]

To look futuristic?

[@ethanpixelate]

Okay, how about the anechoic chamber having a very ordinary looking window and door? Would sort of ruin the hole anechoicness.

[@erixen_twin]

Probably worth mentioning, even with gravity assist and perfect launch timing, it took Voyager2 12-plus years to get to Neptune. So we're expected to believe that Roy made the journey from Mars to Neptune and back to Earth, potentially a 24-30 year round trip journey, with only the oxygen and food supplies on board the ship that was only meant to go from Earth to Mars? And he somehow didn't age (or go insane) during that time?

[@jimmylim618]

When you guys finally realized that this is not a space exploration movie ? This is more to Brad Pitt psychology exploration in space theme , God damn it

[@mohdrazif777]

Before I watched it, i did a very light research about this movie on Wikipedia. The director said "the most realistic depiction of space travel that's been put in a movie". I stopped reading because afraid of spoiler.... Then I watched the movie at cinema and felt so disappointed after it ends. My disappointment is on par with Transformers The Last Knight.

[@williamcrane8236]

Its a crap rewrite of Solaris, cuzz his buddy George C kept riding him about this great space movie he made that Brad hasn't yet.

[@lauraclever]

That's my point

[@Nurg1982]

The other aspect of the movie, I believe, they wanted the onlooking eye to understand, is the (possible) effect to human psyche when dealing with prolonged time in space and spacecraft. Everyone is hyped about going to Mars and the moon at the moment, but we have to realize this is not some road trip. It takes longer periods, some mundane as daily systems checks until you arrive. You need stable, clear headed individuals going onto these missions.

[@xiserhoff]

I wanna see this amount of effort put into the effects of something like the Expanse.

[@Corkypoo]

I have a question? What about the months it took for him to get to Neptune and the feeding tube and all that. How did he get back to Earth without the feeding tube? Am I missing something?

[@breesco]

Nice critique! Current 'science' writing in hollywood has a book of buzzwords, and they're just selected at random. They then make the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs.

[@JohnDoe-dj3lw]

What made me laugh (apart from other technical bestialities) was the fact that they needed "a laser" to send a message from Mars to Neptune, as if to say "it needs to go at the speed of light or the whole scene doesn't make sense, characters can't wait years to communicate with each other". Apparently nobody told'em that radio waves also travel at the speed of light (in a vacuum), since they're a form of electromagnetic radiation lol the movie is a mess from a scientific standpoint, but I enjoyed it. The cinematography was just beautiful.

[@jeremyglass4283]

Actually chemical rocket engines can relight many times over, in fact, even the 3rd stage of the Saturn V was able to relight to send people to the moon back in the 1960-70s! Modern engines such as spacex’s Merlin and raptor engines, or Aerojet Rocketdyne’s RL-10 engine, can light as many as 5 times per mission, and if they store more ignition fluid, they could relight way more times, but that just isn’t necessary for most missions

[@jeremyglass4283]

The fuel being burned only effects how long the engine can fire for (at max thrust, lowering the thrust also increases how long you can burn, but you’re not doing as much work, so you’re actually losing efficiency), it does not affect how many times you can relight the engine, that is constrained by how the engine actually starts up, this could be with an ignition fluid, or a torch ignition system similar to a spark plug in a car

[@Winkkin]

Movie would be a career-ender for anyone else. Any of us sci-fi fans could pitch better.

[@fraaggl]

I totally agree with your analysis, i took the tower for a kind of test for a futur space elevator. They don't really explain the real function of the tower so they could be anything, but like you i was a bit desappointed that it was not a space elevator. That would have been sooo cool !

[@sumahuma6054]

Decent analysis. I don't agree with a few things: An anti-matter cascade is possible via E = mc^2. When the annihilation energy is above the particle threshold of (2 m)^2 (where c=1) then spontaneous creation occurs and cascades to creation of particles of lower mass threshold. And so on and so forth. Going to the edge of the heliosphere with futuristic imaging equipment is probably a good explanation. The images captured in the film were IMAGES, so their equipment must have been sensitive. If the heliosphere is shooting charged particles in a particular direction we can be sure that that equipment would be heavily disrupted.

