Most realistic asteroid impact/end of the world movie yet?

[Jarvis323]

Is this how people would react to a looming world ending asteroid impact?

 

[phinds]

Is this how people would react to a looming world ending asteroid impact?

No. Do you seriously think it IS ?

 

[Bandersnatch]

Looks legit.

 

[Bandersnatch]

Jeez, phinds. Lighten up. It's a satire on current events.

 

[Jarvis323]

No. Do you seriously think it IS ?

Intuitively no, but based on observation, sort of.

 

[Rive]

Based on the trailer, the makers of the movie has seen Idiocracy, right?
'Realistic' goes quite far. Let's say 'has a point' instead

 

[phinds]

Based on the trailer, the makers of the movie has seen Idiocracy, right?

Now THAT makes sense.

 

[Melbourne Guy]

Is this how people would react to a looming world ending asteroid impact?

It's hard to know which of the cast you're referring to, @Jarvis323, but in Neflix's Ironic Cinematic Universe, I'd be surprised if any of them reacted any other way!

- Madam President with a perpetual smirk? Check!
- Egghead man astronomer who seems perpetually confused? Check!
- Political advisor perpetually swarmy? Check!
- Shrill female astronomer with perpetual wisecracks? Check!

It's all there, locked and loaded, can't wait for December. Not!

 

[Hornbein]

Most realistic? Could be.

 

[Jarvis323]

In honesty, it's the denial part that is most realistic to me. People naively assume people would go crazy running around fighting, or become depressed, lose faith in their religions, have a profound moment, do the things they didn't get a chance to do before the end, become interested in possible solutions, etc. In reallity, maybe most people just make a joke of it, ignore it, try to profit off of it, or miss the news completely because they don't pay attention to what's going on in the world.

 

[Melbourne Guy]

In honesty, it's the denial part that is most realistic to me.

There's a whole galaxy's of PhDs in your observation, @Jarvis323. Or a book at least, as Shankar Vendantam has recently done as co-author of Useful Delusions: The Power and Paradox of the Self-Deceiving Brain. Most of us are in denial that we're going to die at some point, so why would an impending asteroid strike change that?

 

[Hornbein]

There's a whole galaxy's of PhDs in your observation, @Jarvis323. Or a book at least, as Shankar Vendantam has recently done as co-author of Useful Delusions: The Power and Paradox of the Self-Deceiving Brain. Most of us are in denial that we're going to die at some point, so why would an impending asteroid strike change that?

For a number of years I have believed that society is based on lies. Looks like Shankar feels the same. Though George Carlin said it first, in his rather more earthy style.

 

[pinball1970]

Is this how people would react to a looming world ending asteroid impact?

This is not a film and you do not actually see an impact but I think this is really well put together.

There are enough planet /earth guys and physics people to tell me

1.No way we could know that

2.There is a possibility/ it could have happened like that

3. We believe it did happen like that

3.Very unlikely it happened like thatThere are a couple of assumptions in there like what time it hit, judging by the sounds / light it hit early AM northern hemisphere, I am not sure it matters.

What I did like?

1.Different perspectives/ views

2. Pieces of info as time progresses but see points above

3. The music! Wow, it is just sinister as hell and punctuated by different views but still very effective.

Extinction event films have to have the hero, back story soap opera and I get it, it is entertainment after all.

I would like a little more sinister and little less Aerosmith.

 

[russ_watters]

I'll probably watch this movie because of the cast, but I'm not sure I'll be into the style of humor.

Anyway, there was a pretty realistic one in 1998 called Armageddon Deep Impact.

 

[pinball1970]

I'll probably watch this movie because of the cast, but I'm not sure I'll be into the style of humor.

Anyway, there was a pretty realistic one in 1998 called Armageddon Deep Impact.

I saw the trailer and I am intrigued so I will watch it.
I liked both films.
As an aside BBC news this morning reported the NASA is launching a mission tomorrow to redirect an asteroid. Just incase we need it for such an event. Impact next September.
https://www.nasa.gov/planetarydefense/dart

 

[Melbourne Guy]

NASA is launching a mission tomorrow to redirect an asteroid

It should be an interesting test case, I heard a podcast interview with one of the DART team on Quirks and Quarks, how they intend to measure the result is interesting. Here's hoping they don't miss, it's a tiny target!

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/quirks/nov...-to-test-a-planetary-defence-system-1.6254088

 

[pinball1970]

It should be an interesting test case, I heard a podcast interview with one of the DART team on Quirks and Quarks, how they intend to measure the result is interesting. Here's hoping they don't miss, it's a tiny target!

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/quirks/nov...-to-test-a-planetary-defence-system-1.6254088

So if a film was going to accurate they would be looking at something like this which is more in line with Deep Impact rather Armageddon.
The rocket does not have explosives on board, would that not be better?
If it missed it could detonate and the blast could cause a slight change in direction that way?

