In article <13rk3e4a71sssc1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Steven L. <sdlitvin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>RogerM wrote:
>> "Steven L." wrote:
>>> It's strongly implied by the opening, in which it is stated that the
>>> videotape was retrieved from an area that was "formerly known as
Central
>>> Park." It would take a pretty big conventional bomb to obliterate all
>>> of Central Park.
>>>
>>
>> It didn't obliterate the video camera. Or even wipe it with EMP. That
>> could either be bad writing, or a mistaken assumption on our part.
>
>That's definitely bad writing. It's strongly implied by the opening
>that whatever bombs they used finally got the monster--though with vast
>collateral damage, enough to obliterate Central Park. Yet the videotape
>survived. Go figure.
>
>BTW, Abrams made a similar mistake in "Lost". There's supposed to be
>this mysterious station, called "Swan Station," set up to monitor these
>baffling "electromagnetic anomalies." Those anomalies periodically
>create huge magnetic fields that can toss around metal objects, etc.
>And yet in the station they are using MAGNETIC TAPE drives to record the
>telemetry data, and FLOPPY DISKS to boot the computer, all of which are
>right out in the open.
>
>Riddle me this: What do the credits for "Cloverfield" have in common
>with the credits for "Lost"?
>
>Answer: Neither production employed technical advisers to review the
>scripts for technical accuracy.
>
>
>--
>Steven L.
Not really.
There's a difference between being able to pluck a tape out of the
wreckage
and plop it into a player and giving a partially melted tape to the NSA
or whoever for data recovery. Supposedly hard disks can be recovered even
after the bits have been re-written several times, I don't see why, if it
were a national security priority, the same type of tech wouldn't be
applied
to the tape.
Ted
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
|