[@sacredlamb3021]

I know u don't do TV shows but could u check out "the expanse" u won't regret it

[@fusionspace175]

You addressed all but one mechanical issue I had with the movie. Why, if you know there are moon pirates, would you still be using those open air moon rovers we had in the 80s? They call it a war zone. What do we drive in war zones? Armored Humvees. Why was there no armored tops on the moon rovers? Weight can't be an issue, as there is so much less gravity. And even if space com is too cheap or whatever to armor their rovers, why wouldn't the pirates have armor on theirs? I know it costs a lot to ship weight up to the moon, but that base has been there a long time. There have to be old metal panels in the garbage. Let's see some Mad Max style armored moon rovers. There's no reason other than people expect moon rovers to look like that. Also, why was Brad Pitt just free after he got back? Wouldn't he face a military tribunal for breaking into the ship and killing the entire crew? The one guy he stabbed with a pipe, even if the others were sort of self inflicted. I guess murder doesn't count if you're in space? Even if you complete your mission, you're still held accountable for killing your own people. Oh, but then we couldn't have the reunion with Liv Tyler. They sacrificed logic for emotional impact, but there was some really dumb stuff here, though overall I did like it.

[@timmythetimebomb4354]

It takes place in the future, that’s why it can stop, because at that time we have discovered it

[@derekofbaltimore]

I just saw the movie yesterday, didn't much care for it, but you committed the cardinal science critique of a sci-fi film. Most everything you said I agreed but It is a pet peeve of mine whenever a scientist critiques the propulsion systems of a future NASA/Star Fleet/etc. Seems weird that they could send the ship from mars to Neptune which is like 10 times more distant than the moon to mars but they also said they could make the trip in 79 days. That's pretty fast and that's sci-fi. Exotic fuels and imaginative propulsion is what makes sci-fi work. Please don't take that from us : )

[@justabill5780]

I kind of wanted to see it, but I couldn't tell what it was about from the ads.

[@jeffreyburton7284]

I watched this movie last night and just accepted the world as they presented it. It's really good. Sort of a 'Heart of Darkness' in deep space. The overall tone of the movie is Kubrickian. The science did get distractingly ridiculous. I really can't understand why anyone would make a Sci-Fi movie that is not firmly grounded in science. It's not the 50s, anymore. Ya know? Still for what it was, which is a tone poem, about loneliness, family, duty and retaining your humanity 'in the vastness of space', it's a good and compelling work.

[@telisogamatos]

where did you watch it?

[@jeffreyburton7284]

@@telisogamatos On Prime Video.

[@Mocha69A]

The movie wasn't about the tech the movie was about the characters it was about sacrifice and people. And it was about making us small in this vast universe it was another message that we should care about each other. It was about alot of things. The sci fi was cool. It wasn't about being another modern sci fi that made all the science accurate. It still touched me. And I'm a pragmatic thinker.

[@thundercactus]

I find it weird now that people think, myself once included, that you just POP once you've exposed to vacuum. We've got 14psi of pressure down here, diving down 30 feet is 28psi (the record for diving is 335ft unassisted, holding breath for over 4 minutes, 164psi at the bottom). Outer space is just 0psi. That's only a difference of 14psi. Sure, it'll make your blood boil, but your skin will hold.

[@sunedssing8721]

Why is he going 400 m/s towards his ship, if he has A GODDAMN SPACE JETPACK? How about instead of smashing directly into the ship he could, i dunno... slow down??

[@AlexAlex-qe5kn]

Smart ass

[@florin604]

Because Hollywood

[@stevegoodson9022]

Another thing that bugged me - a spacecraft designed to go between the moon and mars manages a suicide burn landing on earth, without any apparent heat shielding or parachutes. Hadn't anyone involved in this film played KSP? The jump off the spinning thing to get back to the ship - even if the speed was sufficient, imagine the precision you'd need in timing the jump, and how much all that debris hitting the panel would randomly change your velocity. Astronauts are incredibly smart and capable people and this film is an insult to them.

[@peterfrancis2330]

The general is lying to him about antimatter and space pirate, so give it a pass

[@Cailus3542]

Peter Francis Nope. The general was actually telling the truth about the antimatter. That was indeed what was causing the magic space pulses.

[@THEBIGMG1]

This movie didn’t look interesting plot wise

[@THEBIGMG1]

John Jay I ain’t watching it

[@ebouwman034]

The biggest plot hole for me was that they were worried about the anti matter explosion… then he sets off an antimatter explosion! I can suspend my disbelief about the anti-matter chain reaction but not when he blows it up anyways. IMO they could have gone down a path similar to Event Horizon and say the dad was testing some (hand wave) propulsion system and needed to be far away for… reasons.

