Support NeoGAF

[pinkatrophe]

Oh please take high school physics again. Shockwaves emanating from explosions come from a wave of air (something to do with pressure) not from electromagnetic thermal radiation.

If shockwaves wouldn't result from heat, does this mean that Cruise shouldn't even be physically moved by the explosion in the background?

If so, then I guess this undermines the entire argument on the most fundamental level.

 

[videogamer]

If shockwaves wouldn't result from heat, does this mean that Cruise shouldn't even be physically moved by the explosion in the background?

If so, then I guess this undermines the entire argument on the most fundamental level.

You said that Cruise was being affected by "heat waves", not by shockwaves.

And once again, my paper plane argument still suggests how, even with a rear thrust, other elements may inadvertantly influence the path of travel.

Explain this again.

So, you've got the initial momentum provided by your hand. You have the wind. What else could "inadvertantly" act upon the plane?


You're writing does need help.
1. WTF is "rear thrust"?!? Why don't you just say X speed in Y direction?
2. "Other elements" don't just "inadvertantly" act upon the plane.

 

[pinkatrophe]

You said that Cruise was being affected by "heat waves", not by shockwaves.

I'm sorry, that was just wrong word usage. Either way, I was referring to the waves that would result from the blast.

 

[Son of Godzilla]

I'm nearly fucking sick of exaggerated TV heroes. Especially when they suck my balls [Chuck Norris].

Come on, can't you guys just like Superman and Transformers like all the other kids?

COME ON

Regarding the explosion: I always assumed the perpendicular thing (which looks really cool) was because of the bridge coiling from the explosion as he's pushing off.

Edit: Looking at that avatar, it's not even on a bridge? Looks like a pier or something... Ugh I unno, shockwaves in the ground from the explosion? I've got nothing. Dammit GAF, now I'm never going to see this explosion as cool as it was again.

 

[jamesinclair]

Godamnit guys. The earth is rotating. While Tom is flying through the air, the world is rotating below him, thus the car is actually slamming into him. Poor guy just wants to fly forward, but the earth wont have any of that.

 

[pinkatrophe]

Edit: Looking at that avatar, it's not even on a bridge? Looks like a pier or something... Ugh I unno, shockwaves in the ground from the explosion? I've got nothing. Dammit GAF, now I'm never going to see this explosion as cool as it was again.

No, it is a bridge. You can see it in the trailer.

Realistic physics or not (in this case, not) my hype for the film based off that explosion alone still has not detiorated.

 

[The Shadow]

And once again, my paper plane argument still suggests how, even with a rear thrust, other elements may inadvertantly influence the path of travel.

No it doesn't.

TOM CRUISE IS NOT A FUCKING PAPER AIRPLANE

He has substantially more mass than paper. A gust of wind to the side would not make him fly perpendicular to a substantially larger force of the explosion behind him. HE IS NOT FUCKING PAPER.

Is it upsetting to know that I can actually concede to flaws in my argument? If only certain attributes were transferrable...

I concede my flaws when I'm wrong. I'm NOT wrong here.

Reading comprehension ftl. Once again, refer to the above post of yours that only refers to the force of jumping to one direction or another. And before you even begin to suggest that the force of a straight downward plunge in an elevator is the same as the impact of heat waves and air currents, please, stop.

A force acting on an object is just a force. It doesn't matter how that force was produced.

And regardless if I only discussed one other factor, I'm not ignoring everything else. I'm not going to factor every single micro force when they'd probably be ignored on a force diagram (school ftw). You assumed I said as much when I never did, ever.

I still stand by this. I'm sorry to break this blatant news to you: sometimes films contain things that look cool. If you'd rather have him fly forward and hit nothing, then that's cool. I guess the rest of us are more willing to accept a film's potential to be implausible.

Here's a fantastic idea. How about he flies forward like he should due to the force of the explosion *AND* hit a car. WOW!

Satisfies people who are easily amused as well as those who value the basic laws of the universe.

 

[Kevtones]

So Chuck Norris can run 25 mph?

Chuck Norris doesn't run 25 MPH

25 MPH runs Chuck Norris

 

[PhoenixDark]

Cruise only runs 17mph when he's running away from females.

 

[pinkatrophe]

No it doesn't.

TOM CRUISE IS NOT A FUCKING PAPER AIRPLANE

He has substantially more mass than paper. A gust of wind to the side would not make him fly perpendicular to a substantially larger force of the explosion behind him. HE IS NOT FUCKING PAPER.

