Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«19 »
  • Locked thread
flashy_mcflash
Feb 7, 2011

I joined the #RXT REVOLUTION.

he knows...


Lord Waffle Beard posted:

This movie is a rip off of Interstellar

Interstellar is a rip off of Contact

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

drunkill
Sep 25, 2007


friendship is magic
in a pony paradise
don't you judge me

HBO is airing a making of/behind the scenes show on the 28th:
https://youtu.be/DiTiyQk-9q8

Zero One posted:

No theaters by me are showing this in IMAX. It's all the special release of The Walk.
I don't think it is being shown in any Imax cinemas worldwide. Maybe in Liemax but not the proper ones.

sticklefifer posted:

I think the really important question is, does Sean Bean die?
Sean Bean dies during the 50 minute press conference where he isn't asked a single question and sulks in the back row:
https://youtu.be/QxWGVONpMG8

drunkill fucked around with this message at Sep 25, 2015 around 20:51

Jamwad Hilder
Apr 17, 2007

surfin usa

I read the book and now I don't want to see the movie. I think watching a guy eat potatoes while talking like a reddit comment came to life, for 2.5 hours or whatever, is going to be worse than reading it was.

Frostwerks
Sep 24, 2007

by Lowtax


What's the reddit comment

Psawhn
Jan 15, 2011




I am bad at gifs.

Anyway, I have a very nerdy and question about the final -esque action scene in the book. The better audience for this is probably the spaceflight thread, but I didn't want to CIA document FOIA with black bars over everything over there.

On their missed rendezvous to Watney they were going to miss him with a relative velocity of 11 m/s at a closest approach distance of 68 km, 39 minutes after the Ares 4 MAV finished its burn. They had about 30 m/s dV of RCS fuel and an unlimited dV (for our purposes) of ion engine at 2 mm/s/s. My experience tells me that that kind dV for the rendezvous is plenty, especially because they're traveling on an escape trajectory out of a planet 5x bigger than Kerbin so orbital mechanics doesn't come into play. At the very least, they could cancel out the 11 m/s relV at closest approach, then use the remaining 20 m/s of remaining RCS fuel to inch closer to Watney, arriving an hour or so later.

But the best way to adjust rendezvous is to burn as early as possible, as soon as they realize how badly they're going to miss. I mathed out that a 15 m/s RCS burn immediately, (at an angle 59.6 deg away from Watney), followed by turning on the ion engine for 43.35 minutes, then turning the ion engine around and firing the other way for the remaining 43.35 minutes, then a braking RCS burn of 11.8 m/s (at an angle of 51.1 deg away from relative velocity), will rendezvous Hermes to Watney at 0 m/s relV, only about 48 minutes after the book does. Is my math correct? Is the main reason Andy Weir wrote the existing sequence of events (complete with blowing the airlock for ~30 m/s dV) because he doesn't play KSP enough?

Popelmon
Jan 24, 2010

wow
so spin


Psawhn posted:



I am bad at gifs.

Anyway, I have a very nerdy and question about the final -esque action scene in the book. The better audience for this is probably the spaceflight thread, but I didn't want to CIA document FOIA with black bars over everything over there.

On their missed rendezvous to Watney they were going to miss him with a relative velocity of 11 m/s at a closest approach distance of 68 km, 39 minutes after the Ares 4 MAV finished its burn. They had about 30 m/s dV of RCS fuel and an unlimited dV (for our purposes) of ion engine at 2 mm/s/s. My experience tells me that that kind dV for the rendezvous is plenty, especially because they're traveling on an escape trajectory out of a planet 5x bigger than Kerbin so orbital mechanics doesn't come into play. At the very least, they could cancel out the 11 m/s relV at closest approach, then use the remaining 20 m/s of remaining RCS fuel to inch closer to Watney, arriving an hour or so later.

