# SF Movies/TV that got Newtonian gravity/forces stupidly wrong vs those that got it right (spoilers) **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [March 26, 2014, 8:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592 "2014-03-26T08:32:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Bakhesh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3da27b/32.png) [@Bakhesh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bakhesh)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2014, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592/21 "2014-03-26T15:06:20Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > _Gravity_ took four years to make. > > It will be quite a while before gravity in space is shown accurately in a majority of films, probably not until we start shooting movies in space. On that subject, I’m surprised no one has mentioned the “George Clooney letting go” scene in Gravity yet. After watching this scene a few times, I think there is enough lateral movement for him to still be pulling Sandra Bullock due to centrafugal/centrapetal force, and there appears to be some elasticity in the ropes she has wrapped around her feet (she is pulled backwards as soon as he lets go). It’s not shown very clearly in the movie though ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2014, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592/22 "2014-03-26T15:23:25Z")
> [@Bakhesh](#): > > This is true, but then, we are talking about a universe where you can conquer gravity just by thinking about it really hard, so you might be assuming too much. Yes - they have magic - so any nitpicking of physics is pretty pointless. > [@](#): > > Yeah, but I think you have to class bad writing as ‘got it wrong’. Its not that it isn’t used as a plot device; it’s that they mention it from time to time, then completely forget about it later > > For example, in the episode Relics, they discover a Dyson sphere because of its enormous gravitational field (tried to get it right), but then beam down to a ship on the surface (running on minimal power), and aren’t crushed to death (got it wrong) That’s fair enough - ST can have a free pass on the subject of AG on board ship only - anything else they try to depict realistically with no future tech workaround, then get horribly wrong, is fair game. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2014, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592/23 "2014-03-26T15:26:15Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > _Gravity_ took four years to make. > > It will be quite a while before gravity in space is shown accurately in a majority of films, probably not until we start shooting movies in space. I think Apollo 13 made a fairly decent job of it, from memory. ---
**Author:** ![Bakhesh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3da27b/32.png) [@Bakhesh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bakhesh)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2014, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592/24 "2014-03-26T15:29:01Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > I think Apollo 13 made a fairly decent job of it, from memory. They filmed a lot of it in a Vomit Comet, so those scenes of weightlessness were actually genuine > **[Apollo 13 (1995) - Trivia - IMDb](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112384/trivia/)** > > Apollo 13 (1995) - Trivia on IMDb: Cameos, Mistakes, Spoilers and more... ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2014, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592/25 "2014-03-26T15:30:06Z")
And, like _Gravity_, it was a big-money production featuring a hot director surrounded by bigger stars with a lot of pull of their own. ---
**Author:** ![nevadaexile](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/eb8c5e/32.png) [@nevadaexile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nevadaexile)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2014, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592/26 "2014-03-26T16:29:54Z")
**Mission to Mars** got it mostly right (although when they got to Mars itself they went off track, as did they story) when they were on the rescue mission. The entire Resident Evil series, however, seems to exist in a universe where the laws of physics are malleable depending upon the needs of the narrative. Alice, the protagonist, routinely jumps and spins in situations where she actually gains altitude during what should be her descent. She is also apparently immune to G forces and can control inertia apparently using some type of “psionic” powers. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2014, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592/27 "2014-03-26T16:38:00Z")
Mike Jittlov, he of **The Wizard of Speed and Time** , made a LOT of shorts that are rarely seen. One of them was filmed in the “vomit comet”. Why did **Gravity** take four years to make? They can churn out a largely CGI film in a couple of years. With proper choice of filming style, you can cut the needed time for low-G. There’s no reason they couldn’t make more low-G films now. The reason they don’t, I’m convinced, is that there’s little interest in it, they don’t think the public will know or appreciate it, and they don’t feel it justifies the time and effort. But I would LOVE to see _The Moon is a Harsh Mistress_ or _The Menace from Earth_ filmed, where the low lunar gravity plays a role in the story. ---
**Author:** ![Learjeff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/94ad74/32.png) [@Learjeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Learjeff)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2014, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592/28 "2014-03-26T18:17:13Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > \*Moonraker \*got it wrong. The simulated gravity provided by rotating the space station was consistent throughout, and all at the wrong angles. Can you clarify what you mean by wrong angles? Haven’t seen the movie in decades, so maybe it’s obvious, and I wouldn’t have expected a Bond flick to even bother trying to get gravity right, but rather to maybe just have a little fun with it. I confess I did like Bond’s line about Jaws: “After all, he’s only 100 miles away from the planet!” (or something like that) > [@](#): > > \*Armageddon \*got the same thing wrong as _Moonraker_, as well as having weirdly variable gravity conditions on the asteroid/comet itself. I _did_ laugh at that – for example, a ship “landing” on an asteroid that would have less than .01G gravity. In reality it’d be more like docking than landing. But again, it’s a fun flick, not constrained by mere facts. > [@JohnT](#): > > _Gravity_ took four years to make. Haven’t seen it yet (looking forward to it). I’m sore I missed it in IMAX 3D, frankly. But based on what I’ve read, they got the scenes right but the plot wrong. That is, the CGI is accurate, but any attempt to save themselves by moving to a different orbit is hogwash, of course, given the delta-V required. > [@Mangetout](#): > > I think Apollo 13 made a fairly decent job of it, from memory. One of my favorite movies, though I haven’t seen it since it came out. However, someone (Stranger?) here posted that a lot of the scenes were bogus: planned contingencies rather than extemporaneous. