Next week will see the UK release of Lucy, the latest fast-paced (and ridiculous) action film by French director Luc Besson, this time starring Scarlett Johansson in the "WTF Marvel make a Black Widow" title role as a young woman who gets stuffed full of experimental drugs which allow her to access more than 10% of her brain. Apparently all that's keeping us from being able to fight like Jean-Claude Van Damme, shapeshift and control time and space is that we don't think hard enough. It looks like a good, dumb blockbuster film, but that is some totally awful science. Lucy's an extreme example, but there are shaky sciences on show in basically every Hollywood film you come across. Sometimes movies will employ some made-up mumbo jumbo to explain away plot holes and unbelievable elements, or they're just spreading misconceptions that are prevalent in society as a whole. The usual advice when watching a big silly popcorn flick is to "switch off your brain" and enjoy it, which hardly seems fair. So if a screenwriter isn't gonna put any thought into their work, then neither should we? Bad science rarely translates to a failed movie, or even a bad movie - is Armageddon lessened any by its many, many technical failings? - but audiences at large do tend to take the big screen at face value. That's why we assume people who mainly play villains are nasty in real life, or that when you land in Paris you are immediately faced with the Eiffel Tower. Not harmful, just stupid. So, just for fun, let's try clearing up ten of the most common scientific errors in cinema, eh?
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/