But the best way to adjust rendezvous is to burn as early as possible, as soon as they realize how badly they're going to miss. I mathed out that a 15 m/s RCS burn immediately, (at an angle 59.6 deg away from Watney), followed by turning on the ion engine for 43.35 minutes, then turning the ion engine around and firing the other way for the remaining 43.35 minutes, then a braking RCS burn of 11.8 m/s (at an angle of 51.1 deg away from relative velocity), will rendezvous Hermes to Watney at 0 m/s relV, only about 48 minutes after the book does. Is my math correct? Is the main reason Andy Weir wrote the existing sequence of events (complete with blowing the airlock for ~30 m/s dV) because he doesn't play KSP enough?


I thought they couldn't afford to lose the velocity that the ion engine had built up on their way to Mars because then the return trip would take too long and they would run out of food

TerminalSaint
Apr 20, 2007

Where must we go...

we who wander this Wasteland in search of our better selves?


College Slice

Psawhn posted:



I am bad at gifs.

Anyway, I have a very nerdy and question about the final -esque action scene in the book. The better audience for this is probably the spaceflight thread, but I didn't want to CIA document FOIA with black bars over everything over there.

On their missed rendezvous to Watney they were going to miss him with a relative velocity of 11 m/s at a closest approach distance of 68 km, 39 minutes after the Ares 4 MAV finished its burn. They had about 30 m/s dV of RCS fuel and an unlimited dV (for our purposes) of ion engine at 2 mm/s/s. My experience tells me that that kind dV for the rendezvous is plenty, especially because they're traveling on an escape trajectory out of a planet 5x bigger than Kerbin so orbital mechanics doesn't come into play. At the very least, they could cancel out the 11 m/s relV at closest approach, then use the remaining 20 m/s of remaining RCS fuel to inch closer to Watney, arriving an hour or so later.

But the best way to adjust rendezvous is to burn as early as possible, as soon as they realize how badly they're going to miss. I mathed out that a 15 m/s RCS burn immediately, (at an angle 59.6 deg away from Watney), followed by turning on the ion engine for 43.35 minutes, then turning the ion engine around and firing the other way for the remaining 43.35 minutes, then a braking RCS burn of 11.8 m/s (at an angle of 51.1 deg away from relative velocity), will rendezvous Hermes to Watney at 0 m/s relV, only about 48 minutes after the book does. Is my math correct? Is the main reason Andy Weir wrote the existing sequence of events (complete with blowing the airlock for ~30 m/s dV) because he doesn't play KSP enough?


*dumps your books on the ground*

Jamwad Hilder
Apr 17, 2007

surfin usa

Frostwerks posted:

What's the reddit comment

Maybe that's not the right way of putting it. When I was reading the book it just felt like the way Watney's dialogue/thoughts were written was very...unrealistic, I guess? I thought it felt wrong, tonally. I mean, I get that it's his journal and he's venting a lot of the time, but the way he was written just didn't seem to fit with what the character is supposed to be. He's supposedly a highly intelligent adult man, and yet a lot of the non-scientific thoughts/dialogue he had reminded me of the way my friends and I talked and behaved when we were retarded 14-year-olds who got on the internet too much.

I don't know if that makes sense. My opinion is mostly related to the book anyway so who knows how relevant it'll actually be. I'll probably still see the movie, because it's obviously going to be written differently than the book and I think Matt Damon is a good choice for Watney, I'm just not as enthused about now that I've actually read the book. I guess I'm hoping that they're not too faithful to the book in some respects.

Mars4523
Feb 17, 2014


I didn't have a problem with Watney's internal dialogue but I also read him as significantly younger than Matt Damon. He's the lowest ranking member of the crew after all. It still works if you see him as a man child back in his 30s who following a midlife crisis buckled up and became an astronaut. All the geekiness is more of a coping mechanism to deal with the solitude of being marooned on Mars and knowing that there's a fair chance that he'll die alone.

I've learned not to say "Nobody talks like that!" because unless "that" is period slang somebody invariably talks like it.

drunkill
Sep 25, 2007


friendship is magic
in a pony paradise
don't you judge me

Think of a 15 year old today, plays minecraft and tf2 and trashtalks your mum. That is (potentially) Mark Watney.

ViggyNash
Oct 9, 2012


Nail Rat posted:

God forbid we not have a huge name when the movie already has Matt Damon, Ridley Scott, Jessica Chastain, Sean Bean and Kate Mara attached to it.