[@Ralphie_Boy]

*Saw the movie last night, without getting into the weeds 1 out of 10 I have to rate it a 5* *I'm a sci fi fan and an admire of Brad Pitt and Tommy Lee Jones, can they survive the critics all the way to the bank!* 🤣

[@bombappetit]

The movie sets out some space travel figures, like 19 days to go to Mars, and another 79 days to Neptune. Why wait decades to send an interception or rescue mission to Neptune then? Our current generation of astronauts spend more time in space than that.

[@shamanpj]

Great point!

[@drdavidstr]

do you have a video about interstellar movie ?

[@yugen3968]

The guns 'firing' in space were actually , as the vfx artists imagined them, not exactly the guns we use, but a sort of 'railgun' which magnetically accelerates a big piece of metal. There could be complexities in that again, but just felt like mentioning it.

[@jwoolson]

Two words: "The Expanse" - much more consistent science across all the seasons.

[@agungokill]

loves the show, except its only 10-13 episodes per season, and need to wait an entire year for the next seasons which is sucks!

[@noahno]

Agung Zon Blade lol, dont watch Peaky Blinders then- only 6 eps

[@gudhaxer41343]

@@agungokill id rather have quality episodes than 24ep with filler crap that the likes of CW has.

[@Buskyb]

Jonathan Woolson the expanse is based on serious sience. The authors(plural) is very strict with it. Yes some artistic freedom is taken but hey, fringe sience.

[@osamahkiwan85]

I also found several problematic portions in the movie. For one, if the energy surges were so powerful that it could travel from one edge of the solar system to the other and cause massive deaths on Earth how come Roy's dad wasn't affected when he's right next to the source ?

[@robertwilliams450]

Directional beam energy weapon

[@aliensoup2420]

@@robertwilliams450 There is such a thing as the inverse-square law. Even collimated laser beams expand and loose energy at greater distances. Anyway how do you aim a directed beam across the distances between Neptune and the Earth while each is on a different orbital plane and period.

[@robertwilliams450]

@@aliensoup2420 mathematics. If the beams dissipate then it would cover a wider area

[@aliensoup2420]

@@robertwilliams450 Fine, but the energy per area is dissipated. All things, considered, it was just a bunch of made-up nonsense to create a sense of urgency. Hollywood writers are just lazy.

[@thothheartmaat2833]

In the scene where the rocket is taking off from Mars to go to Neptune, aren't they floating even though they're on mars? The one where the girl smashes her face on the window and the three people get killed when the rocket is taking off.. I seem to remember that scene being in zero gravity even though it was on a planet..

[@headbeeguy1035]

Weren't the towers comms towers to facilitate intersolar system communications with the colonies on Mars, the moon and various craft. Traditional antenna would be easier to maintain comms with the numerous ships then satellite tracking. But space elevator would've been better and what I thought it was going to be from the trailer

[@Odisseu_AOE]

I think the review is taking much in consideration current technology, with advanced tech the limitations would be different. Which the movie smartly does not go deeper in.

[@ShanesSlothMunchies]

I feel like this film wanted to focus more on the content and not context Its one of my favourite films, and my love for it comes from the message, and the pure emotion you feel when watching the movie

[@ryandonnelly2661]

Absolutely LOVED this movie. I expect to have the moon around like it was in the film in 25 years

[@johnbussell8279]

The most irksome thing to me was how Brad Pitt’s character assuming he’s around 50 has such a passion for his deadbeat dad. Every time he says “Dad” I cringed. Also the ring of Saturn was horrible but in reality I forced myself to like it as it’s about Space/science with Brad Pitt in it and we have to remember it’s just a movie use your imagination a little bit. Anyone can rip anything/anyone a part, nothing is going to be perfect

[@shahzadtubeful]

Thank you for so good video. I appreciate your work. Brilliant analysis and presentation.

[@tomthx5804]

1) The only justification for the heliopause thing is that maybe by Neptune, the "interference" would be reduced by some percent, and that percent was what their future instruments required. So its a little goofy, but possible. 2) The matter anti matter thing makes little sense. But I suppose you could imagine a situation where an anti matter explosion in the atmosphere of Neptune could cause the elements in the atmosphere of Neptune to keep making these massive flares that cause the problems in the movie. Super massive hydrogen bomb reactions that keep re occurring or something.

