Everyone judge the film through a different angle. If you a doctor, you may think:”That character would not have survived that fall.” If you’re a physicist : That’s not how black holes work.” And if you’re me, it’s more like: “What a dumb concept of future personal technology!”
It makes me crazy when sci-fi movie makers dream up stuff with no basis in science.Human teleporters(传送器)? Sorry, Star Trek. A bed that detects and cures cancer in seconds? No, Elysium.
On the other hand, some technologies in some movies are so practical that people invest them in the real world. Star Trek’s self opening doors are now a standard feature of grocery store entrances, and the driver less cars from Total Recall(and many other films )are already on American roads.
Lately it’s clear that Hollywood’s production designers have been putting serious thought into the tech we’ll someday crazy. Her , for example, is about a man who falls in love with his siri-like voice assistant. He talks to her through a single earbud(耳机），through which he gets a surprising amount done: processing e-mail, flipping through news stories, sending messages. When an image is essential to the communication, he flips open his phone, where the pictures appears.
The solution makes a lot of sense-----more than , for example, Google Glass, a now dis continued headband that place a miniature screen above your eyebrow. It’s not the technical ones but the social missteps(失策) that make the Glass’s plan fail. Glass’s camera frightened others and made you look like a monster.
You can see why people went nuts over the concept: imagine having all the power of a smart phone without actually needing a smart phone. We won’t see this in the real world, though. Even a projector, battery and processor could be squeezed into a thin band, there remains a lot of challenges. How would the projector attain sharp focus on an irregular , moving palm? How would it project on sunny day? How would it work on very light or very dark skin?
The robots in HBO’s westwood----so perfectly designed that we can’t tell the robots from humans----might be a little untrue. Yet the personal tech in that series makes a lot of sense: the characters carry cardboard-thin, trifold phones. When you need a quick check, you glance at it’s “cover”; when you need the bigger picture, you unfold it into a tablet.（平板）
Most of these shows, however, continue to get one thing wrong: obviously,in the future, our computers make little sounds as their text and images appear. Why do movie makers think that adding silly sound effects make their machines more realistic? In the real world, a room full of burbling screens makes us crazy.
Well, I suppose I should let that part go. They’re just movies, right? They’re not a description of the future----at least not yet.
【小题1】Which of the following best describe the technologies in the movies?| A．They are too unrealistic to become true. |
| B．They are making a lot of sense . |
| C．They are not favoured by viewers. |
| D．They are appearing mostly in scientific movies. |
| A．not interested in |
| B．be crazy about |
| C．be disappointed about |
| D．be worried about |
| A．We will live in future where the film predict |
| B．The movies give a right description of our future. |
| C．The advanced technology contributes to the popularity of the films. |
| D．Some technology in films might be not welcome in the real world. |
| A．The design of the robots are the same with human. |
| B．The tech applied in the movie are far from reality. |
| C．The phones created in the movie can be real in our life one day. |
| D．The film is well-received for its advanced technology. |
| A．How well do movies predict our future? |
| B．The future of the science films。 |
| C．The more technology, the better. |
| D．The imagination of future movies. |