Then again, how many Indian actors regularly show in in Hollywood? Irrfan Khan and Anil Kapoor are pretty much it as far as I know. I guess there's the guy from Harold & Kumar

Given the circumstance and their budget, a random big name minority actor is a good enough recovery option.

ViggyNash fucked around with this message at Sep 27, 2015 around 20:30

Groovelord Neato
Dec 6, 2014

WATCH ME POST SUMTHIN REAAL SMART -->

:

Yaws posted:

Judging by your writing, I'm genuinely curious if you've read the book. Or any book. Ever.

i have no doubt in my mind i have read more books than you have.

Jamwad Hilder posted:

I read the book and now I don't want to see the movie. I think watching a guy eat potatoes while talking like a reddit comment came to life, for 2.5 hours or whatever, is going to be worse than reading it was.

don't go making correct posts like that or people might say you must not have read the book or even a book in your life

Jummy
Jun 14, 2007

Oh, my love, my darling.


Groovelord Neato posted:

i have no doubt in my mind i have read more books than you have.

Now tell us how high your IQ is.

Groovelord Neato
Dec 6, 2014

WATCH ME POST SUMTHIN REAAL SMART -->

:

i would say about average you don't have to be smart to read a lot of books. you just need to have free time and no life

FiftySeven
Jan 1, 2006



Slippery Tilde

I had the pleasure of seeing this film at an early screening tonight.

Its absolutely FANTASTIC. I could go on for a long time about what I like about this film, but I think its easier to just sum it up by saying that I liked absolutely all of it. Every bit. If I had to make but one single complaint, its that The head of NASA at one point says something along the lines of "He can survive for X days provided nothing goes wrong..." and you can pretty much do a 10 second count down to something going catastrophically wrong. its a relatively minor compliant really as the entire film is a bit that way but it certainly was the one moment that made me roll my eyes.

With that said, the rest of the film was basically none stop delight for me. The visuals, the score, the dialogue, the comedy moments, the aspirational elements, the science behind it, the design choices... everything. I dont often say stuff like this because honestly I dont like to jump the gun with this sort of thing but this might just be a contender for my all time top 10 in films which is about as high praise as I can throw at a film. Go see it, its absolutely worth the price of admission and I cant wait to go see it again.

FiftySeven fucked around with this message at Sep 27, 2015 around 22:59

MikeJF
Dec 20, 2003



Mars4523 posted:

I didn't have a problem with Watney's internal dialogue but I also read him as significantly younger than Matt Damon. He's the lowest ranking member of the crew after all. It still works if you see him as a man child back in his 30s who following a midlife crisis buckled up and became an astronaut. All the geekiness is more of a coping mechanism to deal with the solitude of being marooned on Mars and knowing that there's a fair chance that he'll die alone.

Eh, Matt Damon may be 44 but he as less than 40, and honestly, you're probably not going to Mars much younger than that. The youngest person to land on the moon was 36. People spend decades building up to this stuff.

Sulphagnist
Oct 10, 2006

WARNING! INTRUDERS DETECTED




He recommended Ready Player One to someone and I died a little inside while thinking "Of course, of course."

MikeJF
Dec 20, 2003



I can't remember, does the book elaborate much on the overall design of the Hermes? The movie one doesn't seem to bear much resemblance to the current idea of what a Mars craft would look like (with a ring as opposed to spinning the whole ship or, if you did have a distinct centrifuge, two modules on very long sticks. The ring in the movie's small enough that you'd probably get nausea.) (And what's with all the solar panels? It's got a nuclear reactor. I guess the public expects solar panels.)

MikeJF fucked around with this message at Sep 28, 2015 around 10:21

Luneshot
Mar 10, 2014



I didn't look at it very closely, but they might be radiators instead of solar panels?

MikeJF
Dec 20, 2003



Luneshot posted:

I didn't look at it very closely, but they might be radiators instead of solar panels?



Those crinkly things sticking out alongside the rightmost set of solar panels are radiators.

Come to think of it, why are the solars panels facing in two different directions.

