But if we're going to keep making cosmic war movies, it would be cool to see more directors take a fresh approach. More realistic space combat as outlined by the video might be troublesome to film, difficult to explain, and downright boring to watch. It's easy to see why filmmakers stick to the familiar. Close-in battles between larger space vessels tend to reflect the tactics of centuries-old naval warfare, with broadsides inflicting cinematic carnage.
The space dogfights of Star Wars, which influenced so much on-screen space combat, were themselves influenced by WWII air combat movies. This video from the "It's Okay to Be Smart" YouTube channel points out a number of these inaccuracies, and also why they're so prevalent. Shields on ships would only make the battle last longer with the same outcome. DS9 didn’t have the time or budget to have battles last for 30 minutes, yet they needed to show ships being destroyed in order to show real loss and consequences. Small space fighters would not maneuver the way fighter jets do in the Earth's atmosphere. Answer (1 of 2): Purely for cinematography purposes. Lasers weapons would be hard to focus over distance. Yes, if you know basic physics and have stopped to think critically for a moment about the space battles seen in Star Trek, Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica, or many other franchises, you probably realized that it's all way off from reality. Those fantastic "pew pew pew" sound effects of laser weapons.
Photon torpedoes exploding on the surface of an enemy ship. X-Wings bobbing and weaving around other ships, with nimble TIE fighters in hot pursuit.
0 kommentar(er)