Either way I do not think that would make for a hugely interesting film, unless it missed and the asteroid hit which is close to Deep impact plot.
I like De Caprio and the film (Dont look up) looks interesting, satirical but I don’t want to spoil it for myself, I like to watch films knowing little about them.

 

[Jarvis323]

Deep impact was dissapointing to me in how it ended. Not that I wanted to see the world end. It's just that it turned out that all you needed to do to survive is go to high ground. There should have been a coordinated effort to save people on Earth.

I think with these kinds of stories we like to see a portrayal of how the world reacts to a hopeless doomsday scenareo, but then in the end we don't want the doomsday to actually happen. This is one unrealistic aspect. And it makes the scientist who just stood in front of the wave seem stupid.

I wonder if "Don't look up", will also be like this. If in the end the world is saved, then it changes comlletely how you interpret the characters.

 

[Melbourne Guy]

The rocket does not have explosives on board, would that not be better?

The kinetic energy involved makes any explosives - unless it's nuclear (or antimatter, we're in the sci fi forum, aren't we) - moot. Give the asteroid a little nudge, far enough away, and that's sufficient to avoid a dinosaur killer situation here on Earth.

 

[Jarvis323]

The kinetic energy involved makes any explosives - unless it's nuclear (or antimatter, we're in the sci fi forum, aren't we) - moot. Give the asteroid a little nudge, far enough away, and that's sufficient to avoid a dinosaur killer situation here on Earth.

With our luck, we might accidentally knock an asteroid, that wasn't going to hit us, onto a collision course.

 

[Rive]

unless it's nuclear

Kind of reassuring that according to the delivered mass a nuclear option seems possible.

 

[Melbourne Guy]

With our luck, we might accidentally knock an asteroid, that wasn't going to hit us, onto a collision course.

If it wasn't going to his us, ideally, we wouldn't be impacting it in the first place! But I used to naively think that if we smashed one into parts, that would be okay. Turns out, probs not, not unless the parts are all guaranteed to be small enough to burn up in the atmosphere. And that's not likely...

 

[Bandersnatch]

This was somewhat surprisingly nice and heartfelt.
Full disclosure: I watched it in an altered state of sobriety, half asleep, and with low expectations coming in. So it might in fact be more self-congratulatory and indulgent than I remember.
Best I can describe the vibe is Iron Sky crossed with Last Night.

 

[gleem]

I was quite sober when I watched it and it was interesting to see the prognostication based on the trailer. The over concern of the government and citizens with imminent personal and political problems in view of an impending disaster is quite real. The initial lack of credibility of the scientists or the incredulity of the citizenry is also quire believable considering previous warning of impending disaster that did not occur (over population, rampant pollution) and those that have not persuasively revelated themselves (climate change), as well as the cost of mobilizing and effort to address the issues provides an excuse for people to not act in a timely manner.

I think the characters were well portrayed and an important character was not revealed in the trailer that I saw. There is a twist in the plot that you do not see coming which I think was great. However, it did suffer from an Armageddon style solution to address the problem and takes an ending from another sci-fi movie. Enough said. Watch it.

 

[hutchphd]

I think the characters were well portrayed and an important character was not revealed in the trailer that I saw. There is a twist in the plot that you do not see coming which I think was great. However, it did suffer from an Armageddon style solution to address the problem and takes an ending from another sci-fi movie. Enough said. Watch it.

Watched the movie yesterday. I thought it abysmal.

The characters were not interesting. Meryl Streep played a caricature badly (Meryl Streep-!). The humor was very very broad but unfortunately infinitesimally deep. It tried very hard to be theater of the absurd, and the effort showed.

Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery. One of my all time favorite movies is Dr Strangelove. The "Don't Look Up" attempt at flattery succeeds except for the script, the direction, thr production values, and the lack of Peter Sellers (and Peter Sellers and Peter Sellers) and George C Scott .

I'm going to go watch Sim Pickens ride the bomb...

 

[Janus]

If it wasn't going to his us, ideally, we wouldn't be impacting it in the first place! But I used to naively think that if we smashed one into parts, that would be okay. Turns out, probs not, not unless the parts are all guaranteed to be small enough to burn up in the atmosphere. And that's not likely...

The problem is that with a newly discovered object you, at most, can predict its trajectory within a margin of error. So instead of a "path", you get something more like a "cone". The longer you observe it, the narrower the cone becomes. So the best you can do is calculate the probability of an impact. If, as time goes on, the Earth remains in that cone, the probability of impact increases. The only way to be sure of a miss is to deflect it enough to make sure that the Earth is outside of the cone entirely.
As far as the pieces of the object burning up in the atmosphere goes: If the original object is large enough to cause global disaster in the first place, having it "burn up" doesn't mean we avoid any consequences. The Earth's atmosphere still has to absorb all the kinetic energy of the object, All that energy being pumped into the atmosphere is likely to result in a good deal of damage to the global ecology.