Chairman Capone
Dec 17, 2008



MikeJF posted:

I can't remember, does the book elaborate much on the overall design of the Hermes? The movie one doesn't seem to bear much resemblance to the current idea of what a Mars craft would look like (with a ring as opposed to spinning the whole ship or, if you did have a distinct centrifuge, two modules on very long sticks. The ring in the movie's small enough that you'd probably get nausea.) (And what's with all the solar panels? It's got a nuclear reactor. I guess the public expects solar panels.)

I don't think there's any rotating part or artificial gravity in the book, but that's all that I remember.

ryde
Sep 9, 2011



Chairman Capone posted:

I don't think there's any rotating part or artificial gravity in the book, but that's all that I remember.

There is. It's set to 1/3 earth gravity, which is why it can be smaller without the nausea.

Luneshot
Mar 10, 2014



I love how the Hermes basically looks like it's cobbled together from bits of the ISS.

Erwin
Feb 17, 2006



The solar panels don't bother me, because even if you have a nuclear reactor, why not also have solar panels? Plus it's probably in a parking orbit in that shot, and maybe they're refitting it and the reactor is offline

What bothers me is the offset part at the front. That would throw off the center of mass for when they blow the front airlock, unless they adjust the vector slightly but it seems like it's just there for aesthetics.

MikeJF
Dec 20, 2003



Luneshot posted:

I love how the Hermes basically looks like it's cobbled together from bits of the ISS.

According to the movie promotional materials, after this journey they're planning to retire it to become the new ISS. (The materials also say that it was assembled using SpaceX Station as the assembly platform, old ISS has been gone for a while). Book version is going to get refitted and keep going for a while.

ryde posted:

There is. It's set to 1/3 earth gravity, which is why it can be smaller without the nausea.

Yeah, I just went and looked it up; the book seems to imply that the entire ship freely rotates in space without a zero-rotation section, which is basically the current favoured concept - the joint between rotating and non-rotating sections would be needlessly complex and a major point of failure, and dealing with friction would be a nightmare in design; just balance it so that the centre of rotation and mass are the same axis and put the engines there.

Powered Descent
Jul 13, 2008

We haven't had that spirit here since 1969.

Yam Slacker

Erwin posted:

What bothers me is the offset part at the front. That would throw off the center of mass for when they blow the front airlock, unless they adjust the vector slightly but it seems like it's just there for aesthetics.

PMA, perhaps? They're used on the real-life ISS to connect different docking systems -- essentially great big "adapter plugs" for Station modules. There's one between the US segment and the Russian segment (which use VERY different docking and berthing mechanisms), and two more that were used for Shuttle dockings (and will be used soon for manned Dragon / Orion / Starliner dockings). I don't know the reason for the joggle, but they definitely have one.





Perhaps the front section needs to be more easily detachable, or was built by another country. (Or perhaps it was just a way for the moviemakers to add a bit of visual interest and keep it from being one long boring straight line.)

RocketSurgeon
Mar 2, 2008


Luneshot posted:

I love how the Hermes basically looks like it's cobbled together from bits of the ISS.

What slightly bothered me was the fact that the insides of the ship was like a wide open apple store style white space with weird chairs. I get that its the near future and all but engineers always try to jam pack as much poo poo into a small package. All the empty space looked especially weird inside the MAV.

Groovelord Neato
Dec 6, 2014

WATCH ME POST SUMTHIN REAAL SMART -->

:

Antti posted:

He recommended Ready Player One to someone and I died a little inside while thinking "Of course, of course."

lol. the martian came up more than once in the ready player one thread.

Zero One
Dec 30, 2004

Z is the new C

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2...change-martian/

quote:

ASA surprised the world on Monday with its announcement that it had found water on Mars. This wasn’t news, though, to the director Ridley Scott, whose latest film, “The Martian,” opens on Friday, and revolves around the struggles of a stranded astronaut and botanist, played by Matt Damon, to survive on the red planet by himself for more than a year.

Mr. Scott said in an interview with The Times on Monday that the head of NASA had shown him the photos of the water about two months ago, and that had the news come out before production of “The Martian” began, it probably would have affected key plot points in the film.

In the movie, which is adapted from a novel by Andy Weir, Mr. Damon’s character makes water by creating humidity and heat and trapping droplets on a plastic tarp, thereby irrigating the potato plants that help him survive. Had the discovery of water on Mars happened before filming began, Mr. Ridley said Mr. Damon’s character “would’ve gone and dug in.”

