I was glad to see this.
May not jive with Trek canon. But does jive with reality.
Hey, you Jive Talkin' ?
Silence in space! It's about time!
- Thread starter data65
- Start date
Hey, you Jive Talkin' ?
There was still "some" sound, and I find this one of the sillier "nitpicks" many hard-core sci-fi watchers have.
The "sound in space" is done for the audience's "benifit" of action and the average movie-goer doesn't know that there's no sound in space.
If you want to gripe at a character reacting to a sound he "hears" in space (one that cannot be transmitted through contact with a surface) that is one thing. But to gripe about hearing the whiz and whir of weapons and the "boom" of an engine engaging is just petty and silly.
It's a "fact" of movie cliches alot like explosions pushing, rather than consuming, objects.
The "sound in space" is done for the audience's "benifit" of action and the average movie-goer doesn't know that there's no sound in space.
If you want to gripe at a character reacting to a sound he "hears" in space (one that cannot be transmitted through contact with a surface) that is one thing. But to gripe about hearing the whiz and whir of weapons and the "boom" of an engine engaging is just petty and silly.
It's a "fact" of movie cliches alot like explosions pushing, rather than consuming, objects.
I always thought of the sound in space thing as this: it's for dramatic purpose, but scientifically speaking, what we are hearing is the theoretical sound that would be made, if space had an atmosphere (in other words, what we hear when a phaser fires is how it would sound if it were fired in an air-filled test area or a planet's atmosphere).
I'm not sure where you're getting your definitions, but "hard" science fiction deals with the hard sciences (math, physicis, chemistry, even biology) and "soft" deals with economics, politics, psychology, and sociology. Space opera -- and I agree Star Trek falls into this category -- can range from hard to soft, good to bad, and Star Trek exhibits characteristics of all from episode to episode.
I wish, though they had shown the plasma effect of rentry with their friction against the atmosphere.
Whatnow?
Never heard anything like that before! -The usual way to distinguish is as written on Wikipedia:
linky
Uhhhh ... isn't that what I said -- at least regarding hard sf? Here's the quote from "soft science fiction" in a related link:
If so, it wasn't very clear, to me at least.
It looked as if you talk about hard science fiction and soft science fiction, where the rest of us usually talk about hard science fiction and soft science fiction...
Hmmm, did I just confuse everyone even more....
Edit: Don't just edit your previous post, dammit, write a new one when you want to add to what you had to say
Last edited:
Just catching up with Firefly after 7 years ...
It was nice to hear - or not hear - but it also struck me that the silence of space had little to do with realism, as it was inconsistently used; it was more a matter of artistic license in order to increase the drama of specific scenes, some that just happened to take place in space. Still, it worked, so that's what matters.
Just catching up with Firefly after 7 years ...
It was nice to hear - or not hear - but it also struck me that the silence of space had little to do with realism, as it was inconsistently used; it was more a matter of artistic license in order to increase the drama of specific scenes, some that just happened to take place in space. Still, it worked, so that's what matters.
It did work dramatically, but I thought it was also a tip of the hat to the science. They basically were saying, "yeah, we know there's no sound in space. But silent space battles leave most audiences flat, so we're just going to do this little bit."
Reminds me of the zoom in "Russian changes to English" shot in Hunt for Red October.
Just catching up with Firefly after 7 years ...
It was nice to hear - or not hear - but it also struck me that the silence of space had little to do with realism, as it was inconsistently used; it was more a matter of artistic license in order to increase the drama of specific scenes, some that just happened to take place in space. Still, it worked, so that's what matters.
It did work dramatically, but I thought it was also a tip of the hat to the science. They basically were saying, "yeah, we know there's no sound in space. But silent space battles leave most audiences flat, so we're just going to do this little bit."
Reminds me of the zoom in "Russian changes to English" shot in Hunt for Red October.
Isnt it just entertainment evolution? -nuBSG also underplayed the sound in space thing - and it worked very well.
No. Hard SF deals with realistic physics et al. Soft SF deals with whatever physics they want, or ignores physics all together. Yes, soft SF can include psychology, social sciences, etc, but it's not required.
No, hard SF cannot exclude realistic physics. Space opera, by definition is soft SF because they have to include faster-than-light travel to be viable.
Individual stories in a universe may be more hard or more soft than others. But the inclusion of warp drive (or any other FTL travel) makes it soft SF.
No, hard SF cannot exclude realistic physics. Space opera, by definition is soft SF because they have to include faster-than-light travel to be viable.
Individual stories in a universe may be more hard or more soft than others. But the inclusion of warp drive (or any other FTL travel) makes it soft SF.
Nope, space opera can be as hard as anything else; as a genre it's not set in stone whether it's FTL spaceships fighting with phasers or rocket ships beaming lasers at each other, whether it spans multiple solar systems or just multiple cultures in one system - the science just has to be solid if it's to be considered hard SciFi.
I like this post... It's exciting!
Seriously, I just wanted to toss out that I'm enjoying being a fly on the wall during this Hard/Soft sci-fi, Space opera debate.
Seriously, I just wanted to toss out that I'm enjoying being a fly on the wall during this Hard/Soft sci-fi, Space opera debate.
That's nice!I like this post... It's exciting!
Seriously, I just wanted to toss out that I'm enjoying being a fly on the wall during this Hard/Soft sci-fi, Space opera debate.
But, don't you have any opinions on the matter? -I mean, apart from the hard/soft part -which is simple, it's clearly a matter of points of view... has been for as long as people have debated it!
Yep, that was a brilliant transition - it set the stage so we knew they were speaking Russian, and yet allowed the audience to hear and comprehend the nuances of the dialogue instead of being forced to read it and miss the subtleties.
I loved this aspect too.
Even though we do hear some sounds such as shuttles and weapons fire etc, it was conveyed well.
Not so much like 2001 or Firefly/Serenity where its done SILENTLY, this had subtle sounds.
Sepecially the Kelvin battle, that was chilling.
Loved the new warp jum, wow.
I felt people jump when a ship went into warp.
Even though we do hear some sounds such as shuttles and weapons fire etc, it was conveyed well.
Not so much like 2001 or Firefly/Serenity where its done SILENTLY, this had subtle sounds.
Sepecially the Kelvin battle, that was chilling.
Loved the new warp jum, wow.
I felt people jump when a ship went into warp.
