And here I was thinking that movies needed pass the Bechdel Test to be better. But apparently I was wrong. What movies really need to do is stick to proper physics. Well I’m glad we got that sorted, aren’t you?
Categories: arts & entertainment, media, Science, technology
Hoyden About Town 
…uh. Starship Troopers?
Really?
Um, from an organisation that includes someone who wrote that totally science-based movie, Raiders of the Lost Ark?
It’s a joke, right?
I certainly hope so. Because you could totally do giant bugs. You’d just need an endoskeleton and some buttresses for the plating and a pulmonary system, a proper circulatory system with maybe a few subsidiary hearts for redundancy and to make them extra crash-resistant. And of course a whole bunch of eyes.
And clearly there were four Magi at the birth of the Christ, bearing gifts of gold, frankincense, myrrh, and antimatter! Which last got stolen by the bad guys in Angels and Demons and
Marty StuDan BrownTom Hanks got to be the big damn hero two thousand years later hoorah.No imagination this fellow, I tell you.
I guess it’s too much to hope for BOTH…
ok, as a physicist who is also a feminist, i think the problems with the stereotyping are worse and more problematic then problems with relaistic physics. But do you know how damn annoying the complete lack of care to make anything vaguely realistic is? If tis person was saying ‘we shouldn’t be caring about bechdel test etc, this is what is really important’ i’d understand anger, but they’re saying that in an area they know something about there are improvements that can be made to films to make them better fillms. what’s wrong with that?
Films would be more realistic if they passed the Bechdel test and (what’s the test for race called?) Also I make fun of films that miss basic details about HOW COMPUTERS ACTUALLY LOOK. I mean sure, you can make your computer screen look however you want, but in a corporate environment? Er ah I anyway, I make fun instead of wanting them to fix it. Also cars that crash always explode. In the movies.
I am a feminist engineer.
@ Sophia, I do understand that watching something badly done in a movie is irritating. My take on the article was that the author was probably completely unaware of the Bechdel test, and other tests, and that his privilege level was pretty high. I don’t think he was saying we shouldn’t care, I think he has no idea that they exist or that it is even a problem.
The large bugs are too much a part of book to ignore.
Also, the movie wasn’t very true to the book (the launching of big rocks towards earth was taken fromThe Moon is a Harsh Mistress, the soldiers didn’t have power suits in the movie). If they wouldn”t get the book right, do you expect them to get the physics correct?
But if the physics isn’t right, the movie won’t be believable!
Whereas if the movie takes place in white dude land, where women only exist where necessary (male entertainment and servitude) and a person of colour might be thrown in to shut up the PC police, that’s TOTES BELIEVABLE!