You said that every force has an equal yet opposite reaction. I stated how those opposite reactions become skewed given the right elements occur.

And regardless if I only discussed one other factor, I'm not ignoring everything else.

and then

I'm not going to factor every single micro force

Round, round, round we go. You're not ignoring everything by only stating one element, even when you state you're not factoring every force? Hmm.

Here's a fantastic idea. How about he flies forward like he should due to the force of the explosion *AND* hit a car. WOW!

Satisfies people who are easily amused as well as those who value the basic laws of the universe.

Holy SHIT, you should have sent JJ Abrams that memo. Or how about there are people who thinks it looks cooler the way it is because it doesn't require unnecessary cutting and works very seamlessly? How about stopping to realize something the Liu Kang pointed out oh so many posts back that this is a Hollywood movie? You're fine with Ethan Hunt being able to evade thousands of bullets and save the world multiple times, but suspension of physics is too much to handle?

 

[Kevtones]

Cruise only runs 17mph when he's running away from females.

Or towards Placenta.

 

[DMczaf]

Or towards Placenta.

 

[The Shadow]

You said that every force has an equal yet opposite reaction. I stated how those opposite reactions become skewed given the right elements occur. Round, round, round we go. You're not ignoring everything by only stating one element, even when you state you're not factoring every force? Hmm.

Semantics. I'm not ignoring the other forces; I'm fully aware there are multiple in effect. For the sake of simplicity, I'm ignoring the inconsiderable ones since their effect to nullify the explosion are pretty small.

That's what I meant.

IE, the example you choose to ignore. A gust of wind from the side isn't going to deflect Tom and make him hit that car when there's a huge explosion behind him.

Holy SHIT, you should have sent JJ Abrams that memo. Or how about there are people who thinks it looks cooler the way it is because it doesn't require unnecessary cutting and works very seamlessly?

People? What people outside of this thread? What people outside of you and Liu Kang?

And besides, why should I give a shit about a bunch of other people who think it looks cooler? You actually trying to argue that if there's a majority opinion then it's right and not subject for debate? lollers dude.

How about stopping to realize something the Liu Kang pointed out oh so many posts back that this is a Hollywood movie? You're fine with Ethan Hunt being able to evade thousands of bullets and save the world multiple times, but suspension of physics is too much to handle?

Cop out! Cop out!

I've replied to that "point" already but I'll humor you. It's expected for certain things to be exaggerated. There are limits to that exaggeration and it breaks the suspension of disbelief.

 

[Mr. Spinnington]

I'm serious, GAF is oh-no'ing the hell out of me, just like these kids.

 

[pinkatrophe]

Semantics. I'm not ignoring the other forces; I'm fully aware there are multiple in effect. For the sake of simplicity, I'm ignoring the inconsiderable ones since their effect to nullify the explosion are pretty small.

That's what I meant.

IE, the example you choose to ignore. A gust of wind from the side isn't going to deflect Tom and make him hit that car when there's a huge explosion behind him.

:lol

The example I chose to ignore a page and a half ago? I'm sorry, wasn't I the one that conceded that you're probably right? Nice try, dude.

People? What people outside of this thread? What people outside of you and Liu Kang?

And besides, why should I give a shit about a bunch of other people who think it looks cooler? You actually trying to argue that if there's a majority opinion then it's right and not subject for debate? lollers dude.

Me, Liu Kang, and Son of Godzilla. That's a greater amount of people that are arguing against how bad it looks. Note that i said the number of people that are arguing about how BAD it looks, not whether or not it's physically accurate.

lollers, indeed. I love your baseless conjectures. I said that there ARE people who think that it looks good and that JJ Abrams obviously decided to shoot the scene how he did instead of more realistically for a reason, presumably because he felt it looked better? Did I ever say there was an empirical 'right' or 'wrong' way for M:I:III to look?

Cop out! Cop out!

I've replied to that "point" already but I'll humor you. It's expected for certain things to be exaggerated. There are limits to that exaggeration and it breaks the suspension of disbelief.

And that's fine, you have your limits. But seeing as how numerous other films have broken those limits (The Matrix, Superman, and even more realistic films that involve a main character's ability to dodge thousands of bullets) and gone on to be financially successful, I'd say that other people have more flexible limits. Of course this is your opinion, which I respect. Now reciprocate that, and respect those of us who *do* believe that it adds to a greater sense of excitement in the film. I'd be criticizing way more improbabilities about the film before I'd talk about the physics.

