[champ]

It'll be interesting to see how they explain that one away - ejection probably.

It's a shame Will Smith didn't return.

[Aptorian]

Don't want to watch that whole trailer but the "It has its own gravity" scene looks really cool.

Hopefully the Aliens still haven't updated their virus software.

[Cause]

The thing that kills me about these movies is when for real world reasons they have to adjust the plot. I am confident the only reason Will Smiths character died in a test flight is because Will Smith would not return. It will be a minor thing and yet will nag at the back of my mind

[Abyss]

So many reasons why this is a bad idea. A bad idea that will be bad.









Am totally seeing it in IMAX.

[QuickTidal]

Cause, on 04 May 2016 - 10:42 AM, said:

The thing that kills me about these movies is when for real world reasons they have to adjust the plot. I am confident the only reason Will Smiths character died in a test flight is because Will Smith would not return. It will be a minor thing and yet will nag at the back of my mind

Yeah, this was totally Smith not wanting to come back. He's been asked for years and kept turning them down, so they finally moved on without him.

And now of course I want this movie to make BIG BUCKS (hopefully more than his last 3 movies collectively), just so he can stew in his bad decision.

[polishgenius]

QuickTidal, on 05 May 2016 - 01:26 PM, said:

And now of course I want this movie to make BIG BUCKS (hopefully more than his last 3 movies collectively), just so he can stew in his bad decision.

In fairness, in the last decade Will Smith has intentionally been making at least half his appearances in relatively smaller films (and even Focus wasn't that big a budget by modern, or his, standards). Independence Day cost more than his last three films combined (if you don't count Suicide Squad), so if it doesn't make that back it's a massive bomb.

It will, though, obviously. It'll be going up nearly directly against Suicide Squad though (they release a week apart, I think), so that could be interesting.



Also: I know we're not meant to look for scientific accuracy in an Independence Day movie, but holy shit the 'it has its own gravity' sequence is already annoying me.

[Salt-Man Z]

ID4 is the probably movie I've seen the most in a theater (I think 4 times between 2 states: MN and CA) and I've been expecting its follow-up to be nothing short of a disaster.

This looks like it could be pretty fun, though.

[champ]

polishgenius, on 05 May 2016 - 02:23 PM, said:

Also: I know we're not meant to look for scientific accuracy in an Independence Day movie, but holy shit the 'it has its own gravity' sequence is already annoying me.

It's ID, just roll with it!

Especially if you're still here for the 2nd film after they took out galactic conquerors with a computer virus in the first!

[Cause]

polishgenius, on 05 May 2016 - 02:23 PM, said:

Also: I know we're not meant to look for scientific accuracy in an Independence Day movie, but holy shit the 'it has its own gravity' sequence is already annoying me.

Force of Gravity= Constant (Mass 1*Mass 2)/(distance squared)

If we simply work with scale we can ignore the constant. The mass of the earth is constant. The important point in the equation is that the force falls of with distance, but most importantly the distance is squared. So if we halve the distance between two bodies the increase in force is actually quadrupled. Our moon is far enough from earth to fit every planet in the solar system between the earth and the moon. The mass of the moon is 1.2% of earth. I have no idea what the mass of a space ship made of denser material (Metal) the size of the Atlantic ocean would be but lets just say 0.01% of earth. Now if such a ship is a 1000 times closer to earth than the moon it would have 10000 times the gravitational pull of the moon as shown in the equation above. In reality that would probably just raise the sea level of the Atlantic ocean directly under the ship and cause a severely low tide everywhere else as opposed to Tsunamis and earthquakes. If the ship were to fly over a land mass however the High tide it would cause could flood a seriously significant portion of land.

I guess I am both agreeing and disagreeing with you at the same time. Although since it flies because of anti gravity how that should influence the above I have no freaking idea!

This post has been edited by Cause: 05 May 2016 - 06:28 PM

[Aptorian]

I think the anti-gravity/what ever makes it fly/impossibility-engine is what matters. It's not its size. It's the effect of some kind of fuck you field that surrounds it.

[Cause]

Yes the truth is the aliens should be able to crack our planet from orbit. Harvest whatever the hell they want from the debris just as easily.

