That 'Race to Mars' crap on the science channel

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

l3p3r

Guest
While I admire the attempts at scientific and technical accuracy in this production, once again as in all science fiction depicting near-future space voyages, we are treated to a crew of idiots with stereotype personalities, an unrealistic set of unnecessary confrontations, and a platter of negligent actions that lead to ridiculous life threatening situations.<br /><br />Why? Why must we deal with this every time? Why can we not be treated with a competent, rational crew in a film like this, not even once? Is it really that frightening to make a film that does not quiver and ooze with sickening stereotypes?<br /><br />Another fail. To further tarnish the view of manned space flight for the layman. My disappointment is overwhelming. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
D

dragon04

Guest
The layman <b>requires</b> a little drama. Were that not the case, Britney Spears and Paris Hilton would never even make the news.<br /><br />That's the near-impossible challenge that Science and the Science Channel are charged with. To somehow get the mainstream to watch and learn about space and science.<br /><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"2012.. Year of the Dragon!! Get on the Dragon Wagon!".</em> </div>
 
P

PistolPete

Guest
I feel your pain, man. I feel your pain.<br /><br />How this kind of thing works is that someone at the Discovery Channel decided that they needed docudrama style show to dramatically show what might happen on a mission to Mars. The Discovery Channel, as good as they are with science shows, doesn't have <i>that</i> much money to put into such a production. They probably hired out a screenwriter to write a script to specs just like a manufacturer would hire a subcontractor to build a part to specs. There are many reasons why the scriptwriter may have resorted to clichés and stereotypes: the writer was pressed for time (stereotypes and clichés are an easy temptation when its 11 pm and the script is due the next day), the writer wasn't being paid a whole lot (money is a great motivating factor to try harder), the writer may not have even had a screenwriting background (i.e. the writer may have had a solely science background like a science journalist. IOW, the guy knew about science and how to write on at least a 5th grade level, but was never taught story structure).<br /><br />This kind of stuff happens all of the time and won't go away anytime soon I'm afraid. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><em>So, again we are defeated. This victory belongs to the farmers, not us.</em></p><p><strong>-Kambei Shimada from the movie Seven Samurai</strong></p> </div>
 
R

robnissen

Guest
<font color="yellow">The layman requires a little drama.</font> <br /><br />Yup. That is why there is a movie called Apollo 13, not Apollo 12, or even Apollo 11. (Though I s'pose there could have been a couple moments tension when Armstrong decided to go first.)
 
L

l3p3r

Guest
Even in Apollo 13 the scriptwriter went spastic with his creative license and wrote a whole lot of silly arguments and inter-crew tension into it that never actually happened. I feel very sorry for the actual crew, being represented as mentally unstable individuals like that, after what they went through and the incredible things they accomplished. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
V

venator_3000

Guest
Don't have cable so didn't see the Mars thing, sorry.<br /><br />Best near-future space voyage sci-fi...<br /><br />"Destination Moon" from 1950.<br /><br />George Pal, Robert Heinlein, and even Woody Woodpecker. A combination that still can't be beat! <br /><br />v3k <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
S

silylene old

Guest
<font color="yellow">They probably hired out a screenwriter to write a script to specs just like a manufacturer would hire a subcontractor to build a part to specs. There are many reasons why the scriptwriter may have resorted to clichés and stereotypes...........</font><br /><br />And, probably that screenwriter is now walking the picket lines.<br /><br />I agree with Dragon04's comment. American's are just too stupid to be intellectually entertained or curious, and instead need to be titillated with drama, crises and conflict. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><em><font color="#0000ff">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -</font></em> </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><font color="#0000ff"><em>I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function.</em></font> </div> </div>
 
S

shadow735

Guest
A nice supply of tacos and xanax will help keep those issues to a min. :p <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
F

fatal291

Guest
You feel sorry for the crew?? I feel sorry for people who instead of picking up a book or actually doing some research they decide TV will teach them all they know or need to know. ANY time when turning on the TV chances are will be drama. Even when you watch National Geo, they have the nice pounding of drums playing when the lion spots the boar
 
S

shadow735

Guest
I feel you, but think of it this way, those people that dont pick up books and only watch those shows at least they are getting some knowledge even if its filled with a little drama to keep them glued to the screen. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
B

bdewoody

Guest
This is the most revealing point about Hollywood and the general public. Instead of making a movie about one of the most significant events in history, Neil Armstrong stepping foot on the moon, they opted to make a movie about a mission that had the potential to end up a total disaster. Even though the outcome spoke volumes about the ingenuity of the engineers and astronauts to adapt to the environment.<br /><br />Another example is the attention paid to crashes at auto races. When a car in a NASCAR race wrecks they show it from every camera angle they have at least 10 times. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em><font size="2">Bob DeWoody</font></em> </div>
 
R

robnissen

Guest
<font color="yellow">I feel you, but think of it this way, those people that dont pick up books and only watch those shows at least they are getting some knowledge even if its filled with a little drama to keep them glued to the screen. </font><br /><br />I agree completely. I wish 300 million americans would log on this cite or others to get detailed space info. (SDC probably wishes that as well <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> ), but it aint gonna happen. But someone might watch this and decide to contact their representative to encourage more funding for manned exploration. Plus some little kid might watch the show and it could light a science spark that might come to fruition in 20 years. As the saying goes, there is no such thing as bad publicity.
 
G

gunsandrockets

Guest
<This is the most revealing point about Hollywood and the general public. Instead of making a movie about one of the most significant events in history, Neil Armstrong stepping foot on the moon, they opted to make a movie about a mission that had the potential to end up a total disaster.><br /><br />That is an unwarranted attack. You obviously have not heard of the miniseries "From the Earth to the Moon".
 
B

bdewoody

Guest
Yes I saw that, but it wasn't a movie released to theaters either and probably had nothing to do with Hollywood.<br /><br />One good thing about such a program. If they convince the American public that NASA needs more funding to go to Mars and the Moon so we won't get stuck with the leftover real estate after the Chinese, Indians and who knows else beats us there because the USA was too tight with it's wallet to go first. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em><font size="2">Bob DeWoody</font></em> </div>
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
<i><br />Even in Apollo 13 the scriptwriter went spastic with his creative license and wrote a whole lot of silly arguments and inter-crew tension into it that never actually happened. I feel very sorry for the actual crew, being represented as mentally unstable individuals like that, after what they went through and the incredible things they accomplished.</i><br /><br />I agree with the creative license but disagree that the crew were portrayed as being <i>mentally unstable individuals</i>. Jim Lovell was closely involved with the production of the film and provided a voice over commentary, Fred Haise has also indicated general approval of the film.<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts