Second Term Paper for Physics 123

                                                   Science Facts or Cinematic Fiction?

“Cinema should make you forget you are sitting in a theater” –Roman Polanski. The degree of believability varies in the world of cinema. From traditional live-action films, to CGI and Special EFX animated films, we often see mistakes in which laws of physics are pushed, broken, and incorrectly illustrated. One of the principles of physics that is often disobeyed in the film industry is the action/reaction principle. Newton’s Third Law of Motion was violated in films such as The Matrix, Fast and the Furious 6, and The Avengers. From jumps, to fighting sequences, to explosions, the absence of the equal and opposite reaction principle in action scenes are often done on purpose in order to push story and create visually appealing images that are interesting to see, while allowing the viewer to live in that scene and in that moment. In other words, they want to provide the “wow-factor” and leave their audience in “aw” when they leave the movie theater. Many times film directors avoid science facts in order to provide the audience a science fiction world in which the viewer can not only engage with, but can escape their reality in those 2-3 hours on the big screen.

First, a film that violates Newton’s Third Law of Motion or the action/reaction principle, which states that in every action there needs to be an equal/opposite reaction, is the popular American-Australian science fiction film known as The Matrix. The film has several scenes that break this law of physics throughout the entire movie. This 90’s blockbuster had its own world of physics that allowed it to become a very popular film thanks to the awesome out-this-world fighting sequences. One scene that really stands out in my opinion for this paper is the part where Neo and Trinity shoot and kill all the agents inside the lobby while they are trying to rescue Morpheus. They shoot their way through the many agents without a breeze and without getting harmed by the bullets themselves. The movie defies the law of action-reaction, when their heavy-duty riffles do not show the recoil effect, allowing Neo to look like a cool superhuman as he launches forward in a cartwheel while shooting the agents, and without changing his trajectory from the force of the heavy weaponry. With big assault riffles and shotguns, the recoil effect should have been quite visible and the character should have recoiled backwards instead of forwards due to the gases released by all the gunpowder. Defying laws of physics such as the action/reaction principle is a method filmmakers often use in order to show the character’s super abilities and possibilities within that film’s realms of physics. It can also make for a more interesting action film to watch.

Next, a second film that defies or ignores Newton’s Third Law of Motion is Fast and the Furious 6. Most of the fast and the furious movies from the series are known to defy physics to the max throughout their films, but I’m going to talk about a scene in Fast and the Furious 6 more specifically. The scene where Dominic Toretto, played by Vin Diesel, jumps out of a speeding car and flies over a bridge, into the air to save Letty, the love of his life. The car does not have enough impact on the side of the bridge for Toretto to fly that far up and across the bridge as if he was superman. He was also shot out in a specific trajectory onto the window of another car across the bridge. What are the odds right?  Not to mention, at that speed and height in the air, he would die at impact when landing, yet he saves Letty with practically no scratches on him. Vin Diesel is now a superhero according to this movie. Big Hollywood movies tend to manipulate Newton’s Third Law of Motion in order to create a specific tone or feel to the movie, especially if it’s an action film. Action shots are known to defy the action/reaction principle in order to show the actors accomplishing the impossible and make the viewer intrigued by the actor’s actions. Although some films push it too far off and create less believability, at the end of the day films like Fast and the Furious are intended to create a fantasy world where the impossible is possible.

Finally, the third film that violates the action and reaction principle in Newton’s Third Law of Motion is the famous superhero movie known as The Avengers. This film, along with hundreds of other superhero movies, tends to defy laws of physics in order to show superhuman abilities on the characters and the effects of their superpowers. For example, in the scene where Loki drops Thor from the sky in a steel/glass-cage and Thor is able to use his superhuman powers and hammer to jump up and break out of the cage just in time before impact, defying gravity and real life movements in a falling object. At that extreme speed and height of drop, Thor should have basically resembled a human-tortilla on impact. Yet he is able to jump out and escape as if he was just falling off a bike or something. However, in order for superhero films to be catchy and entertaining, such as The Avengers, they need break laws of physics and push real life in order to show a more or less believable universe. Superhero films are usually successful in the world of cinema in Hollywood because they bend and break physics through the use of superpowers, inter-dimensional portals, and other out-of-this world phenomena. Also, let’s be honest, if film directors completely followed Newton’s Third Law of Motion, action films would be quite boring to watch in a movie theater.