[@idjles]

They didn’t even do the dust thrown up from the moon buggies correctly

[@DavidWMiller]

@@ChineduOpara Who cares?

[@DavidWMiller]

@@ChineduOpara No, I mean who cares if he could do better, other than you. You don't have to be able to do something better to criticize it.

[@moneeb343]

I wish they had more space pirates. Instead of the space monkeys, a space pirate pillaging space equipment? How was that ignored?! You already had pirates on the moon! Ad Astra didn't need lots of action, but the points of action that had action were so short lived and could've gone through so much more.

[@joeskater5782]

When the mice started running around, it was so cool. Mice are really smart.

[@Lepidopterous.]

Lmao this isn’t a documentary...

[@mysticmarble94]

No, it's just a stupid movie ... I agree.

[@davidm5707]

But it should have some relationship to reality, otherwise it's fantasy and anything can happen for no reason.

[@Lepidopterous.]

David M It does have some relationship with reality. It wasn’t written for or by rocket scientists, nor is it the total disgrace to science some are making it out to be. 😂 (Still love this vid for being informative)

[@J5L5M6]

@@Lepidopterous. Whoa, you also learned something watching this? Judging from the comments I've read, I just thought everyone except for myself arrived here with more knowledge than the entire alumni of the US and Russian space programs combined. 😂😂😂😂😂

[@ecurb10]

This whole "it's only a movie" excuse really annoys me....it's a cop-out that makes no sense. It's basically saying that because it's "not a documentary" then anything goes...let's not follow the laws of physics, let's not bother following any basic laws at all. In creative writing there's a thing called verisimilitude - a story must have the sense of realism, that it could actually happen. It's a vital ingredient of any good narrative writing - even fantasy - that you learn in any creative writing 101 class. Audiences these days are way more tech-savvy than they used to be, and especially given that much of the sci-fi genre audience are also science-nerds, then verisimilitude in a sci-fi means getting the science right! I would've thought that'd be obvious. It's like when a war movie doesn't follow historical or weapons accuracy....much of the audience would be war/history buffs, so it would stand to reason that they'd be watching for accuracy. It's amazing why movie makers still don't seem to get that.

[@GreenInvasion]

I don’t know for who they make this kind of films. I find it infuriating how badly written are all the dialogs and the absolute disrespect for scientific facts. The whole message of the film is: Don’t bother exploring space because there is nothing out there. Stay at home at the sofa. As a hardcore science fiction fan I find this garbage quite insulting. I agree completely with the review except for having to go and see the film for yourself. No need to. Save the money, watch Interstellar again...

[@gideondiego3372]

Agreed!

[@obtsfan]

If you think that that was the whole message of the film then I think you misinterpreted it. The only person that’s cast in a negative light is the father, and for good reason. Brad Pitt’s character learns to not be self-destructive like his dad and appreciate the personal relationships that he had on earth. That doesn’t mean he’s going to stay on the couch for the rest of his life. It’s about being a regular person and having moderation. Caring about those around him. Not perpetuating the mistakes of his father. Not being obsessive. As a sci-fi fan and astronautics engineer I wasn’t insulted in the slightest..

[@obtsfan]

And they never say that “there’s nothing out there”. Brad Pitt’s character says that his dad found lots of fascinating worlds throughout the galaxy, he just didn’t find LIFE. The character also saves all of his dad’s data and brings it back to earth. The message of space exploration is still there. You just shouldn’t kill your crew and alienate your family in order to do it.

[@J5L5M6]

@@obtsfan Thank you. It seems that many fellow Science FICTION fans fail to grasp that there are humans in these tales. It's akin to writing off the entire world of Blade Runner ('82 & '17) due to us not having capable AI at this juncture in time.

[@vudusid9137]

You missed the part where he set off from Earth to the moon. The rocket was pointing directly at the moon implying that it was flying in a straight line to get there, rather than relying on real life space travel by orbiting the Earth, increasing that orbit until you are in the moons influence and then decreasing the moons orbit.

[@GavanWilhite]

You would to go Neptune to use the sun as a gravitational lens. This might give you the necessary resolution to see details like lights on exoplanets.

[@petrichor9417]

I wonder where the remains of the eaten crew went. There should be at least some bones and their clothes be left. But nope, everythings gone. Also, it would have been so cool, if they had completely cut out the sound in the sound booth, I think that would have driven the feelings they tried to convey in that seen even further.

