A joke? You wouldn't try to land the concrete, to be sure.
Obviously, you're not a golfer. Because if you want to get technical, there are aggregate additives that can imbue concrete with x-ray scattering properties, such as baryte (Barium sulphate) which is used today in concrete lining nuclear reactors. Mining water and regolith out of asteroids, though technically complicated and currently not economical, will inevitably become status quo when we exhaust Earth's rare earth minerals, specifically our supply of superconducting metals. As the cost goes up for materials here, and technology advances, the feasibility and economical viability of this strategy will mature to the point of pursuit.
I don't even understand why you would want to get technical with this film. Of all the components of this film available for you to criticize, I'm not sure the concrete is what's to focus on. The film is low budget and to make that work you need to compromise. Coming up with an exhaustive fiction for why it could be okay to have concrete in space is moot when it's obvious to the viewer that it was what the production team had to work with. What's a joke is that you are taking it as seriously as Neil deGrasse Tyson getting upset about the way Sandra's hair moved in zero-gravity.
If anything, I found the name of the film to be its weakest point. They say never judge a book by its cover, but this is just silly. I could see people with a cynical sense of humour getting a kick out of it, perhaps. I'm guessing most of these types of movies are picked up as DVD's by clueless parents thinking they've found that "Prometheu..whatever" movie their kid's been ranting about. It's a trap, but at least it doesn't hide that fact.
Anyway, I'm not trying to attack you personally, you seem like you've got your head on straight (from your reviews). I'm just jaw-dropped that this is even being discussed, as it's so pointless to either attack or defend this film on technical components, when there is so much else wrong already. You suckered me in just fine though, I guess, because I signed up just for you. Now, who's taking it too seriously?
I appreciate that every film, even small budget ones can be great, but I guess I just wanted to say that you can't expect too much from films like this, and perhaps you need to take it with a few more grains of salt. Whenever I think I'm being too critical, I remind myself that $500,000 is not a lot of money these days. Just think, it cost $650,000 (just think how much to do the same today) to shoot Mad Max in 1979 and they used sped up footage and a sheet of plywood painted to look like a truck on the front of a semi-truck rental they used so they wouldn't damage it. With $500,000, I'm very impressed with what the production team came up with, costumes, etc. You have to remember this is about business. With my expectations in check, I can honestly say I was nowhere near as upset as how I was with how Prometheus [actual] turned out in the end.
If you want to get any enjoyment out of it, you really do need to let go and just have fun with it.
reply
share