In conclusion, movies tend to break, bend or violate laws of physics left and right in order to provide entertainment on the big screen. Films are meant to create a sense of believability whether it is in true-story films, love, tragedy, or science fiction. As I mentioned before, from one end of the spectrum to another, films often disobey or violate laws of motion in order to create fascinating and breathtaking scenes on camera. They defy physics to create cinematic shots and sequences that remain in people’s memories through time. In other words, they create a visual impact through decision-making while creating a film. Directors tend to avoid real life physics and science facts when creating a universe of science fiction. We see this happen in films that defy Newton’s Third Law of Motion, or action/reaction principle, such as The Matrix, Fast and the Furios 6, and The Avengers. Their decision in violating the action/reaction principle allows them to show us awesome fight sequences and action scenes that are definitely what Hollywood is now about. At the end of the day, laws of physics are pushed and broken in the cinematic world so that as a whole we can come together in a movie theater and enjoy the beauty of watching a film, allowing us to escape reality and all of its chaos. We can live in that moment and be a different person even if it is just for two hours. 

Outline of the Second Term Paper

Science Fact or Cinematic Fiction?

Introduction:

A.    Films Discussed: 1) The Matrix 2) Fast and the Furious 6 3) The Avengers

B.    Thesis: The degree of believability varies in the world of cinema. From traditional live-action films, to CGI and Special EFX animated films, we often see mistakes in which laws of physics are pushed, broken, and incorrectly illustrated. One of the principles of physics that is often disobeyed in the film industry is the action/reaction principle. Newton’s Third Law of Motion was violated in films such as The Matrix, Fast and the Furious movies, and The absence of the principle of equal and opposite reaction was done in these action scenes on purpose in order to push story and create visually appealing images that are interesting to see, while allowing the viewer to live in that scene and in that moment.

Body Paragraphs:

1.     Scene 1 (The Matrix). The scene when Neo and Trinity shoot and kill all the agents inside the lobby while they are trying to rescue Morpheus. The film bends the law of action-reaction, when their heavy-duty riffles do not show the recoil effect, allowing Neo to look like a cool superhuman as he launches forward while shooting the agents.

2.     Scene 2 (The Fast and the Furious 6). The scene where Dominic Toretto jumps out of a speeding car and flies over a bridge, into the air to save Letty, the love of his life. At that speed and height in the air, he would die at impact when landing, yet he saves Letty with practically no scratches on him. Vin Diesel is now a superhero.

3.  Scene 3 (The Avengers). The scene where Loki drops Thor from the sky in a    glass-cage and Thor is able to use his superhuman powers and hammer to jump up and break out of the cage just in time before impact, defying gravity and real life movements in a falling object. At that speed and height of drop, Thor should have resembled a human-tortilla.

Conclusion

-       In conclusion, films left and right tend to bend and violate laws of physics in order to provide visually entertaining images on the big screen. Traditional and CGI films often ignore or push real-life physics in order to portray funny, dramatic or intense action scenes. A law of physics that is often illustrated incorrectly in films is Newton’s Third Law of Motion. The principle of action/reaction is minimal or totally dismissed in films such as The Matrix, The Fast and the Furious, and Avengers in order to provide beautiful moments and scenes within the cinematic world that have the “wow-factor” effect on the audience.

Reverse Video Reference

       Hi ya’ll what’s up! So, our assignment was to reproduce/act out a character from each of the different animated clips (4 clips). This was actually way more difficult than I expected! Ironically, I have years of experience in Hip Hop dancing and choreography, yet still found this assignment a bit frustrating, difficult, fun and definitely challenging. I think it is way different and more difficult to imitate/act out a character walk using video reference instead of following in-person step-by-step choreography like I’m used to. Also, my wifi at home was down, so I had to use my phone’s small screen to look at these videos, and I couldn’t go frame by frame to study the movements and nuances too carefully, So I tried my best given the circumstances. It was fun to see all the bloopers and cursing from all of the “trial and error” videos. It was also weird to change it up. We, animators, are used to recording our reference and then animating it, but in this case it was the complete opposite, therefore it was more challenging for the brain and body. Definitely an experience! 

Stop Motion Animation of Falling

 

  I decided to do my own stop-motion animated version of the original story of Humpty Dumpty, a nursery rhyme first heard in 1870 through James William Elliott's National Nursery Rhymes and Nursery Songs. The way I created this stop motion animation turned out to be a way more complicated process then it should have been. Since the animation involved an egg, I was not able to use a string since it was not strong enough. Therefore, I had to use clear Ducktape in order to keep the uncooked egg suspended in the air and in the poses that I wanted it to be in. I used my camera on a tripod and timer on each photo. Since you could clearly see the duck tape and my hands in all of the photos, I had to then go into Photoshop and use the clone tool and brushes to realistically blend it with the background (kitchen) as best as I could. Finally, in Photoshop, I ended up drawing a face and arms digitally in order to give life to the poor egg.  After I had all the shots that I wanted, I brought all of my photos into iMovie and played around with the timing of each frame. It was a complicated, but overall fun process!

Laws of Physics in an Animation Universe

Daniel Herrera

Phys123

Laws of Physics in Animation Universe

            “Adventure is out there.” That is a simple four-word sentence that has a much greater concept behind it. With every adventure, comes a unique story to tell to the world. In the animation world, the story is the heart of it all. Without a strong and appealing story, an animated film simply could not succeed in the world of cinema. In school we are constantly reminded that a strong story in animation must be able to convey emotions to the audience, such as happiness, sadness or sorrow. However, in order for a story to work in the world of animation, there are several rules, concepts, and principles that must be followed in order to convey realism and believability in a world full of imagination. One of those rules is following a believable use of physics in the animation universe. Yes, there are laws of physics that must be understood and studied when creating animations. Without the knowledge and consideration of physics, the audience would be hit with a red flag and automatically feel distracted and confused by the lack of believability being projected on the screen. That being said, an artist has the power to bend and push those laws of physics in order to convey a strong story that has potential to leave a mark in the entertainment industry and create an impact on people’s lives. In Pixar’s UP film, by directors Bob Peterson and Pete Docter, a story is told about a 78-year-old salesman by the name of Carl Fredrickson that goes on the biggest adventure of his lifetime, fulfilling his dream of flying his home to the South American wilderness with thousands of balloons tied to his chimney. In order for the animators to succeed in portraying the crazy, adventurous, and emotional journey of Carl Fredrickson and a boy named Russell, some of the laws of physics in the real world, including gravitational forces, path of actions, and laws of speed and inertia were bent, broken and exaggerated in order to push the story and create a fantasy adventure full of laughs, tears and suspension.

            First, I want to talk about one of the laws of physics that was pushed and stretched throughout the film. That is the use of unrealistic gravitational forces that can be found in certain scenes. For example, in the opening scene when a construction company is evicting the old man, Carl Fredrickson from his home, he decides to tie 20,000 helium balloons to the chimney in order for the home to fly away with him in it. Such a fun and cool idea for an awesome floating house adventure, but unrealistic and physically impossible to say the least. For one, the gravitational force emitted from the balloons would not be strong enough to rip the house off from the ground and detach it from the pipes as it is shown in the film. Secondly, with that many balloons and tied and floating up above and centered on the house’s roof, Carl’s home would loose balance and fall over instead of floating in the air due to the lack of stability from not having balloons on the sides of the house. In the real world, there would have to be a balanced force in order to prevent the house from tipping over to the ground. In relation to the house floating, the strings of the balloons were way too thin to have the possible strength of giant monster carrying the house in the air. However, this works because the general audience will not be too concerned about the physics in this film’s universe and the possibility of houses flying with that many balloons attached. Another scene that stood out to me in particular was when Russell, the wilderness-exploring boy, is piloting the house and lands on top of the missile-shaped plane. Russell, along with Carl, Kevin the bird, and Doug the dog, all defy the rules of air resistance by moving around as if they were in the ground. At that extreme height up in the air, they would not be able to move around that easily as they make it seem in the movie. Due to air resistance, they would move around at much slower speeds with that amount of wind and air pressure in the sky. In my opinion, I definitely think the animators could have improved that scene by adding weight and resistance to the characters’ movements while in the air to add more believability. On the other hand, there were scenes that did stick to physics that would exist in the real world. For example, the scene where Carl wants to make his house float again in order to chase Russell because he left on his own to rescue Kevin, whom was kidnapped by Charles Muntz, the villain of the film. Fredrickson begins to throw out all of his household objects such as furniture, suitcases, and other things and the house takes off into the air once again. Due to minimal air resistance and less weight from the empty house, Carl’s home is able to take off and speed up into the air, which relates to the law of acceleration in physics. It is also an exciting and very emotional scene for me because Carl reflects on his past life with his wife Ellie that passed away, and how they loved adventuring together. He decides to give Russell a chance and help him rescue Kevin, which shows the sudden shift in Carl’s character and the change in moods from sad and depressing to courageous and adventurous.

            Next, UP uses a couple of path of actions and parabolic arcs that are super exaggerated in comparison to real world physics. This is common in the universe of animation because cartoons have to be pushed in order to communicate well. One obvious parabolic arc that is extreme in order to carry out the main story of Carl’s adventure is the path of action of in the distance the house travels all the way to the South American wilderness. Just like any ball bounce or any other object with a line or path of action, the trajectory of a moving object will fall in a parabolic arc due to gravity. However, in this film, the artists bend the laws of falling objects because all of sudden the floating house becomes a flying object that almost falls at an infinite and never-ending parabolic arc. Talk about pushing and exaggerating laws of physics in the animation universe. It is obvious that this film would not be successful without the use of exaggerated arcs because the constant floating motion of the house is vital for this story to succeed. A second path of action that was extremely exaggerated and pushed to the max was when Russell attempted to build a tent in the wilderness with the old man, the tent swings out hundreds of feet up in the air and too far away. I understand physics are bent and pushed for entertainment purposes, but I feel like this scene is a red flag and lacks believability in my opinion. Even with a lot of momentum and force, the tent would be too heavy to travel such distance in with that incredible amount of velocity portrayed in the film. A good example of an exaggerated path of action used in the scene that actually follows the laws of physics in real life, is when Carl and Russell carry the house on their backs with water hoses wrapped around them, because it shows a path of action with a constant motion. This is possible due to a concept in physics known as Buoyant Force. This force causes the house to rise upwards, then the density of air and balloons decrease, and in turn allow the weight of the house and the buoyant force to be the same and balanced.

            Finally, the laws of inertia and speed were pushed beyond the limits but I think it definitely helped the film. One example of this is shown in the opening scene when the house starts to fly away with the thousands of balloons. As it is floating away and gaining speed, the house runs into several objects such as minivans, antennas and other objects along the way. In the movie, Carl’s home hits the objects and continues traveling in very similar if not the same speed as it was traveling in before it hit those objects. This defies Newton’s law of inertia and follow-through because an object in motion will remain in a constant motion unless acted upon an unbalanced force. Therefore, the house would have to slow down on impact with other objects. A second example where laws of speed and gravity were not followed too well in order to push the story was when Carl and Russell are escaping Charles Muntz from the cave after rescuing Kevin the bird. As a couple of balloons pop from the impact with the cave walls, Carl and Russell start to run away and float like if they were astronauts walking on the moon. Obviously this isn’t possible in the real world, but it is definitely entertaining and it sells in my opinion. However, UP did have scenes where laws of inertia and speed from the real world were actually present. For example, when Russell is almost thrown over the cliff while being chased by Charles’s dogs, there is enough acceleration and speed present to show believability in the distance Russell travels hanging from a water hose. This is also an example that shows good use of inertia and drag because Russell drags perfectly behind the rest of the motion (house flying away).

            In conclusion, the film UP bends and pushes physics existent in real life in order to tell and push a story to the audience. I mentioned the film’s use of good and bad examples of physics that were done intentionally by the artists in order to illustrate a retired balloon salesman’s ultimate adventure and journey to the Southern wilderness. From bending the laws of gravitational forces, to exaggerating path of actions to the max, every little detail was considered in making this film a hit. It is no shock that this awesome film produced by Disney’s-Pixar received a 98% on Rotten Tomatoes. From making me laugh when Russell attempts to crawl on top of Carl Fredrickson’s head and completely failing, to secretly weeping and getting a knot in my throat when the old man Carl has a flashback on his past life with his wife Ellie. Laws of physics in the animation world must be pushed and broken in order to convey strong stories that can create an impact in the entertainment world as well as a film that can possibly touch many people’s lives. “Adventure is out there,” so don’t be afraid to go on life’s journeys yourself and tell your next story to those around you.