• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The Abyss

Rubycon

Rubycon

Madame President
This is probably one of my favorite movies. I have a LOT of respect for the Sea and know without notice you can go from "kosher" to FUBAR in less than a blink of the eye...

Of course no scifi flick has an absence of plot holes (they would be boring) but two things always stood out here, one obvious and other not so obvious.

Near the end of "Bud's big dive" when he loses light and cracks open a bundle of chemical lightsticks. The obvious thought is the pressure would have folded them long ago or at least ruptured the inner capsule activating them prematurely. That failing, at such great depth water temperatures would be frigid and as anyone that's played with lightsticks knows - put them in the freezer to slow the reaction (less light).

The other is the nuclear warhead itself. Could the detonation mechanism stay intact and in fact work at such depths? The original design of these was to fly on top of a missile towards a population center, right?

Obligatory http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfhSJNoyoYs&feature=g-vrec&context=G27e7b3dRVAAAAAAAAAA
 
It seems as though water being inside the thing would screw up the basic physics of the detonation, not to mention the damage done to electronics.
 
It was pretty good. The special edition kinda goes too far off the deep end for me (too cheezy), and I actually think the regular one could have been better being either more or less sci-fi (as in if the aliens had more worthwhile presence throughout instead of feeling contrived as a way to save him at the end; or if they'd dropped them altogether and just had other real sea creatures to take their place).

As for the warhead stuff, how deep were they again? There have been plenty of nuclear detonations under water, although I'm not sure what the deepest is (not to mention I would expect they put it in some sort of vessel that could withstand the pressure). The warhead was on a sub, so I would think it would have some changes for that. I know the subs surface, but I think they are actually capable of launching sub-surface, I could be wrong though.
 
Last edited:
"How many atmospheres can this ship take?"

"Well, it's a spaceship, so I'd say anywhere between zero and one."




Several thousand psi of pressure on something that wasn't designed for more than the stresses of launch is probably going to do some damage.
 
Last edited:
AznAnarchy99 said:
I keep mistaking this movie with "The Sphere" with Sam Jackson.
Click to expand...

I think your thinking of another movie that was based under water and had some alien ship the crew was visiting. I don't remember the name, but it was much more like The Sphere than this was.
 
Description in the movie would be fairly consistent with a W76 warhead. I'll go with maybe provided the detonator and neutron pulse tube aren't compromised by submersion at those depths.

Not that I'd want to be playing "Operation' with one sitting in my lap under a few miles of ocean when I found out.
 
K1052 said:
Description in the movie would be fairly consistent with a W76 warhead. I'll go with maybe provided the detonator and neutron pulse tube aren't compromised by submersion at those depths.

Not that I'd want to be playing "Operation' with one sitting in my lap under a few miles of ocean when I found out.
Click to expand...

Ah yes the part where color rendition is crucial and the only source of illumination he has is spectrally narrow. It's a coin toss and he won.
 
K1052 said:
Description in the movie would be fairly consistent with a W76 warhead. I'll go with maybe provided the detonator and neutron pulse tube aren't compromised by submersion at those depths.

Not that I'd want to be playing "Operation' with one sitting in my lap under a few miles of ocean when I found out.
Click to expand...

I honestly though it looked like something from an AGM-69 Short Range Attack Missile [Perhaps they were the same design?] - reminded me from my nuke days in the Air Force:

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/bomber/agm-69.htm

/agree - an awesome movie - the ending was a bit "meh" [I always cringe when the crew starts laughing [out of joy] when they see Bud walk out of the alien ship.
 
I liked it...and I've seen it with the "alternative ending" on DVD.

Like most movies, it's full of "logical holes" in the plot, but hell, I usually just ignore them and enjoy the movie if it's otherwise well done...which this one was.


"Zoom in...enhance." 🙄 Logical? Realistic? Fuck no...but it still makes for good entertainment.
 
I freaking love this movie.

Around the time the Special addition was released, one of our local, super awesome indy theaters back home did a weekend midnight showing.

IT WAS 3 HOURS OF AMAZING!


Oh, How I wish Cameron would make good movies again. 🙁
 
zinfamous said:
I freaking love this movie.

Around the time the Special addition was released, one of our local, super awesome indy theaters back home did a weekend midnight showing.

IT WAS 3 HOURS OF AMAZING!


Oh, How I wish Cameron would make good movies again. 🙁
Click to expand...

Titanic_poster.jpg


:colbert:





:biggrin:
 
Another movie that I've enjoyed watching countless times. Common Cameron please release a HD version soon. D:
 
I really liked this movie and wish it were out on BD. Best I remember the DVD was hard coded Letterbox with pillars on each side, non-anamorphic. A shame it didn't get a better treatment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top