In truth they shouldn't even need to harvest habitated planets. There is absolutely nothing on earth that can't be found elsewhere I think I once read about a meters that contained a theoretical 80 trillion dollars worth of platinum or something similar.

They do things the hard way

[Aptorian]

The point of the original film if I recall correctly is that they conquer planets that are habitable, because they can serve as a hive. They come, they eat and multiply and then move on.

In the film it's implied they are like locust but that doesn't need to mean that they are strip mining habitable planets and taking the air, water and precious resources with them. Rather it would just mean that their culture/migration/life cycle means that they feed and breed until they have to move on.

[Cause]

Food is just energy and chemistry. Again no need for an actual habitable planet. Of course then there would be no need for will Smith to fight aliens. A quandary

[polishgenius]

Cause, on 05 May 2016 - 06:27 PM, said:

. In reality that would probably just raise the sea level of the Atlantic ocean directly under the ship and cause a severely low tide everywhere else as opposed to Tsunamis and earthquakes.

Well, this is part of my issue. Why are there buildings and shit flying up, but not much apparently happening to the water?
Also, 'what goes up must come down' - if it's been caught by the ship's gravitational field, it is going down! That's the whole point!

[QuickTidal]

You're thinking too hard about it PG.

[Macros]

Think about this PG.
Will Smith punches one out "welcome to america m, Bitch!"
He punched the protective exoskeleton armour. Not the little alien inside

[Morgoth]

Cause, on 05 May 2016 - 07:48 PM, said:

Food is just energy and chemistry. Again no need for an actual habitable planet. Of course then there would be no need for will Smith to fight aliens. A quandary

This is something that buggs me in sci fi books too. Why fight over planets when, considerign the technology available, it would be much more efficient to build habitats in space? Lately though I have been sort of accepting it from a point of view that even if it is objectively more efficient, maybe one simply wants to be able to walk on real ground and experience a real sky.

This post has been edited by Morgoth: 06 May 2016 - 06:58 AM

[polishgenius]

QuickTidal, on 06 May 2016 - 12:08 AM, said:

You're thinking too hard about it PG.

Macros, on 06 May 2016 - 06:15 AM, said:

Think about this PG.
Will Smith punches one out "welcome to america m, Bitch!"
He punched the protective exoskeleton armour. Not the little alien inside

It should be noted that I didn't actually like the first one. I did think from the first couple of trailers that I might like this one, though, which is why I paid enough attention for it to start annoying me.



But, I mean, I might like it anyway. I like some properly stupid films, after all. It can't be as dumb as Immortals.

[Macros]

On the other hand.

Why did the Romans conquer so much? They had enough as Rome.
Why did the Mongols rampage over half the world?

Maybe the aliens are more human than not, they don't just want resources, they don't want competition, they want to dominate a rule, a show of superiority over perceived inferiors.

Its a storyline that humans can accept and understand.

[Cause]

Macros, on 06 May 2016 - 09:18 AM, said:

On the other hand.

Why did the Romans conquer so much? They had enough as Rome.
Why did the Mongols rampage over half the world?

Maybe the aliens are more human than not, they don't just want resources, they don't want competition, they want to dominate a rule, a show of superiority over perceived inferiors.

Its a storyline that humans can accept and understand.

Im not sure that is an Apt analogy at all. If you want to build a coliseum or the like you better be an empire funnelling the resources of a conquered people to your home town. Funnily enough in this case I think it was Jewish gold from the temple in Jerusalem that paid for the coliseum. Once your an alien species that has mastered gravity and FTL travel amongst various other technologies (but not antivirus software), its probably easier to mine in space than to conquer inhabited worlds. How much energy (Literally, from giant laser blasts) and time would it take to sack earth as opposed to just mining meteors or nebulae clouds etc. Plus I am pretty sure the last act of a dying human race would have been to scorch the planet in nuclear fire, biological and chemical weapons. Though of course whether any of that would be deadly to the aliens is anyone's guess. Equally likely though is that any amino acid on earth could be the equivalent of Sarin to them.

I once read a semi scientific paper that argued even if the universe was chock full of aliens we would have almost no reason to every interact with them or they with each other. Its unlikely we would need to compete for space or resources or have anything in common.