"Artificial" gravity again shown wrong in 'Red Planet'!

Okay, so this isn’t really a question (and only scientific sticklers need read on).

There were many things scientifically wrong in Red Planet, which was why it wasn’t a very good movie. But the thing that bugged me the most is when the Matrix chick restores power to the orbiter. The computer says, “artificial gravity restored” and then, everything that’s floating suddenly and immediately drops straight down to the floor! This perpetuates the (incorrect) notion that a centrifical gravity system creates some mysterious, magnetic-like force which is just switched on and off.

First of all, even if the ship lost all power the cetrifical ‘rings’ would keep spinning for a while, only being slowed by the friction from the bearings connecting them to the rest of the ship.

More importantly, if everything was in zero-G and the rings started spinning again, anything floating (including people) would essentially remain at rest and travel in a horizontal line (perpendicular to the rings center) until in contacted something in the ship, namely the floor or something solidly mounted, where it would bounce along until it’s rotational speed created enough centrifical force for it to remain pressed against the floor.

Of course all of this is moot for a film in which the robot (which could have killed all of them in about five seconds if it wanted to) seems to think it’s in a Jackie Chan movie…

Having once been a newbie myself, I was gonna rescue the thread by belatedly asking, “Hey! How come when the computer chick restored artificial gravity to the ship, did everything suddenly drop to the floor?”

But then I noticed that you aren’t a newbie and in fact have about as many posts under your belt as do I. So instead I’m gonna say “BUZZ! wrong category!”, and ask a question of my own about this movie. (I will not call it a “film”)

You know the part where they almost died because they thought they couldn’t breathe in the Martian atmosphere? Well, shouldn’t they have had some kinda sensors that would have told 'em it was okay to breathe it and maybe sample it in some way?

Okay, I admit it: It’s a lame question, but whatta ya expect from a humpbacked bell-ringer? :smiley:

Quasi

Ok, I haven’t seen the flick, so I might be missing part of the premise, but - why? They’re going to Mars - we already have a good idea of what the Martian atmosphere is like, and we know it’s too sparse to be really breathable, so, why would they have instruments to measure it?

I have a review of the astronomy of Red Planet on my website at http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/movies/redplanet.html. I talk about both these issues.

I actually rather liked the movie, despite the errors. After Mission to Mars, RP was like Citizen Kane.

The movie was full of errors, some of which are more disconcerting to me than the artifical gravity one… They refer to the small insect-like creatures as “nematodes,” which makes them the strangest looking worms ever caught on film.
Besides factual errors, there’s a huge continuity error: about 45 minutes after the scene where they freak out because they’re out of O2, Burchenal throws Gallager his pack telling him " You’ll need the O2 for the ride home." What O2??

However, despite the errors it’s still a lot less pointless than Super Nova…

I got real suspicious when they suddenly had so many accidents just as they arrived in orbit. It suspiciously started looking like that ‘Landing On Mars’ movie where a crew goes to rescue a group of explorers on Mars and everything goes fine, until they arrive, then the ship gets screwed, they abandon the ship and ‘jump’ to a supply capsule conveniently in orbit, loosing one guy, then dump all of the vital supplies and ride the orbiter down, which doesn’t land well, but all survive.

Remember that lame movie?

Anyhow, Red Planet had a whole bunch of obvious flaws in it, like no sensors for O2 carried in or on the suits, the really idiotic crew selection of 5 young, lusty guys and one chick to be in space alone for 6 months, and the instant ‘smart-ass’ attitude of that one guy who later got slugged off of the cliff, which indicated a not very well selected crew.

Then, the battle designed, and really cool, military robot just happens to go nuts real quickly and provide an additional danger element. Like if they had the technology to produce a semi-sentient military robot, it would have been dropped from aircraft in tests to make sure that it would not switch over accidentally to attack mode.

I rate it around a B on special effects, B for acting abilities, and a D for the script plot. If it came from a book, which I don’t know, then the author is really undeserving of his royalties or should be absolutely furious at the way they chopped up his work.

Speaking of movies, did anyone know that there are two versions of Dune out? I saw the original, which I think was over done and too warped, and then saw one being shown on TV for the Classroom with different actors, less bazaar and ornate sets and it was a whole lot better. It ran close to the first, like the flying fat guy, the blue eye color but none of those garish, black desert suits where they drink their own sweat or aircraft the shouldn’t have been able to take off in the first place.

Anyone know it this version is in the tape stores?

The new “Dune” is on DVD, it’s also on the sci-fi channel so you can see it for free. Why do you have a problem with the suits that let them drink sweat, though? That’s in the book.

I figured they refilled it with the O2 in the Martian air.

But that whole military robot thing was just bad… When they were first talking about it, and mentionned it had a “military mode”, I mean… Who didn’t see a malfunction coming?

And when he’s trying to figure out some power source for the Russian lander, wasn’t EVERYONE watching that movie just screaming “THE FRIGGIN’ ROBOT!”.