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2014, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592/29 "2014-03-26T18:35:01Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Yeah, that makes no sense, but to me the real physics issue is how the superhumanly strong Spider-Man can land numerous punches and kicks to the head and body of Doctor Octopus and not, y’know, explode him like a dynamited watermelon. I’ll fanwank that. Movie!Octavius was an employee of Osborne Industries. During his development of the mechanical arms he realized he would have to be superhumanly strong (or at least superhumanly durable) to use them, so he hacked into company files and managed to partially replicate Norman’s super-strength serum. (Remember, he has a doctorate in "advanced science. 😉 ). He modified it to reduce the psychoactive elements and so didn’t get the full measure of super-strength, but he did get inhuman durability. ---
**Author:** ![blindboyard](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blindboyard/32/2833_2.png) [@blindboyard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blindboyard)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2014, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592/30 "2014-03-26T19:07:15Z")
Star Trek Vi, okay. Star Trek XII, not okay. ---
**Author:** ![El\_Kabong](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/el_kabong/32/496_2.png) [@El\_Kabong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Kabong)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2014, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592/31 "2014-03-26T19:36:59Z")
> [@Bakhesh](#): > > They filmed a lot of it in a Vomit Comet, so those scenes of weightlessness were actually genuine > > [Apollo 13 (1995) - Trivia - IMDb](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112384/trivia) I just happened to see a few episodes of _Big Bang Theory_ from the season where Howard is aboard the International Space Station, and was pleasantly surprised to see they did a pretty good job of simulating microgravity there. I thought it might have been on the Vomit Comet, but apparently not. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2014, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592/32 "2014-03-26T22:02:33Z")
> [@Learjeff](#): > > Can you clarify what you mean by wrong angles? Haven’t seen the movie in decades, so maybe it’s obvious, and I wouldn’t have expected a Bond flick to even bother trying to get gravity right, but rather to maybe just have a little fun with it. They made an explicit point about braking the rotation of the space station (and losing their simulated gravity), then spinning it up again - except that the station wasn’t a ring - it was a bit like the Belgian [Atomium](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomium)- and in the movie, spinning it caused a universal ‘down’ force throughout the whole thing - rather than a centrifugal effect. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2014, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592/33 "2014-03-26T22:05:34Z")
> [@Bakhesh](#): > > They filmed a lot of it in a Vomit Comet, so those scenes of weightlessness were actually genuine > > [Apollo 13 (1995) - Trivia - IMDb](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112384/trivia) Indeed - and even the scenes they didn’t film in freefall, they still made an effort to get right - you could sometimes tell the actors were just making bobbing movements by bending their knees, but still, they tried to get it right. ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2014, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592/34 "2014-03-26T22:49:41Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > They made an explicit point about braking the rotation of the space station (and losing their simulated gravity), then spinning it up again - except that the station wasn’t a ring - it was a bit like the Belgian [Atomium](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomium)- and in the movie, spinning it caused a universal ‘down’ force throughout the whole thing - rather than a centrifugal effect. And, if I recall correctly, when the spinning stopped, the ambient sounds died away, too as if lack of gravity meant lack of air. ---
**Author:** ![Aquadementia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aquadementia/32/555_2.png) [@Aquadementia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aquadementia)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2014, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592/35 "2014-03-26T23:25:38Z")
The Armageddon example is the one that always got me. I’ll give them a few points because it’s just a popcorn flick. They go to Mir. Ok, something in space that people should know adds a little realism to the movie. They rotate Mir to make pumping easier. Ok, more like a way to reduce the number of expensive zero-g scenes, but I see why they did that. However, why did they start rotating the station BEFORE the shuttles docked? Not only does Mir need shuttle docks on opposite ends, but they somehow have to to dock to a spinning station at exactly the same time. Never mind that spinning would probably pull apart Mir even without the shuttles attached, they took an already touchy maneuver and made it absolutely impossible. ---
**Author:** ![Battle\_Pope](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Battle\_Pope](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Battle_Pope)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2014, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592/36 "2014-03-26T23:37:37Z")
I’ve only seen parts of it but [Europa Report](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_Report) got a lot of praise for its scientific accuracy, including the 0G stuff, when it was released. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2014, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592/37 "2014-03-27T00:16:59Z")
The “leaping” scenes in John Carter were absurd. Martian gravity is roughly 1/3 of Earth’s surface gravity. John Carter couldn’t leap hundreds of feet into the air, and he most certainly wouldn’t bound high into the air uncontrollably. He might stumble a little, for a few seconds, until he gets used to it. (Actually, overall, not a bad movie. But that part was dumb…and very wrong.) ---
**Author:** ![Aquadementia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aquadementia/32/555_2.png) [@Aquadementia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aquadementia)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2014, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592/38 "2014-03-27T00:33:38Z")
> [@Battle\_Pope](#): > > I’ve only seen parts of it but [Europa Report](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_Report) got a lot of praise for its scientific accuracy, including the 0G stuff, when it was released. It did pretty good. There was a line “holding at absolute zero” on Europa that someone should have caught though. > [@Trinopus](#): > > The “leaping” scenes in John Carter were absurd. Martian gravity is roughly 1/3 of Earth’s surface gravity. John Carter couldn’t leap hundreds of feet into the air, and he most certainly wouldn’t bound high into the air uncontrollably. He might stumble a little, for a few seconds, until he gets used to it. > > (Actually, overall, not a bad movie. But that part was dumb…and very wrong.) The jumping was true to the books so it gets a pass from me along with his being immortal. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sf-movies-tv-that-got-newtonian-gravity-forces-stupidly-wrong-vs-those-that-got-it-right-spoilers/684592.md?page=1)