MovieChat Forums > Infini (2015) Discussion > Glaring contradiction in technology (RE:...

Glaring contradiction in technology (RE: Faster-than-light travel)

posted 9 years ago by RDionysus
11 replies | jump to latest

As a major premise of the story, we're asked to accept that at some indeterminate point in the future, humans have mastered the art of teleportation. Okay, I'll buy that. Harder to swallow is the apparent ability they have of shooting the 7 octillion or so atoms in the human body around the galaxy at faster-than-light speed (which as anyone who has a passing acquaintance with physics knows, is impossible). You'd think that such a miraculous achievement as breaking the laws of physics to suit our need would warrant some explanation in the movie, a little pseudo-scientific backstory perhaps, but no. It's apparently not that important.

Then again, I don't think this film's writers thought much of the audience's ability to discern the difference between real astronomy concepts and complete gibberish, which is made clear when the East Coast station commander authoritatively states that Infini "is sitting on a rock frozen to the point of near-infinite crush." Wha? That sounds like something my kid would write, and she's in the fifth grade. They could have emulated those wizard script-writers in Hollywood, and at least tossed in actual science terms when they have characters spout gibberish.

Anyway..I digress! Back to my original point: so we have people teleporting around faster than light, and they don't want to elaborate on how we've achieved this. OK, I'm fine with this too. However, at least have the world you've created be logically consistent, because I'm bothered by the fact that two-thirds into the movie we have one of the crew-members on Infini transmitting a message to his kids, and when Carmichael sees him he asks what he's doing. "Sending a radio transmission," the guy responds. "Radio transmission? They won't get that for centuries..." Carmichael states.

So, what gives? They are able to beam out billions upon billions upon billions of particles to any part of the galaxy instantaneously, but the guy's voicemail message has to obey the Relativity speed limit?

I think if you're going to make a movie like this, you should at least expend some effort to explain the technology at play. And even when it's far fetched it should at least be self-consistent. Sure, it's usually just some pseudo-scientific nonsense, but you don't have to be Isaac Asimov or Arthur C. Clarke to show a little creativity and have it be interesting. Take a look at something like Event Horizon, for example (which this movie definitely lifts from, BTW). Seeing the bizarre-looking travel technology at work, along with a remotely plausible explanation for it, was half the fun! All we got in this movie to signify space travel were some PDA taps and some wacky Jacob's Ladder-style head shuddering.

All in all, this movie actually had great atmosphere, solid acting, and decent special effects, but they definitely dropped the ball in the writing department.

[–] gondigan 9 years ago

Your stuck on the whole "Faster than light" thing, since it is only a movie it doesn't matter because for one we don't know everything about the universe right now and we don't know if they are in an alternate universe and this movie was set in the future.

They said they are in the 23rd century, so it is very well possible they have far more knowledge of the universe then we currently have.

In comparison, 200 years ago most would have thought some of the things we have accomplished now would be impossible.

[–] rediiss 9 years ago

relevant or not, but the electronics on the mining-facility were told to be old. the teleportation technology and so the age of electronics where the team currently came from was a bit more advanced. that could explain that radio transmission situation.
though I don't object that the new science innovations were not so convincingly explained throughout the film. but a consistent description of how things work at all is too complex in this case.

[–] treeroped 9 years ago

Take the movie for what it is. A very creative b minus movie. Why criticize it. The writers know the flaws and so do we. The travelers simply folded space time ala dune. No big deal.

[–] sooperklew 9 years ago

They didn't get that part right either. Hundreds of years? They stated that infini was at the opposite end of the milky way galaxy. The milky way galaxy is 100,000 light years across. It would take close to 100,000 years to reach earth not hundreds.

Assuming the radio waves aren't sucked into the supermassive black hole at the center of the galaxy.

[–] lujlp 7 years ago

100,000 / 100 = 1,000 centuries

As 1000 is a multiple of 1 centuries world

Also earth is half way between the center and edge of the galaxy, meaning even if this place was on the furthest point away from earth on the edge of the galaxy it would only be 750 centuires

[–] augurae 8 years ago

What gives? It's because you're wrong and probably don't know *beep* about science.

