BvS All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - Part 13

[DA_Champion]

LOL they actually put a pulsar in Krypton's former core?

So much for "science" fiction. That's one of the dumbest ideas I've heard.

 

[third]

LOL they actually put a pulsar in Krypton's former core?

So much for "science" fiction. That's one of the dumbest ideas I've heard.

well luckily i can suspend any disbelief as i have no idea what any of that stuff means t:

 

[Smashlilman]

LOL they actually put a pulsar in Krypton's former core?

So much for "science" fiction. That's one of the dumbest ideas I've heard.

It's a planet made out of exotic material. The thing that prevented the planet from collapsing was the exotic material that the core was made out of. That's the Material that the Council ordered to be extracted.

That's why it's called science "fiction".

 

[DA_Champion]

It's a planet made out of exotic material. The thing that prevented the planet from collapsing was the exotic material that the core was made out of. That's the Material that the Council ordered to be extracted.

That's why it's called science "fiction".

Better to call it fantasy if there is no science in it.

Coming up with complex explanations to nonsense is also an intrinsically bad idea.

 

[Smashlilman]

Better to call it fantasy if there is no science in it.

Coming up with complex explanations to nonsense is also an intrinsically bad idea.

What are you talking about that goes for 99% of everything that is science fiction. Haven't you ever read any of the John carter of Mars. Sailing on air ring bell. That's like the entire point of the fiction in science fiction.

 

[DA_Champion]

What are you talking about that goes for 99% of everything that science fiction. Haven't you ever read any of the John carter of Mars.

Most of what's erroneously called science fiction in Hollywood should indeed be called fantasy.

Anyway, putting a pulsar in Krypton's core is quite dumb. It's a good thing it's not actually in the movie.

 

[Smashlilman]

Most of what's erroneously called science fiction in Hollywood should indeed be called fantasy.

Anyway, putting a pulsar in Krypton's core is quite dumb. It's a good thing it's not actually in the movie.

We are talking about Books not just Hollywood!!!

Krypton is a Gigantic Planet made out of exotic material that collapsed and turned into a failed star once X element was extracted. That's classic Science Fiction.

 

[roach]

I find thrashing the science in a movie about an alien who comes to earth and has super powers a bit….you know…silly.

 

[DA_Champion]

I find thrashing the science in a movie about an alien who comes to earth and has super powers a bit….you know…silly.

I find your argument that it's fine to make up absolutely anything up whatsoever because there are already some ridiculous elements a bit.... you know.... silly.

 

[DA_Champion]

We are talking about Books not just Hollywood!!!

Books often do better since more of them are published, but if all the science fiction you read is Star Wars expanded universe, I understand your point.

Krypton is a Gigantic Planet made out of exotic material that collapsed and turned into a failed star once X element was extracted. That's classic Science Fiction.

A good thing this was not in the movie. It's not classic science fiction at all, it's excessive nonsense that doesn't contribute to the plot, and is actually contradicted by some of what is shown in the movie.

 

[Smashlilman]

I give up its like arguing with a brick wall.

 

[747]

Synthetic Kryptonite you say?

 

[Smashlilman]

Synthetic Kryptonite you say?

The secret ingredient is Tar.

 

[Dr.]

As I understand it, a neutron star/pulsar can only be created via a supernova explosion. (Both the mass of a big star and the high force of its explosion are necessary ingredients for the neutron density. A planet can’t do the job.) So it’s just as well that there was no on-screen mention of a “pulsar.”

 

[DA_Champion]

As I understand it, a neutron star/pulsar can only be created via a supernova explosion. (Both the mass of a big star and the high force of its explosion are necessary ingredients for the neutron density. A planet can’t do the job.) So it’s just as well that there was no on-screen mention of a “pulsar.”

We have a winner

 

[roach]

I find your argument that it's fine to make up absolutely anything up whatsoever because there are already some ridiculous elements a bit.... you know.... silly.

Yup that's how science fiction works. Things are created with no thought to the science behind it…if someone wants to be scientific accurate that is fine but you don't have to be…a lot of the stuff in most science fiction movies are not science accurate and are just made up things.

 

[Smashlilman]

As I understand it, a neutron star/pulsar can only be created via a supernova explosion. (Both the mass of a big star and the high force of its explosion are necessary ingredients for the neutron density. A planet can’t do the job.) So it’s just as well that there was no on-screen mention of a “pulsar.”

The thing like I said before Krypton isn't just a normal planet made out of normal elemental materials. Krypton was a rock giant the size of Jupiter made out of highly dense exotic materials. What ever was at the core of the planet was producing a counter repulsive force that keep the planet from collapsing. The council harvested it and doomed the planet to collapse.

Yup that's how science fiction works. Things are created with no thought to the science behind it…if someone wants to be scientific accurate that is fine but you don't have to be…a lot of the stuff in most science fiction movies are not science accurate and are just made up things.

and that's why they use the words "fiction" after science Everything in science fiction is based on the fictitious science within the universe of the author. The next thing you know where going to start complain about how Superman's heat vision should dry all of the moister out of his eyes and leave behind only dried husk.

