MovieChat Forums > Project Almanac (2015) Discussion > The technical talk is garbage

The technical talk is garbage

posted 9 years ago by mindrip
54 replies | jump to latest

I couldn't get past minute 7 because the dialog was filled with a bunch of "tech words" in random order. How is it possible that a "sci-fi" movie, from 2014, gets the most simple technical things wrong? Twice in the first 7 minutes! WTF?!

Then there's the "project" for the MIT application - are you kidding me? Drones and hand gesture control are old news and they are nothing more than toys. It's a gluing project at best, definitely not something you'd show off with when trying to get into MIT. On the same subject, if the other two guys were the "engineers", WTH was his contribution to the project? Project manager?

Given the amount of FAIL they managed to pack in only 7 minutes, can anyone explain why does this movie has such a high score? It's so stupid it hurts.

Science fiction? More like make believe.

[–] JimiCobain 9 years ago

Your post was so full of garbage, I couldn't get past line 7.

[–] mindrip 9 years ago

Thanks JimiCobain, you're making a fine point, but I refuse to believe that the majority of the voters are mentally challenged.

Don't get me wrong, I don't dispute your statement, in your case it might just be true. You just can't generalize like that.

[–] JimiCobain 9 years ago

Where are you getting this statistic about "the majority of voters" from? Did that come from your ass?

From what I can see, majority of people rated this movie a 7 or higher, and 3 times as many people voted this a 10 in comparison to those rating it a 1. Or are these not the statistics you want to look at? You have some other numbers for me?

[–] joe_538 8 years ago

There are people who gave this a 10? I gave it a 3, and thought that was generous. 5 is my "I don't feel I wasted my time, but I'd probably never watch it again" rating.

The writers didn't even understand how WiFi works... you don't need a college education to see how ignorant the people who made this are. Granted, a lack of basic knowledge never stopped anyone from making a time travel movie before, but between the blatant ignorance, "found footage" method, annoying characters, a dragging story, and predictability, there's nothing to recommend it. It looks like something the Sci-Fi Channel would have quietly farted out.

[–] Strazdamonas 9 years ago

"Majority of voters" are most certainly mentally challenged, thats why the saying goes "Best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with an average voter".

That aside, this movie is currently on 6.3. Average rating on IMDB is 7, according to IMDB themselves. This means that this movie was seen as bellow average by IMDB users. As somone that rated it a 6 myself, i tend to agree with that.

As far as technical talk being garbage, this is an MTV movie, that is to be expected.

---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

[–] omendata 8 years ago

I gave it a six and im a tech guy so what if some of the words were not exactly string theory or in accord with Einsteins theory of relativity - interesting movie but the end let it down badly and there just wasnt enough flesh on the bones!

Maybe its just me but when they introduce the kissy , kissy romance angle it just makes me yawn and slows most movies down and makes it look like another teen romance to please the girls in the audience!

Its uncle Frank Kirsty!
Its time to play!

[–] roofall 7 years ago

Maybe, but plenty of (teenage) ass, tho

w00t

[–] soldier_one_2 9 years ago

Ah... A snobish tech kid. You know it's not supposed to be real... so why bother with your comment?

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] davel23 9 years ago

Yeah, when he mentioned "802.11g 64Ghz WIFI" in the first five minutes it pulled me right out of the movie. Of course, I see similar complaints from other people who are knowledgeable in other fields when movies screw up their particular specialties and my reaction is usually "who cares? It's just a movie". Guess it's our turn to complain.

[–] Vyom3 9 years ago

I knew something was off when the guy said 802.11g 64Ghz WIFI! It should be 2.4 GHz right?
Dammit.

[–] davel23 9 years ago

Yes, 2.4 Ghz is the correct frequency, but even beyond that 802.11g is seriously outdated technology at this point. 802.11n is the defacto standard at this point, and even its successor, 802.11ac is becoming more and more widespread every day. The only reason you'd be using 802.11g now is if you had a piece of old tech that didn't support anything newer. And if you put it in a project that you were submitting to MIT you certainly wouldn't be bragging about it.

[–] MrHoyt 9 years ago

Just solve everything by putting the L2cache in ad-hoc mode, LOL

[–] MrHoyt 9 years ago

Oh yeah and just add a graphic card and you automatic get a GUI!

[–] esa-edvik 9 years ago

And the GUI is partially a DOS "tree" command :D Holy hackers, Batman!
The power requirements of this are also a huge joke. But yeah, it's an MTV movie. Writers could still at least try...

[–] chained-in-human-body 9 years ago

Well, at least they were scanning a system (as said by some of the actors), it's not their fault that they were scanning the wrong one, i.e. *file* system.

[–] VashTStamp 8 years ago

Also should be mentioned there are dual band routers with 5 GHz bands. I didn't really care for the movie mixing in a bunch of science to make the machine seem plausible. Time travel to the past simply cannot be explained even remotely through modern science, this is why it is rarely covered in sci-fi movies unless introduced through a more "sci-fi/fictional" concept. At least some of Einstein's theories can be used to explain time travel to the future.

If anyone is looking for better movies on time travel a few that come to mind are Primer and Time Lapse.

[–] Songwriter_90210 9 years ago

So... I guess you're kinda humble bragging that you're smart or something? You mention, in a way, that science is your "field"? So you guess it's "our" turn to complain, you say. Hunh. Great way to elbow yourself into a group.

Well, here's something: I only averaged a 3.8 GPA in school. I didn't receive a degree in science, but dude, even stupid old me knew the tech talk was total *beep* It isn't like you had to be a frikkin' science major to see that. But hey, if you want to, please, continue to think yourself in such a lofty way. I'm sure it does a lot for your self esteem. You, with your particular specialty.

[–] thetragicprincess 9 years ago

It's a tad hypocritical that you should respond with such animosity towards him when you display the very arrogance you accuse him of.

If you can be proud of your lack of [said] achievements, then allow him to be proud of his [said] achievements. Insecure much?

Not surprising if your current IMDB username is synonymous with your present career. Songwriters tend to display the inherent pretentious, psuedo-intellectual, woe-is-me characteristics.

You are very, very far from being humble, and ironically have nothing to be humble about.

But by all means little boy, hold that mediocre trophy of yours triumphantly to the heavens as you cry yourself to sleep while dreaming of your inferiority complexes and regrets.

[–] alpha-tango 9 years ago

bravo! :)
I like it.

[–] Gambit771 9 years ago

And why did he say eight hundred and two point one one g.
The only time I've heard people say that instead of wifi or wireless or Internet is in poorly written scenes involving someone who's supposed to be clever or Mariah Carey videos though I will remember the l2 cache tip.
That could be handy in the future

[–] Professor59 9 years ago

For a low budget movie done start to finish in 9 months, I'm surprised it isn't worse. Yeah, I'm an IT guy and I know they were spouting a lot of gibberish. Thing is, you have to know that the same people who write low budget Hollywood movies are not the same people who actually went to MIT. And making it sound right is pretty expensive.

So I chose to suspend disbelief in order to try and enjoy the movie.

Honestly, I had a much harder time letting go the garbage tech talk in War Games and The Net. This wasn't nearly the worst offender.

[–] fst5000 9 years ago

"And making it sound right is pretty expensive."

i seriously doubt that. they could have asked your average geek and would be able to up the realism of the tech details 100% in 5 minutes, for free.

i'm not saying they have to get every last detail right, it's a time travel movie after all, but the first ten minutes were a bit much for my nerves.

[–] MarioTee 9 years ago

is 10+ million really that low? no stars starting, average sets and not that much of CGI or practial effects, I wouldn't say they could affor some Physics teacher to overlook everything.

[–] jwelker 9 years ago

If you haven't noticed, this is far from the first sci-fi film or show to use "technobabble."

[–] fst5000 9 years ago

i enjoyed the movie but i agree, the techno-babble was pulled out of someone's behind. when they go as far as to state the correct IEEE(?) standard 802.11g, the least they can do is state the corresponding frequency of 2,4ghz, not mix up frequency and data rate (54mbps). the info is literally on the same wikipedia page.

and when this dude wants to set up L2 cache in ad-hoc mode my inner geek seriously had to cringe.

it would be so easy to use real and relevant technical lingo, it just doesn't make sense to *beep* up small but nice little details like that, especially in a movie targeted at the younger, maybe slightly nerdier audience, which might be familiar with stuff like that.

[–] TheRealManofSteel 9 years ago

I enjoyed the movie too. I didn't pay any attention to any of the technobable because frankly that's not why I was watching the movie. Saying that though, the part I felt was hard to digest was when the brother and sister were in the attic and found their dads old cam corder. After 10 years there's no way that thing should have been able to turn on like that. But whatever, its about about time travel which, except for how we currently look at the past, isn't even possible in my humble opinion.

[–] luz_terrin 9 years ago

I have not watched the movie yet and the scene with the cache but that being said... Do you guys know what ad hoc means ? And it is not the strangest combination of words cache in ad-hoc mode? While i am not the mightiest and brightest of all programmers or do not consider myself a geek, quick google search can actually show you some results and the context they are used in (http://community.jaspersoft.com/wiki/configuring-ad-hoc-cache
https://docs.moodle.org/dev/Cache_API#Ad-hoc_Caches )

Disclaimer: I have not spent the full time to read through and through the links i have provided but from a quick glance they seem to be fine and on topic. And again I have not seen the particular scene maybe that is why i cannot see the problem with it.

[–] tyrexden 9 years ago

Actually, the science was dead-on accurate. In fact, if any keen-eyed viewer actually looked at the plans, they could even making a semi-functioning time machine... Sure, its unlikely they could go back 10 years, but at least a few days.

[–] halonone 9 years ago

What? No. What is a "semi-functioning time machine" anyway? It either travels time... or it doesn't. There is no semi-functioning. And there was nothing mentioned in this movie that hasn't already been explored by multiple physics researchers. I don't really understand how you make that observation based off a few minutes of dialogue and brief skimming of blueprints. I would have to imagine a functioning time travel machine would take a manual larger than my torso and at least days to explain in any real depth.

[–] Ubertrolll 9 years ago

No, it's real.
I just tested my prototype based on the blueprints and explanations in the movie and I've been able to succesfully send back an inanimate object 1 hour.

[–] tyrexden 9 years ago

I'm with Ubertrolll. I haven't yet sent anything back successfully, but i did see an older version of myself in some old home video, so i'm assuming i'm going get it figured out within the next few weeks.

[–] strikersdomain-net 9 years ago

1. What is this proprietary connector? I know what DARPA is, but have never seen a VGA cable....
2. 64 Ghz wifi?
3. L2 cache?
4. (Microsoft ad) Throwing a xbox 360 mainboard inside a box and poorly cold-soldering a few wires can make things run faster. Forget the different instruction sets between the x86 and powerpc.
5. (MTV ad) Hey let's jump around on stage at one of the largest concerts and get tweeted all over the place, our then-present self won't wonder wtf is going on at all....
6. Unattractive nerdy guy minus glasses = attractive guy hot girl wants
7. Blah I hate this movie, .... boobs... "I got to set the camera down, I have to get a shot of my teenage boobs in a low cut shirt in this sequence"
8. I forget:

Biggest one of all:

I am a super smart MIT worthy nerd... I have NEVER seen the basement of my lifelong home. I cannot afford MIT, but there is also a $1000 video camera sitting in the attic and a couple grand of lab equipment in the basement. SELL THE HOUSE!

[–] dreamdoggie 9 years ago

To the people defending this movie. No, it's not ok to make a science fiction movie, try to explain it with real world science and get the simplest science stuff wrong. If you can't get it right and you know it, then your intended target audience is not your actual target audience when the main focus of the movie is science fiction. Make it a drama, thriller, comedy or something and downplay the science fiction part as much as you can.

I better give this movie a good rating. It already has a high rating and I have no idea what's going on, so I don't want to look stupid by giving it a low rating.