“He’d’ve found the edge of a glacier, definitely. It would be fascinating,” said the 77-year-old director, who met to chat at the JW Marriott Essex House in Midtown Manhattan. “But then I would’ve lost a great sequence. He has to make water, and the steaming device, and put up the plastic tents, which creates the humidity, which grows the plants, which is the most basic form of irrigation. They still do it in Spain that way.”

Bruceski
Aug 21, 2007

The tools of a hero mean nothing without a solid core.


I am really glad that came up too late to change, because "happens to be sitting on top of an underground glacier" is a stupid plot element.

robot roll call
Mar 7, 2006

dance dance dance dance dance to the radio


I just got to the part of the book where he renames a scientific unit to "pirate-ninjas". That's so random!!!

RocketSurgeon
Mar 2, 2008


robot roll call posted:

I just got to the part of the book where he renames a scientific unit to "pirate-ninjas". That's so random!!!

If it makes you feel any better the movie tries to tone down that poo poo. Both of watney's trips are shortened to just a few scenes of him setting up the solar panels and sleeping so the entire pirate ninja shitfest is gone.

Sith Happens
Jun 7, 2005

You will find that it is you
who are mistaken.

About a great many things.

robot roll call posted:

I just got to the part of the book where he renames a scientific unit to "pirate-ninjas". That's so random!!!

RocketSurgeon posted:

If it makes you feel any better the movie tries to tone down that poo poo.

Why do you guys hate fun? How did your little souls get so broken that pirate-ninjas™ are a source of such angst?

CaptainViolence
Apr 19, 2006

I'M GONNA GET YOU DUCK


Yam Slacker

robot roll call posted:

I just got to the part of the book where he renames a scientific unit to "pirate-ninjas". That's so random!!!

That part of the book was the only one I really rolled my eyes at, but not because it was unrealistic. The time I spent in engineering school made me nearly immune to awkward curve-breaking schlubs who still thought Chuck Norris jokes were the height of comedy ten years after they'd gotten irritating for everyone else.

sticklefifer
Nov 11, 2003

TOO EASY

Sith Happens posted:

Why do you guys hate fun? How did your little souls get so broken that pirate-ninjas™ are a source of such angst?

For me when reading the book, I found that less funny and charming, and more "Geocities page in 2002 original content do not steal". It just felt weirdly dated for something that's supposed to be the future.

Gaz2k21
Sep 1, 2006

MEGALA---WHO??!!??

This came out in the UK today so I caught a showing before work, despite the image being really dark (due to the cinema not compensating for the fact that the audience will be wearing dark 3D glasses) I enjoyed it greatly, I'm not much of a reviewer but if your in any doubt about going I'd say pull the trigger.

Groovelord Neato
Dec 6, 2014

WATCH ME POST SUMTHIN REAAL SMART -->

:

Sith Happens posted:

Why do you guys hate fun? How did your little souls get so broken that pirate-ninjas™ are a source of such angst?

lol is this serious

ijyt
Apr 10, 2012

s k u l l a p a l o o z a


Just saw this today in the UK because my friend is awesome and scored free tickets, what a fun film. Had everyone laughing, and the visuals were stunning. I think the film would have been worse off without the levity.

Weirdo
Jul 22, 2004

I stay up late

Grimey Drawer

I saw this tonight and honestly the most memorable part was before the film when the FOX PR guy who intro-ed the movie came dressed up in a spaceship Columbia flight suit and was joking about it ("What too soon?" )

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Snowman_McK
Jan 31, 2010
ASK ME ABOUT MY SELF-PUBLISHED WARHAMMER FANFICTION AND MY KNIFE COLLECTION


Weirdo posted:

I saw this tonight and honestly the most memorable part was before the film when the FOX PR guy who intro-ed the movie came dressed up in a spaceship Columbia flight suit and was joking about it ("What too soon?" )

To be fair, this sounds amazing and pretty memorable regardless of what follows. Is it supposed to be a damming indictment?

  • Locked thread
«19 »