MovieChat Forums > 2012 (2009) Discussion > Question about Yellowstone (possible spo...

Question about Yellowstone (possible spoiler?)

posted 9 years ago by ArchaeanX
10 replies | jump to latest

Ok, I am just amazed how small the shock wave from the eruption was. The shock wave should've killed all the characters, or at least have been more intense.

I know it's just a hollywood movie, but come on. They did their best at realism it seems (well maybe not their best but there was a lot of research for the movie.)

Is there anyone that can comment who is familiar on explosions? Shouldn't have the concussion wave killed them all at that close proximity? (I believe that is the technical term for the shock wave) I only know a few things about explosions from research. I am almost certain that it would've sent them flying much further, but I guess that would've destroyed the plot.) But! I think there could've been a solution. The characters could've waited until they were further away.

[–] MadSimian 8 years ago

The concussion wave wouldn't have outright killed them but either the heat and/or the toxicity of the resultant mixture of volcanic fumes with the surrounding air would have.

The thing is that you need to realize the difference between realism and realistic at least in terms of visual entertainment(i.e. movies and television). In this case, realism would mean that it is meant to be as close an approximation of reality as possible whereas realistic would mean it looks like it could happen in the way portrayed but doesn't necessarily have to mimic reality in any way, shape or form.

As an example, lots of action movies have people getting shot but rarely would the injury happen like that in real life. For instance, a gun shot rarely knocks people off their feet and/or sends them flying backwards yet action movies portray this all the time. In this case, it certainly looks realistic enough but, as has been pointed out, it shows no amount of realism. It certainly looks cool though, doesn't it? ;D lol

Rudy, question.
Yeah?
...Know any virgins?**cue spit take**

[–] ArchaeanX 8 years ago

When I re watched it, I think an explosion that size would definitely be strong enough to cause pressure to kill them. But I could be wrong they could've been further away than I originally thought them to be.

But like you said, it is a movie and only supposed to appear real without it ruining the movie. Had it been real life I would definitely question someone living that close to an explosion that size.

[–] the_la_baker 8 years ago

Correct. They would have been completely obliterated. Probably vaporized too.

When Mount St. Helens erupted the shockwave rolled over the forest for another 19 miles, leveling century-old trees; all the trunks neatly aligned to the north. Beyond this “tree down zone” the forest remained standing but was seared lifeless. The area devastated by the direct blast force covered an area of nearly 230 square miles (596 square kilometers).

In the film the eruption was at least 100x that size. The plane, the RV, and everyone would have been gone.

[–] Dejay 8 years ago

Interesting. I didn't know vulcanic eruptions can be that powerful. After all it's just some lava under pressure? When the cork of the vulcano pops lots of *beep* spills out but not like in an explosion (or so I would have thought). I would have thought the biggest danger is from hot ash, then falling rocks, then lava flow.

While watching the movie it looks like a gigantic nuke had gone off and seemed unrealistic to me. But apparently St. Helens blew up the whole mountain!

PS: Of course the whole movie is really about all those scenes where they are driving or fleeing literally on the edge of doom, escaping collapsing ground, fire, firebombs, ash and falling skyscrapers lol. It makes great visuals but you really can't expect that to be realistic.

[–] the_la_baker 8 years ago

Interesting. I didn't know vulcanic eruptions can be that powerful. After all it's just some lava under pressure? When the cork of the vulcano pops lots of *beep* spills out but not like in an explosion (or so I would have thought). I would have thought the biggest danger is from hot ash, then falling rocks, then lava flow.

I was shocked to learn of their destructive power as well.

While watching the movie it looks like a gigantic nuke had gone off and seemed unrealistic to me. But apparently St. Helens blew up the whole mountain!

I have no idea how realistic those visuals were.

PS: Of course the whole movie is really about all those scenes where they are driving or fleeing literally on the edge of doom, escaping collapsing ground, fire, firebombs, ash and falling skyscrapers lol. It makes great visuals but you really can't expect that to be realistic.

Absolutely. Disaster porn at its finest. With the exception of a few scenes(Vatican) this was some really impressive SFX.
:)

[–] Dejay 8 years ago

I have no idea how realistic those visuals were.

I bet not very. The director probably sat next to the FX guys and said "oh can we have one of those circular blast wave thingies?" "But sir, that's not how..." "Oh, oh, make it three of those!"

We can be glad they didn't add arms and legs to the mushroom cloud and had it stomping around hahaha.

But yeah it is great disaster porn. For some reason I like these apocalyptic stories and images. Religions are full of apocalypse stories. I guess humans have always pondered about how things could end badly, maybe in order to avoid it. Or maybe just to get out the popcorn in time.

[–] spud-boy 7 years ago

But Mt. St. Helens blew out sideways. The eruption in the movie was more straight up. But I agree, there should have more of a shock was. I liked the pyroclastic bombardment, though.

[–] CGSailor 8 years ago

They did their best at realism it seems (well maybe not their best but there was a lot of research for the movie.

If you really believe that. You are one of the most gullible people on the planet.
the film is virtually an ICON to Hollywood Bullsh!t.

I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

[–] SpiltPersonality 8 years ago

I'm not sure. Can you (or even Usain Bolt) run faster than 700km/h? That's the speed that the pyroclastic flow can move at.

SpiltPersonality

[–] Darthfrodo58 7 years ago

The shockwave actually would have killed them all, and the plane would have been damaged beyond repair. Plus, the ash cloud caught up with them and a plane can't fly in an ash cloud (no oxygen and the ash destroys the cylinders). It's kind of fun as a disaster movie, but pretty unrealistic.

Never get involved in a land war in Asia