[@SeFu2006]

The space pirate part I didn’t understand how could space pirate even be a thing when it takes millions of dollars to be in space in the first place.

[@anastasi7551]

This movie was a scientific disaster. - 1G on moon base. Um, no. - fighting in zero G during a rocket launch? Um, no. - Zero G while rocket ion drives are firing? Um, no. - Spacewalking near gas giants without being cooked by extreme radiation? No.

[@dmstrobel]

Yes! The "1g on the moon as long as you have air" happens so often in movies I expect it, so I was disappointed but not surprised. But the fight in freefall during launch popped me right out of the film. Plus I was excited then confused at the beginning when Pitt's character was obviously on a space elevator... then it was just a tall tower. Why would they give up a space elevator!?

[@Tore_Lund]

@@dmstrobel Not seen the movie, but from this video, the Moon rover scenes are also wrong. You don't have belching dust plumes in no atmosphere. every microscopic dust grain will follow a perfect parabolic trajectory, so they possible made CGI clouds, to ad realism, when they in fact achieved to opposite!

[@xponen]

they never fought during rocket launch, the character only fought after stage separation, after the "jolt" scene.

[@anonymes2884]

@@xponen Pretty sure he was floating before that though.

[@xponen]

@@anonymes2884 but the scene is shot waist-up, we only imagining whether his leg is floating or standing up.

[@KaterynaM_UA]

well comparing to this, Martian was a documentary xD

[@kwcnasa]

To be honest, I think the moon buggy gun fight chase scene is really cool. Buy after watching the film, shouldn't they have a Lunar version of Humvee with bullet proof features? After all they know there is a war zone out there, and the fact that they are able to build such impressive structures on the moon and Mars, I just don't understand why they can't afford to build a lunar vehicle with some kind of protection.

[@ferminprieto2577]

yeah, I was very disappointed when I saw the movie too... they lost me when Brad Pitt arrived at the lunar spaceport walking casually as if on earth.

[@hardware199]

8:06 this animation is from wikipedia (Gravity assist) :D

[@floridtv]

His motivations were driven by a subconscious and suppressed desire to know his father more than anything. To gain a better sense of identity. Not motivated by bad physics. Shallow observation. This movie is about the deepest psychological transformation. It doesn't get more human than that.

[@Dcassimatis]

!st let me just say I can't stand technically inaccurate films... you're on a high priority mission and suddenly we're going to stop to add some plot manipulation in the middle of empty space...research primates wouldn't be able to bite through any part of a space helmet, or space suit, space hardware is rated for micro-meteoroid impact...every inch of it...you could shoot a 30/30 round at close range to the visor on a space helmet and not breach it...living tissue exploding when exposed to a vacuum...wouldn't ever happen...this was a stupid dumb-shciitt of a film...and anyone reviewing it should be pissed...it was a lousy movie...poorly written...with 80 million dollar budget, Brad Pitt and Tommy Lee Jones...I expect more. In today's world most people are smarter then the people making movies...the people making movies need to get an education...there's no excuse for any movie lacking technical accuracy...I walked away feeling I wasted my time and money and i'll bet most everyone else did as well...so, stop trying to talk this movie up...it's not possible.

[@BobWilliscorgi]

AD Astra was the most boring film I’ve ever seen 🙄

[@drone-time]

You would think that with a $100 million budget, they could afford to pay for a science consultant with more than a 7th grade education. Then again we live in a society that values entertainment more than truth. We've grown so accustomed to suspending disbelief for the sake of entertainment that we've lost our sense of disbelief all together.

[@tharundhanabal9872]

There are several scenes where the Cepheus is in a constant non-zero acceleration, but the crew reamanis waitless, how is that even possible, Wouldn't there be some sort of g-force? Is there something about physics idk. I would love if anyone could explain. Thanks!

[@johncartman222]

Hey Andy, nice video. Thank you for the Information. Have still one question. What about Brad Pitt jumping towards his ship with the metall shield thing. How could have he know in witch direction to jump. The distance Just seems too huge to calculate. I mean even on earth you cant calculate without physic the direction, landing point etc etc... he just somehow lands directly on his ship.

[@ZorroComputers]

I still do not get what I have watched. Is it like a screening version.

[@jussiriikonen3811]

Love these long videos, keep them coming!