Except FTL travel is possible if you don't travel at all. For example quantum entanglement: information or "data" is not travelling, it simply being instantly transmitted from one particule to another which coexist in the same singular dimension.

Then it's a sci-fi movie.

[–] crc32 (2584) 7 years ago

Quantum entabglement has nothing to do with FTL. The particles will seperate at relativistic speed. The only part that invokes questions of FTL are that if you collapse the wave of one particle seems to collapse the wave of the second particle at the same instance. This is not an implication of FTL more like an affermation that collapsing one particles wave function is preventing you from being able to branch into another reality where the other particle has not collapsed. At least thats the interpretation scientists are making. I personally have some reservations about quantum mechanics. Not sure why singular diminsion is even being discussed.

[–] Sidewindr 8 years ago

So, what gives? They are able to beam out billions upon billions upon billions of particles to any part of the galaxy instantaneously, but the guy's voicemail message has to obey the Relativity speed limit?

Who knows, do you have issues with Star Trek and beaming super long distances.. maybe they discovered some special sub-space or dimension or have managed to bend space. Point is, this is irrelevant to the story and as such needs no explanation.

All in all, this movie actually had great atmosphere, solid acting, and decent special effects.

And this is the point of the movie, it seems you do get the point but just did not realise it.

[–] hafeez112233-1 8 years ago

You'd think that such a miraculous achievement as breaking the laws of physics to suit our need would warrant some explanation in the movie, a little pseudo-scientific backstory perhaps, but no. It's apparently not that important.

Not only is it not important, but it would be very counter-productive.

True science fiction asks "what if?"...and this can be almost anything. The best science fiction writers do not get bogged down too much with the how of it all, that would only be likely to interfere with the necessary suspension of disbelief.

Such endeavors are sometimes called hard SF, and they have a tendency to get lost in a literary rabbit hole, and are also prone to becoming quickly out-dated.

The best SF deals with the ramifications of such speculation; it is not enough to just present it as a possibility, nor can it be just a shortcut to gloss over any practicalities of plot or story.

I wouldn't call this film the best of SF, but it is not the worst either, and your suggestions would only serve to place it more firmly in the latter camp.

“Your head is on the block and you worry about your whiskers?”

[–] crc32 (2584) 7 years ago

Yes but the first act should have atleast described what the teams job was. We don't even know space travel is involved till the "West Coast" team declares the mine in on an astroid way out there. Instead the first act just has akward conversations that drag out with out explaining anything. The opening scene was even disjointed by mixing footage of the locker room with the conversation he's having with a female we assume is his girlfriend or wife. These slow reveal narritives are just boring. We have no idea what these men are doing or what there peers are doing. They just JUMP and come back histerical and that minutes are missing. They don't even bother telling us if the minutes are in this "slip log". Was this a security camera they are reffering too who knows. The scene lasted too long considering they don't explain anything. The audience gets bored when they realize were just getting strung along. This isn't thought provoking its insulting.

[–] crc32 (2584) 7 years ago

Yea I had to replay that "infinite crush" line a few times to make sure I heard it right. I figured they were either trying to say absolute zero(Like maby this was a french film and the translation was wrong). The movie sure felt french. Or freezing is some term for something else like I don't know a chemical reaction to the ore they were harvisting or what not. Or maby frozen meant they were stuck in time or something since the movie wasn't explaining if the slipstream was time travel, interdeminsional travel. I figured time travel (or rather time dialation) since the crew looked like they were spazzing out when they were sent and came back 10 seconds later as if where every they went they had hours of battle yet from our perception they were gone for only 10 seconds.

All in all, this movie actually had great atmosphere, solid acting, and decent special effects, but they definitely dropped the ball in the writing department.

Agreed the movie wasn't though provoking. more like eye rolling invoking.