When it comes to science, Hollywood is very rarely top of the class. Explosions, inexplicable romances and special effects that makes Tom Cruise look taller are more their forte - getting anywhere close to scientific accuracy trails way, way behind in terms of priorities. That'll be why people (the studio included) are making such a big deal about Christopher Nolan's latest blockbuster Interstellar, which was produced with the help of actual astrophysicist Kip Thorne. Interstellar deals with a lot of scientific principals and theories that currently exist, including Einstein's whole general relativity bag making up an important (and heartbreaking) plot point, and some of the wackier ideas about black holes and the like popping up as the story moves forward. Claiming that Interstellar is 100% realistic, however, is more than a little naïve. From the stuff that's on the cutting edge of current research to an unfortunate dependency on the worst kind of Hollywood tropes, here are the five things that Interstellar's science gets right - and five it really does not.
Tom Baker is the Comics Editor at WhatCulture! He's heard all the Doctor Who jokes, but not many about Randall and Hopkirk. He also blogs at http://communibearsilostate.wordpress.com/
