9 years ago

I agree with you on the sound in space aspect. I think technically you may get some minuscule sound as there are particles in space but nothing like in shows. As well as other waves but that's beside the point.<br /> <br /> Sound in space is kind of a trope like the idea you can just knock someone out using chloroform is totally fake you'd have to hold it against the mouth for about ten minutes. It's just kind of traditional to have the pew pew of lasers and that boom of an afterburner.<br /> Plus it feels like it would be too odd for most people to just have these silent shots, but gravity did it and people liked it.

9 years ago

Don't forget firefly that should did a nice trick with the no sound in space. Way before gravity

9 years ago

Don't mean to nit-pick but I don't think afterburners on spacecraft would, by definition, do anything except waste fuel as there's no oxygen in space. <br /> <br /> I try not to notice things like hearing explosions in space, I'd rather just enjoy the show without worrying about them getting everything perfect. But keep in mind that you'd still hear the engines of any craft you were in as long as there was atmosphere in it.

9 years ago

I agree with everything except that BGS was an incomprehensible cluster f*** of plotholes from season 3 onwards ...

8 years ago

@fvr-deleted-1483869193 The show is great, they blended decent CGI with pretty good acting ... there are however 2 problems for it to be the next BSG<br /> 1.They cut out a lot of material that made you really connect with the characters in the books .. but that can be fixed using flashbacks and other methods i guess, i understand why they did it, they had to get things going fast to get a fallowing and they were limited by the 10 episode order from the network .. it seams they are trying to fix this by adding on more episodes in the second season.<br /> 2. They are burning trough material fast and if they don't get the episode count up in every season it will catch up to the original writer's material and then go off script and we'll get stuck with something like the original SGU .. great idea, great implementation but it just loses fallowing.<br /> <br /> Hope this lasts, also the best thing i loved from the books was Chrisjen Avasarala, the character was bold and quite foul mouthed, putting everyone around her in their place, she was the invisible hand that moved in behind the scenes and got shit done, the way she was written was genius, the foul mouth grandma who not only played with the men, but brought them to their knees, something they toned down to an extreme in the series, i hope they fix this and realize that she and "the detective" were what really made the series stand out.

8 years ago

@fvr-deleted-1483869193 Interstellar did a really good job of dealing with sound waves in space. There's a scene where air floods into a room and as it does you start to hear sirens etc...very cool.

8 years ago

@fvr-deleted-1483869193 Sound in space (nearly) always gets done wrong. To make that part faithful is more a bonus point than a condition. At least it is for me.<br /> It is way easier to make a movie or series while ignoring the limitations of a vacuum, in stead of having to think of something to replace it (in case you don't want to create tons of dead silent shots.) You need to get really inventive, become limited in what you can do with shots and audio and it certainly influences the feel of a film heavily. Sound is a big part in film and it is exceptionally difficult to NOT use it. Think of it as trying to make a movie like Lord of the rings with only practical effects. Or a Die Hard movie without Bruce Willis :P Yes it is possible, but it is really hard.

7 years ago

@fvr-deleted-1483869193 The "sound in space problem" is definitely a hard problem to solve for directors. There's no easy solution to it. While I agree that in The Expanse it's one of its flaws, the question is how to do it right.<br /> <br /> There are two possible solutions I can think of that both aren't perfect. The first one would be to treat the camera as some kind of god's eye, a position where a human could never be, but somehow receive visual "reception". Then we wouldn't have any sound, yes. No human, even in the future, could ever experience that though.<br /> <br /> Another solution is to treat the camera as the eyes of someone drifting in space in a space-suit. There you would have sound. It's not the same as we're used to though. The director would need to have a long and hard talk with a physicist advisor and come up with some models of how the sound would be perceived. For example when an engine starts up. At first there wouldn't be any sound. But then taking into account the trajectory and intensity of particles and possible shockwaves, what kind of sound would be hearable in your space-suit? And would the viewer accept this awkward other world?

5 years ago

@fvr-deleted-1483869193 The audio would probably be a bit boring if there was no sound at all whenever they showed anything in space. I thought that Battlestar Galactica handled that well by having sparse sound during their space combat scenes.

5 years ago

@xelra "Another solution is to treat the camera as the eyes of someone drifting in space in a space-suit. There you would have sound."... Nope.