jackh@zehntel.UUCP (jack hagerty) (12/13/84)
Even though I saw 2010 on opening night, I don't have access to the
net on weekends so I knew that I wouldn't be the first to share my
opinions. However, I didn't expect the FLOOD of articles that this film
has generated in only four days!
First off, I'm not going to review the film since it's been done several
times already. If you want to know my opinions, go re-read Mark Leeper's
review; It could have been written by me, word for word, had I the skill.
Like most of you on the net, I went into the theater with lowered expec-
tations for all of the reasons already posted (Hyames reputation, mostly).
The technique worked since I wound up enjoying the film in spite of myself.
On further reflection, however, I've decided that Hyames reputation for
playing fast and loose with scientific credibility is intact.
My gripes are as follows, going from major to minor (which, to a trivialist,
is in ascending order):
1) Aerobraking - I thought the scene was very effective overall showing
that you don't need warp speed or phasers to have an exciting sequence
in space. Even so, there were several major problems with the way Hyames
portrayed it. As you all know by now, aerobraking is not a science
fiction plot device but a real technique. In fact, it's not just theo-
retical, having been used successfully nine times by manned spacecraft.
The Apollo moon missions used it; the only difference being that the
trajectory used was designed to burn off ALL of their kinetic energy
and let them plop gently onto the earth rather than into orbit. The
control required is just as critical, if not more so.
The biggest problem is why the use of ballutes? These are certainly real
devices (a cross between a balloon and a parachute, hence the name) and
are usually used to slow down bombs so they fall away from the plane
faster. As such they must be attached to the *back* of the device that
they're slowing. If attached to the front, as shown in the movie, the
center of pressure would move ahead of the CG causing the vehicle to flip
end for end. A second problem is, as inflated devices, they have no internal
structure. Assuming that the nose of the Leonov was filled with lead (to
keep the CG forward), the ballutes would simply flatten out along the
ship offering no braking at all; in fact, it would probably *improve*
the drag coefficient!
Another problem I saw with the sequence is that ASSUMING the Leonov
could control its attitude finely enough to allow the ballutes up front
(like balancing a broom on your fingertip) and ASSUMING they could be
inflated rigidly enough to not collapse and ASSUMING you could find an
ablative or other heat shielding material flexible enough to be folded
up then don't you think that the ballutes should have been just a little
bit singed at the end of the sequence? You've all seen pictures of the
Apollo capsules after they've re-entered and they were only burning off
a few hundred megajoules coming back from the moon. The Leonov had to get
rid of gigajoules to go into Jovian orbit. What was wrong with a good
old fashioned rigid, ablating, jettisoned-at-the-end heatshield as was
used in the book?
Two final nits on aerobraking. As someone already pointed out, the process
was far too short. I don't have the actual numbers in front of me (perhaps
someone at Ames could run them. Berry?) but it would take them at least
a couple of hours to go halfway around Jupiter at full flight speed.
There are many cinematic device to indicate the passage of time that could
have been used. Also, why was the flight crew securely strapped into accel-
eration couches while while Floyd simply reclined supine and unrestrained
on his cot? The book flying and sticking to the wall didn't cut it with me.
That means that he, and the frightened Russian girl, would have been standing
upside down on their necks during the entire sequence.
2) Political subplot - As has been previously pointed out, this was not in
the book and is intrusive and unnecessary. What made it completely un-
believable for me was the two crews meekly separating into their respective
spacecraft on command from earth. It is well documented that both American
and Soviet crews have disobeyed direct orders from ground controllers if
they considered them to be arbitrary or of low priority. This is in low
Earth orbit, the crew all from the same nation and the task a matter of
convienence. Can you imagine, therefore, the Leonov's crew obeying such an
order when they're 100 million miles away and they're all depending on each
other for their very survival? Hardly.
3) Gravity Problems - These are so numerous as to be one continuous mistake.
However, there was one that was so obvious and blatant that I feel it
had to be put there on purpose (sort of like the "food sliding down the
straw" in 2001).
A great deal was made of the fact that the Leonov had artificial gravity.
The centrifuge was made a major visual element of the ship instead of
making it internal as with the Discovery. This was, I presume, so that
the actors could stomp around the flight deck and slump wearily into chairs
as required. The fact that they continued to stomp and slump in inappro-
priate places (such as the Discovery's pod bay and flight deck) only
highlighted the inconsistancies.
Anyway, they had to stop the centrifuge in order to do the lashup with
the Discovery, a point which was emphasized by the "floating pens"
scene. So when Chandra comes stomping back onto the Leonov with the
gillotine cutter and hands it to Floyd, what does Floyd do? *He tosses
it into the air in an "oh well" gesture AND CATCHES IT IN HIS HAND!*
I realize that the Discovery's engines were fireing at that time but
they're only capable of 1/10 g by themselves and more like 1/20 g with
the added mass of the Leonov. Besides, the vector is 90 degrees out.
4) Odds and Ends - I didn't care for Floyd's voice-over diary. One almost
expected each entry to be preceeded by "Captian's Log, Stardate...".
The Leonov, accelerating at 1/10 g, being able to outrun the shock
front from an imploding star ("Warp factor one, Mr. Sulu").
The industrial-strength chain hoists needed for the Leonov's zero-g
pod bay.
Chandra not even getting out of his seat to transfer back to the
Leonov until t-30 sec making his "breeches bouy" rescue necessary.
This was put in purely for dramatic effect and made the "highly trained
crew" look like a bunch of rank amatures.
Dispite the above, I really did like the film. I may even go see it again.
But the claim of being "scientifically accurate" seems a little much.
Hyames reputation is intact.
Jack Hagerty, Zehntel Inc.
...!ihnp4!zehntel!jackh