If you want to claim this argument, you can have it. Sheesh, it's degraded into nothing more than ass-covering and baseless assumptions. Attribute my tap-out to whatever you want, but either way, this has gotten past the point of mild irritation for me.

Enjoy the rest of the thread.

 

[Mr. Spinnington]

am wrong

am right

But guys, it's starting to look like this.

 

[The Shadow]

But guys, it's starting to look like this.

Just as long as I'm the taller one.

Also, victory is mine. Newton wins again. Yay! Bow down before the laws of motion fools.

 

[XMonkey]

It still looks like a cool scene.

 

[Cronox]

Just to help with that majority opinion thing I'll go ahead and agree with Shadow. It never looked right to me either, which sort of ruins an otherwise visceral scene.

 

[Deleted member 1235]

don't forget to factor in his wee legs. the mans a dwarf.

 

[BuG]

That's an illusion. He doesn't run. He forces the Earth to spin faster on an axis perpendicular to the direction he is facing.

I was going to try and prolong the dying Norris fad by making a joke similar to yours, however you've managed to articulate it in a manner much better than I ever could.

 

[psycho_snake]

Or towards Placenta.

dammit you stole my joke

 

[tedtropy]

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

I've seen that damn M:I3 trailer a million times and that scene has bugged the shit out of me every time I've seen it. Of course, leave it to GAF to get a whole thread going about how bad it looks and if it's possible. :lol

Seriously, that angle is way too screwed up for it to be a realistic reaction. From where he's at relative to the explosion, he should probably have been thrown forward, toward the camera, not at such an odd angle to the side. All that aside though, it just looks plain stupid.

 

[Days like these...]

Just my $.02 it's also always bothered me. I'll probably see MI:3 tonight oe American Haunting depending on what my GF wants to see

 

[LordMaji]

:lol :lol wtf. :lol

 

[Dr_Cogent]

I've seen that damn M:I3 trailer a million times and that scene has bugged the shit out of me every time I've seen it. Of course, leave it to GAF to get a whole thread going about how bad it looks and if it's possible. :lol

Seriously, that angle is way too screwed up for it to be a realistic reaction. From where he's at relative to the explosion, he should probably have been thrown forward, toward the camera, not at such an odd angle to the side. All that aside though, it just looks plain stupid.

I've never seen a single MI movie, but have been curious. And yes, the angle at which he is thrown is really silly looking. I'm guessing the movies director doesn't know shit about physics or something.

 

[Sapiens]

God, I love Tom Cruise and his movie press tours - and then all the insanity they cause.

 

[levious]

you should see the first at least... I really liked that one.

 

[BigGreenMat]

Can't we just say that The Shadow and pinkatrophe are both partly right? Shadow you are right that the angle at which his trajectory is changed is rather drastic given the perspective given. Pink is also right that although it seems a bit wonky it doesn't mean that it is completely wrong. What you have to understand Shadow is that an explosion isn't a perfectly pinpointed expanding force. Watch a few explosions and notice the way they seem to thrust in certain directions more than others. They are not uniform. Also you bring up a pool ball as an example. Does a ball always move parallel to the direction you send the cue? No. What happens when the ball is struck on a shade? It moves according to how the shade is struck. What makes you think that the explosion cannot hit Mr. Cruise in a similar fashion? Exactly, it could have done just that. It is just like your pool analogy, you just weren't thinking broadly enough to see the possibilities of your own model.

 

[firex]

dammit, tom cruise is on performance enhancing drugs!

Spoiler

it's the placenta, it's giving him superhuman powers! we must cut off his source!

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

I've never seen a single MI movie, but have been curious. And yes, the angle at which he is thrown is really silly looking. I'm guessing the movies director doesn't know shit about physics or something.

Personally, I don't think you are missing out on much. For me, the first two have been way more hype than what they've lived up for. M:I 1 was a rather average action flick that tried to be smarter than it was. I was talked into seeing M:I 2 by someone who knew how to use her feminine wiles! After seeing it, I remembered why I hadn't ever needed to see another M:I film. I won't be seeing 3.

 

[Dilbert]

The "physics" in that scene is inexcusably bad. I agree with The Shadow -- seeing something that wrong breaks the suspension of disbelief. You can't compare it to, say, The Matrix -- in that movie, the whole plot is centered around people being able to break laws of physics, whereas MI:3 is supposed to show realistic (well, at least semi-plausible) Earth physics.

pinkatrophe, you are barred from ever discussing anything related to physics again. Sheesh.

