Fooey, 'Underwater' is not the movie I hoped it might be....

  • Thread starter Thread starter member 656954
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Movie Underwater
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the disappointment regarding the film 'Underwater,' which diverges from the expectations set by Peter Watts' novel 'Starfish.' The user expresses frustration over the film's portrayal of underwater physics, particularly the unrealistic depiction of structural integrity at extreme ocean depths. The trailer suggests a lack of scientific accuracy, as it shows characters surviving scenarios that would be fatal in reality. The user remains hopeful for a future adaptation of 'Starfish' that honors its gritty narrative.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of underwater physics and pressure dynamics
  • Familiarity with Peter Watts' Rifters trilogy, particularly 'Starfish'
  • Knowledge of film adaptation challenges and narrative fidelity
  • Awareness of common tropes in science fiction horror films
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the scientific principles of pressure and structural integrity in deep-sea environments
  • Explore adaptations of literary works into films, focusing on fidelity to source material
  • Analyze the portrayal of science in contemporary science fiction films
  • Investigate audience expectations versus cinematic interpretations in genre films
USEFUL FOR

Fans of science fiction literature, filmmakers, screenwriters, and anyone interested in the intersection of science and cinema, particularly in the context of underwater narratives.

member 656954
I finally saw Ford v Ferrari, and one of the shorts opened with a team of people working seven miles under the ocean.

My immediate, very excited, thought was that they've made Peter Watts amazing novel, Starfish, into a film. Starfish is the first in Watts' Rifters trilogy, and I loved it. Watts' assumes adults read his novels, so I assumed a movie would be equally gritty and aggressive.

Sadly, as the trailer progressed, it became obvious it was for yet another locked-box monster mystery. And it also became apparent that science has been sacrificed yet again for...

Well, I'm not sure what for, as I've not yet seen the movie, but the trailer has one of the cast walking a corridor in the hab (this is miles under the sea, remember) after the thumping noise of something hitting the hab when she notices a drip. The drip is a leak and if your structure springs a leak at that depth, that's it, you're dead. At the depth, the 16,000-odd psi would inject seawater at the speed of bullets and once structural integrity is lost, that's it. You are crushed before you'd have time to blink. This being a movie, that isn't how it goes, the character runs faster than the hab collapses. <sigh>

The trailer is here if you're interested. I probs won't see it at the cinema...and I remain hopeful that Starfish one day gets the Hollywood treatment, though I'll admit I'm not very confident that it will.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Maybe it's the Alien that sank to the bottom in Antarctica years ago, with the chain and water tower attached and he/she is really ticked off.

PS.
I especially like the bathroom scene - a large area normal sink and toilets - no expense spared - good grief.
 
256bits said:
Maybe it's the Alien that sank to the bottom in Antarctica years ago, with the chain and water tower attached and he/she is really ticked off.

Could be, with the strong inference in the trailer that it doesn't like rock music :frown:

And yeah, the bathroom is hilarious. It looks like the local gym, but upsized. Those are huge habs they are working from!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 256bits