A Nobel Prize may be in astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson’s future, because he has done what scientists never before believed possible:
He found some mistakes in a movie.
The head of the Hayden Planetarium took to Twitter on Sunday to educate “Gravity” viewers about a few flaws in the movie, wonder why we don’t celebrate real astronauts more, and generally break the magical spell cast by director Alfonso Cuaron.
He first took issue with the film’s title: “The film #Gravity should be renamed “Zero Gravity,” he tweeted. (But no, it shouldn’t be, because it’s also, like, totally about the gravity of the situation. Emotional gravity, man.) He suggested the alternative title “Angular Momentum,” which would not have looked as cool on a marquee.
Then he started hitting the movie where it hurts: Going after its science. His tweets, and our rebuttals:
“Mysteries of #Gravity: Why Bullock, a medical Doctor, is servicing the Hubble Space Telescope.”
“Mysteries of #Gravity: How Hubble (350mi up) ISS (230mi up) & a Chinese Space Station are all in sight lines of one another.”
Because… it’s a movie?
“Mysteries of #Gravity: When Clooney releases Bullock’s tether, he drifts away. In zero-G a single tug brings them together.”
Because, ah… okay. But how great was Sandra Bullock‘s hair in the movie?
Actually, Tyson had issues with that, too.
“Mysteries of #Gravity: Why Bullock’s hair, in otherwise convincing zero-G scenes, did not float freely on her head.”
The ultimate point, however, was that we are not sitting anywhere near Neil deGrasse Tyson at the movies. Wait, no. There’s also another point:
“Mysteries of #Gravity: Why we enjoy a SciFi film set in make-believe space more than we enjoy actual people set in real space,” he wrote.
All that said, DeGrasse liked “Gravity.”
“My Tweets hardly ever convey opinion,” he said in conclusion. “Mostly perspectives on the world. But if you must know, I enjoyed #Gravity very much.”