 

[Cauliflower of Love]

Can't we just say that The Shadow and pinkatrophe are both partly right? Shadow you are right that the angle at which his trajectory is changed is rather drastic given the perspective given. Pink is also right that although it seems a bit wonky it doesn't mean that it is completely wrong. What you have to understand Shadow is that an explosion isn't a perfectly pinpointed expanding force. Watch a few explosions and notice the way they seem to thrust in certain directions more than others. They are not uniform. Also you bring up a pool ball as an example. Does a ball always move parallel to the direction you send the cue? No. What happens when the ball is struck on a shade? It moves according to how the shade is struck. What makes you think that the explosion cannot hit Mr. Cruise in a similar fashion? Exactly, it could have done just that. It is just like your pool analogy, you just weren't thinking broadly enough to see the possibilities of your own model.

Only thing pinkatrophe is right about, is that the shot would look lame if cruise headed straight for the camera(which is where he should have techinally have gone).

See the direction the car moved? That's how he should have moved. They just should have placed the explosion on the other side of the bridge.

I will admit it's a cool looking shot. =P

 

[Dilbert]

Can't we just say that The Shadow and pinkatrophe are both partly right?

No.

Pink is also right that although it seems a bit wonky it doesn't mean that it is completely wrong. What you have to understand Shadow is that an explosion isn't a perfectly pinpointed expanding force. Watch a few explosions and notice the way they seem to thrust in certain directions more than others. They are not uniform. Also you bring up a pool ball as an example. Does a ball always move parallel to the direction you send the cue? No. What happens when the ball is struck on a shade? It moves according to how the shade is struck. What makes you think that the explosion cannot hit Mr. Cruise in a similar fashion? Exactly, it could have done just that. It is just like your pool analogy, you just weren't thinking broadly enough to see the possibilities of your own model.

No.

 

[Solo]

How fast can Jack Bauer run, Jack Bauer lovers?

Jack Bauer doesnt run. The world spins for him at exactly the rate he chooses to move.

 

[BigGreenMat]

No.


No.

Explain. I understand people not getting it, but most people can't understand relativity either because it doesn't jive with their normal worldview. Most people find the non-divide of particles and waves or the nature of light out of whack as well.

 

[Dilbert]

Explain. I understand people not getting it, but most people can't understand relativity either because it doesn't jive with their normal worldview. Most people find the non-divide of particles and waves or the nature of light out of whack as well.

1) The shockwave emanating from an unconstrained shockwave will be spherical. Any irregularities in the explosion itself will manifest as tiny perturbations in the intensity along the shock front, but you'd be hard-pressed to notice them at any significant distance from the explosion. In the movie clip, there is no external structure to reflect the shock wave, so the direction of the force could only be radial.

2) Your explanation of what happens when you strike a pool ball is completely wrong. The motion of a pool ball in a collision with a cue ball is PERFECTLY well-understood using classical mechanics. All you need is conservation of energy, momentum, and angular momentum -- there is nothing even slightly unpredictable about it.

 

[pinkatrophe]

The "physics" in that scene is inexcusably bad. I agree with The Shadow -- seeing something that wrong breaks the suspension of disbelief. You can't compare it to, say, The Matrix -- in that movie, the whole plot is centered around people being able to break laws of physics, whereas MI:3 is supposed to show realistic (well, at least semi-plausible) Earth physics.

pinkatrophe, you are barred from ever discussing anything related to physics again. Sheesh.

:lol

The thing I love about GAF is the members' tendency to make a polemic out of anything. Even when I admit that I'm wrong, people continue to probe the issue. It's like challenging yourself to a fist fight.

BigGreenMat: please, don't probe the issue anymore. One thing I always have to remind myself about is that half the debates on message boards ultimately aren't worth the energy in the first place.

 

[The Shadow]

:lol

The thing I love about GAF is the members' tendency to make a polemic out of anything. Even when I admit that I'm wrong, people continue to probe the issue. It's like challenging yourself to a fist fight.

Could you point out where you "admitted" you were wrong? You argued simple physics (my reason for feeling it looked odd), appealed to the authority of the masses (more people like it than don't), and you "baselessly" assume Abrams had good reason for doing the scene like it appears and use that as evidence for your case.

Seriously, I must have missed this clear cut admittance that you were wrong somewhere.

For the sake of putting this thread out for good, I'll admit I may have been harsh with the "retarded" comment and probably shouldn't have posted it.

And yet I can't help but feel that anyone who thinks that looks realistic (which you suggested it did in your first reply to me), is retarded. I'm just being honest here, not mean.

 

[bionic77]

Just saw the movie. Really good and by far the best of the MI movies.