Edward Price6 said:That comparison is a total miss, don't you think? Honestly, it's pretty obvious.
If the shot was missed, then the whole premise was off from the start. I was just playing with the idea to see where it would go...
Look, unless we're talking about documentaries, every movie is basically fiction by definition, right? We're specifically diving into the world of science fiction here.
That’s exactly my point. Most people who hate on sci-fi start with the same tired argument: "It's just fiction, so why bother?" I honestly don't get it. Like, what's the issue with it being "unrealistic"? In a broader sense, isn't every single movie—aside from a documentary—just pure fiction? At the end of the day, every script is just an idea born in someone's head and brought to life on screen. So why pick on one genre specifically?
Especially when it comes to Mars. There’s still so much guesswork involved, right? We’re probably looking at a dozen variables that nobody even saw coming. Who knows what else is hiding out there? They’ve gotta keep learning constantly. Why stop now?Not too long ago, they weren't even sure if there was water out there. Like, at all. Was there water? Were there bacteria? They were just guessing. Total uncertainty, right?
So, this guy seriously just sits there with a straight face and tells us that things nobody saw coming "have to be learned through experience"? Like, really? Is he for real?
So, let's be real: landing on Mars feels like total science fiction right now because nobody has actually pulled it off yet. But here’s the kicker—to get there, you basically have to learn through trial and error, right? How do you even solve that logic loop? You’d need to go to Mars just to test things out and gain experience, but then technically, that doesn't count as the "real" mission. So, do we just fly there once for practice, take all that data, and then call the next trip the "first time for real"? Makes sense, doesn't it?
I was actually just typing away about that exact thing. I tried breaking the whole trip down into bite-sized pieces—you know, like segments? If you tackle them one by one, everyone can find their own rhythm and get through it. It’s pretty straightforward once you follow the sequence. Honestly, though? The biggest hurdle is just finding an investor to back the play. It’s a super grounded, real-world scenario... what do you think?
So, we're talking about fiction that’s built on actual scientific premises. It’s a bit of a spectrum, isn't it? Sometimes it leans heavily into the hard science, and other times... well, it's a little more "creative" with the facts.
You’re talking about the whole production process, right? If I wanted to make a point, I guess I could say: *The Martian* wasn't actually filmed on Mars, so obviously it's fiction.
Nah, you said:
Have we actually sent anyone to Mars yet? Nope. So, it’s still just sci-fi. Nuf said.
I told them straight up: it’s fiction. But honestly? It’s about as fictional as any other movie out there. The difference here is they're actually playing around with tech that already exists and is sitting right in front of us. They aren't just pulling random magic out of thin air to bypass plot holes like they do in those Star Trek series. You know, where they just invent some nonsense on the fly to skip over parts they haven't figured out? Even when those shows try to call in scientists for help, they still struggle to come up with a theory that actually holds water.
Everything here is just bottled water and commercial interests. Is it even real? Honestly, the only thing that feels like fiction is how we blow all our resources on wars instead of actually investing in deep-space research. Why aren't we looking up?
But honestly, we’re just spinning our wheels here. It’s all just semantics, really...