 

[DA_Champion]

Yup that's how science fiction works. Things are created with no thought to the science behind it…if someone wants to be scientific accurate that is fine but you don't have to be…a lot of the stuff in most science fiction movies are not science accurate and are just made up things.

There are actually a number of writers who operate on a higher level than "let's just make **** up for the hell of it regardless of whether it makes sense. " Science fiction is often, and has historically been used, as a literary vehicle of introspection and for the exploration of ideas, and also to make predictions. Where fantastical elements are included (e.g. the spice in Dune) it is because it is a potent metaphor that serves the broader story, not just because "it's cool". If it is treated in an internally consistent manner, it is still science fiction.

Try Charles Stross sometime.

 

[Dr.]

The thing like I said before Krypton isn't just a normal planet made out of normal elemental materials. Krypton was a rock giant the size of Jupiter made out of highly dense exotic materials. What ever was at the core of the planet was producing a counter repulsive force that keep the planet from collapsing. The council harvested it and doomed the planet to collapse.

...and that's why they use the words "fiction" after science Everything in science fiction is based on the fictitious science within the universe of the author. The next thing you know where going to start complain about how Superman's heat vision should dry all of the moister out of his eyes and leave behind only dried husk.

Curious about Krypton’s famous fate, I once looked up “exploding planets.” Apparently, there’s no known mechanism that can cause this to happen. Of course, the key word is known - and sci-fi authors are free to invent something rare or mysterious.

In my view, the more fantastic the sci-fi tech or phenomenon, the less it should be explained. So if the plot requires a planet to explode, maybe mention “phlebotinum” (or some such) as the cause. No one can challenge this because “phlebotinum” is nonsense. When you try to make the science seem more authentic (by using known terms like pulsar) you actually make it less authentic.

 

[Smashlilman]

Curious about Krypton’s famous fate, I once looked up “exploding planets.” Apparently, there’s no known mechanism that can cause this to happen. Of course, the key word is known - and sci-fi authors are free to invent something rare or mysterious.

In my view, the more fantastic the sci-fi tech or phenomenon, the less it should be explained. So if the plot requires a planet to explode, maybe mention “phlebotinum” (or some such) as the cause. No one can challenge this because “phlebotinum” is nonsense. When you try to make the science seem more authentic (by using known terms like pulsar) you actually make it less authentic.

It depends on your audience. Neil had a fit over Gravity. The GA loved it.

 

[DA_Champion]

Curious about Krypton’s famous fate, I once looked up “exploding planets.” Apparently, there’s no known mechanism that can cause this to happen. Of course, the key word is known - and sci-fi authors are free to invent something rare or mysterious.

In my view, the more fantastic the sci-fi tech or phenomenon, the less it should be explained. So if the plot requires a planet to explode, maybe mention “phlebotinum” (or some such) as the cause. No one can challenge this because “phlebotinum” is nonsense. When you try to make the science seem more authentic (by using known terms like pulsar) you actually make it less authentic.

Excellent post.

Do you think that midichlorions are a good example of what goes wrong when one tries to make fantasy look scientific?

Anyway, there is no way to destroy a planets from physics endogeneous to the planet. You can destroy a planet by external means, for example by placing it in a tidal field. JJ Abrams also had a good idea, place a black hole in its center.

We now know a lot about planets. Rocky planets with thin atmospheres like Earth and Krypton are very common, they typically have approximately the Earth's gravity. Those planets, left alone, will stay as rocks forever.

 

[chamber-music]

Maybe not the mad scientist Luthor, but I'd be very surprised if they didn't emphasize the intellect in Lex Luthor (Bill Gates is also pretty damn smart for revolutionizing the computer industry the way he did).

I'm just happy to see a genius tycoon Lex rather than a boastful real estae obsessed crook with a bumbling sidekick.

 

[Fallen Angel]

I'm just happy to see a genius tycoon Lex rather than a boastful real estae obsessed crook with a bumbling sidekick.

Stop hatin on Otis.

 

[godisawesome]

When people talk about Hanckman's Lex, I always feel like saying he's not a mad scientist in the first two movies; he's simply a very smart criminal who excels at criminal things. Only the fourth film actually featured any mad scientist hijinks on his part. Even SR's Lex Luthor only got his big evil plan when the Jor-El program explained things to him.

The idea of him being a billionaire interested in fringe science seems more mad scientist to me, since fringe science implies stuff like cloning, nanotechnology, or reverse engineering alien technology, all of which sounds a hell of a lot more involved and crazy than hijacking missiles or figuring out "drop crystal in water, watch it grow!"

And kryptonite needs to be something rare and small. If you established there was one pound in existence in our galaxy and made it clear that Lex has to fight to get ahold of it and being conservative in its use, you can make it much less of a cheat. Especially if its energy properties are arguably more powerful than its lethal radiation. And I like the idea of it slowly making him weaker and in extreme pain. as opposed to instantly removing his powers.

 

[chamber-music]

Stop hatin on Otis.

It was funny when Lex had Otis murdered by Bizzaro after about five minutes of meeting him in the new 52 comics t:

No one who calls themselves a genius would put up with having an idiot like that around for long.