Dream sequence anyone? :-) How about this - In some trailers they appear to be servicing Hubble, and in other, at ISS. Think of the dream sequence in Apollo 13 where Marilyn Lovell dreams of Jim being sucked out when the hatch opens. Much of the audience probably thought that was the disaster at that point. I can imagine that Bullock's character, has a dream about the Hubble servicing mission going wrong. Then wakes up on ISS and some time later, the "real" disaster happens. Speculation of course, but would solve the totally different orbit issue.
it appears to me that they may get rescued by the Chinese . The last sense of the trailer where the ISS breaks up she is grabbing for what appears to me to be a Shenzhou Orbital Module. Have to wait for the movie.
I find it humorous that all the know-it-alls in this thread are determined to hate this movie before they even see it. Pretty silly, IMHO.Keep this in mind, first and foremost: IT'S ONLY A MOVIE. If it makes an honest attempt to dramatize the efforts of astronauts and cosmonauts well, that should be applauded, even if it doesn't get every technical detail right.
Keep this in mind, first and foremost: IT'S ONLY A MOVIE. If it makes an honest attempt to dramatize the efforts of astronauts and cosmonauts well, that should be applauded, even if it doesn't get every technical detail right.
I looked at this way, any compelling space movie is a good space movie. I enjoyed the heck out of "Space Cowboys" and it's one my favorite films, period. Quote from: dcfowler1 on 09/08/2013 03:50 amKeep this in mind, first and foremost: IT'S ONLY A MOVIE. If it makes an honest attempt to dramatize the efforts of astronauts and cosmonauts well, that should be applauded, even if it doesn't get every technical detail right.Space movies are, in my mind, like war movies. People who the subject matter really well will often tell you a completely accurate movie would be way too boring to watch and you wouldn't see much anyway if it was filmed like it happens in real life.
I think 2001 is an exception. Yet it is an exceptional movie.
This is the space equivalent of a film where a character:1. survives a plane crash, then2. escapes a forest fire, only to be threatened by a 3. a tornado, followed by4. an earthquake, and finally5. a tsunami strikes.All in one film.
Quote from: Lars_J on 09/05/2013 07:39 pmThis is the space equivalent of a film where a character:1. survives a plane crash, then2. escapes a forest fire, only to be threatened by a 3. a tornado, followed by4. an earthquake, and finally5. a tsunami strikes.All in one film.Substitute car chases, gun battles, and fights, and you've just described nearly every action movie.
Quote from: ChrisWilson68 on 09/14/2013 12:25 pmQuote from: Lars_J on 09/05/2013 07:39 pmThis is the space equivalent of a film where a character:1. survives a plane crash, then2. escapes a forest fire, only to be threatened by a 3. a tornado, followed by4. an earthquake, and finally5. a tsunami strikes.All in one film.Substitute car chases, gun battles, and fights, and you've just described nearly every action movie.You have a point, but most of those films have villains that are in active conflict with the hero - thus explaining the continuing battles. Unless the destruction in this film is caused by some nasty space weapon that continues to hunt down our heroes, I don't think it is a very good analogy. This appears to be a disaster film set in space.
You don't think entropy is a clever enough villain?
A photo WB posted. Orbiter Explorer after the debris strike. http://www.adverblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Screen-Shot-2013-09-23-at-7.24.52-PM-640x398.png It struck me seeing RCC panels 7 and 8 ripped off. Deja vu of Columbia IMO.