 

[gleem]

Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery. One of my all time favorite movies is Dr Strangelove. The "Don't Look Up" attempt at flattery succeeds except for the script, the direction, thr production values, and the lack of Peter Sellers (and Peter Sellers and Peter Sellers) and George C Scott .

Yeah. Dr Strangelove came to mind for me too. But really, "Don't Look Up" wasn't that bad. Rotten Tomato: critics 55%, audience 77%. and considering its political undertone it probably not bad since a percentage of the people might have been offended by the humor.

I thought it abysmal.

I think you over analyzed it. It was not intended to be a work of art.

 

[gleem]

he problem is that with a newly discovered object you, at most, can predict its trajectory within a margin of error. So instead of a "path", you get something more like a "cone". The longer you observe it, the narrower the cone becomes. So the best you can do is calculate the probability of an impact. If, as time goes on, the Earth remains in that cone, the probability of impact increases. The only way to be sure of a miss is to deflect it enough to make sure that the Earth is outside of the cone entirely.
As far as the pieces of the object burning up in the atmosphere goes: If the original object is large enough to cause global disaster in the first place, having it "burn up" doesn't mean we avoid any consequences. The Earth's atmosphere still has to absorb all the kinetic energy of the object, All that energy being pumped into the atmosphere is likely to result in a good deal of damage to the global ecology.

The first thing to notice is the prediction of a collision of an orbital trajectory for a body 6 month by a hand calculation. A typical layperson will not see a problem with this.

The alternative plan for dealing with this NEO did expect collateral damage, but it would make some people very rich.

 

[hutchphd]

I think you over analyzed it. It was not intended to be a work of art.

I think is was intended as an important piece of satire. I offer this review which matches mine pretty well:
https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/...9ltm1AqoykIcWyepwZMDB55eafOgO8M-ADRl2_jr3cphQ

Hopefully it will save some victims. Just "Don't Look At"

'

 

[gleem]

I think is was intended as an important piece of satire. I offer this review which matches mine pretty well:

When Siskel and Ebert had their show, which I often watched, they did not always agree. Sometimes I could not fully appreciate a "thumbs down" or even a "thumbs up". I also watch CBS regularly which has David Edelstein as a movie critic who is IMO is overly erudite and ponderous in his critiques to be virtually meaningless to me in the sense of being irrelevant. We don't all see things in the same light.

 

[hutchphd]

It is your opinion and I do not begrudge you that pleasure, and know you are not alone.
I was hoping only to give other potential viewers an added argument to not waste 90 minutes of their life . It is of course their decision as well.
I believe I will now do something really cerebral like watch me some college football...

 

[hutchphd]

Speaking of deep impact scenarios: It is my understanding that a major part of the mayhem from such an asteroid is the "broiler effect" from having the ejecta re-entering and further heating on descent. Apparently there is sufficient radiant flux possibly to be lethal over a large area . Is this possibility still considered likely? Somehow this is far more terrifying (I don't know why..)

 

[Melbourne Guy]

So instead of a "path", you get something more like a "cone". The longer you observe it, the narrower the cone becomes.

True, @Janus, and I did not describe my thinking very well because any explosive force we can apply that is sufficient to 'blow up' even a small asteroid such that the cone is widely dispersed enough to essentially miss the Earth is science fiction at the moment and for the foreseeable future.

So, yes, whether the asteroid intersects the Earth in one piece for many pieces is immaterial as far as the outcome in terms of energy dropped on us.

DART may demonstrate a viable 'hit it and hope it misses' method for further out asteroids, but whether it would help with an extinction event impactor is questionable.

 

[Klystron]

Watched the movie yesterday. I thought it abysmal

I have started to watch the movie twice. Could not get off the ground. Third attempt the charm?

The same thing happened attempting to watch the oh so serious NetFlix flick "The Power of the Dog". Good cast and acting, beautiful scenery, high expectations; yet, I needed three tries to finally watch the entire movie. Not science fiction (I think); so, will reserve my opinion of "Dog".

Having only watched the beginning, "Don't Look Up" reminds me a bit of "Contact" with a comet substituting for the incoming radio signal. If Jennifer Lawrence's character sleeps with a defrocked priest in the third reel, this justifies the comparison.

[edit: Read that "Don't Look Up" is intended as an allegory for global climate change. Perhaps I'll give it another look.]

 

[BillTre]

Speaking of deep impact scenarios: It is my understanding that a major part of the mayhem from such an asteroid is the "broiler effect" from having the ejecta re-entering and further heating on descent. Apparently there is sufficient radiant flux possibly to be lethal over a large area . Is this possibility still considered likely? Somehow this is far more terrifying (I don't know why..)

This seems to be the current interpretation of the after effects of the Chixculub impact that killed off all the dinosaurs, burned most or all trees, and destroyed the environment such that no vertebrate over 60 pounds long survived.
As I read it, the heat of numerous small particles heated by re-entering the atmosphere radiated heat over the entire globe.
At least the water didn't boil off.