Can you name the scientifically inaccurate movies? by tallsaul

Can you name the scientifically inaccurate movies?

created by tallsaul

Enter a Movie in the box below
Correctly named Movies will show up below
Click any empty Scientific Inaccuracy or Movie to answer for that location
Source: Yahoos - Top 10 SI movies
This game highlights those movies which take the science and stretch it to incorporate what is desirable to the vast majority of movie goers - an over the top story line and hardcore special effects!
This quiz has not been verified by Sporcle

Popular trivia games today

The Killer Quiz

6037

Countries That Border Germany

5262

Hunger Games Death Row

2567

Word Ladder: NFL Draft

2019

Missing Word: 'D' Songs

1918

Geography Bunker

1874

Celebrities in Family Guy

1602

Which Month? Sports Events

1313

And more...

04:00

Show Missed Answers

Scientific Inaccuracy	Movie	Hint: Actor/Actress
Size of nuclear device needed doesn't exist		Bruce Willis
No way to compensate for the vast pressure and temperature within the earth		Hillary Swank
Manmade computer virus is compatible with alien software		Will Smith
Man survives a nuclear blast in a fridge		Shia Labeouf
A truck manages to cross an area of molten rock without igniting the gas tank		Pierce Brosnan
Eyeballs pop out after being sucked into space		Arnold Schwarzenegger
Plants are sentient and can control their bodily functions		Mark Wahlberg
Superflare hits New York City but giant TV in Times Square still works		Nicolas Cage
Ships actually catch fire in space		Denise Richards
Man develops gills (mutation) in response to a changing environment		Kevin Costner
Disrupted gulf stream brings ice tsunami instantly		Dennis Quaid

Scientific Inaccuracy	Movie	Hint: Actor/Actress
Humans attempt to jump-start the sun by adding all of the uranium found on Earth		Cliff Curtis
Human batteries would require more energy to upkeep than they would give		Keanu Reeves
Human finds a cure for a virus from his own blood		Will Smith
Flood waters and tsunami reach over the Himalayas		John Cusack
Lava is easily contained and directed with the help of hastily built refuse piles		Tommy Lee Jones
Two people survive an F-5 tornado by loosely tying themselves to a pole		Helen Hunt
100% virulent and kills within hours		Dustin Hoffman
Explosions yield noises in space		Carrie Fisher
Bone structure supports immense weight of monster		Matthew Broderick
DNA of extinct species doesn't deteriorate and is relatively complete		Sam Neill

Javascript is not currently enabled on your browser.
If you do have Javascript enabled:
This site uses javascript to make the magic happen.
Please turn on javascript and reload this page, or use a more current browser (like Firefox)

Scientifically Inaccurate Movies Quiz

by tallsaul

Created Apr 22, 2010 in Movies
Game Plays 1,643

Friend Scores and Standings

Loading friend results....

Top Games Today in Movies

Top Games with Similar Tags

Top User Games in Movies

	Fidelio:	Apr 22nd, 2010 at 15:10 GMT	5 points
	It must have been difficult choosing just one scientifically impossible plot point from the latest Indiana Jones movie...kind of like picking one branch out of a redwood forest.

	TwoSheds:	Apr 22nd, 2010 at 15:24 GMT	3 points
	Armageddon...you certainly had your choice of inaccuracies with that one. And I'm so glad that other people recognize the stupidity of the "human battery" concept in the Matrix. It would have been so easy for them to just say the humans were being used as parallel processors...

	crazylegs:	Apr 22nd, 2010 at 15:30 GMT	3 points
	Who exactly is Tommy Lee Curtis?

	rockgolf:	Apr 22nd, 2010 at 15:49 GMT	0 points
	Suggest you shrink the Hint field by 10% and widen the clue & title by about 5% each.

	tallsaul:	Apr 22nd, 2010 at 16:48 GMT	-1 points
	Good point on Tommy Lee Curtis :)... was thinking of two people! Thanks.

	irice22:	Apr 22nd, 2010 at 17:31 GMT	1 point
	Too short. Also, always accept just the subtitles of a movie, i.e. "Kingdom of the Crystal Skull"

	tallsaul:	Apr 22nd, 2010 at 17:38 GMT	1 point
	I do accept Indiana Jones... and now the subtitle as well. Also added some time. Thanks for the input.

	alltheway2eleven:	Apr 22nd, 2010 at 22:25 GMT	5 points
	Oh... so THATS what makes Star Wars scientifically inaccurate. It's not like... everything in it is

	Freder23:	Apr 23rd, 2010 at 02:03 GMT	2 points
	The clue for I am legend is actually scientifically possible. Cures for disease are often found by testing blood antibodies or other factors for conferred resistance. There are other inaccuracies to pick on though.

	saxofonia:	Apr 23rd, 2010 at 02:18 GMT	3 points
	I momentarily confused a John Cusack movie with a Rush album.

	tallsaul:	Apr 23rd, 2010 at 11:14 GMT	-1 points
	@Freder23: I agree that it is scientifically possible... but definitely implausible

	morris:	Apr 24th, 2010 at 17:28 GMT	0 points
	not to nitpick, but we have no way of knowing the properties of space in star wars, which is set 'a long time ago in a galaxy far far away'

	tallsaul:	Apr 24th, 2010 at 20:56 GMT	4 points
	@Morris: Our current understanding of our universe is that the rules of physics work the same no matter where you go... NOW... if you're talking about a DIFFERENT universe, that developed from a different set of circumstances, you may be right. I think we're supposed to believe that it still occurred within our universe... right?

	svejk:	Apr 25th, 2010 at 01:19 GMT	1 point
	Nice quiz. Obviously a few of these movies have several to choose from. I'd be tempted to accept "all of them" for explosions yielding noises in space-I can think of 4 movies that applies to without trying.

	Geebs3906:	Apr 25th, 2010 at 02:58 GMT	0 points
	Not be obnoxious, but you COULD survive an F-5 tornado...maybe the WAY they survive it is ridiculous (I seem to recall them tying a belt around a pole or something), but you actually have a pretty decent shot of getting out alive.

	asterix:	Apr 25th, 2010 at 12:53 GMT	-3 points
	waterworld? so evolution is scientifically in acurate?

	tallsaul:	Apr 25th, 2010 at 13:08 GMT	3 points
	of course evolution is scientifically accurate... you fail to see the point: evolution isn't something that happens quickly (evolution of humans to that degree - full on fish gills - would take vast amounts of time and would require many intermediate steps. Natural selection would favor those individuals who had more and more gill-like respiration - whatever that means. That is of course unless the mutation yielding immediate fish gills suddenly DID pop up - which would seem to me to be a very complex and fortuitous set of changes). Why is it that people think that because of a mutation, they're going to see massive and beneficial results (i.e. the x-men, godzilla, etc.)? Additionally, the main point was that it is apparent (that because the world has become mostly water)he has the mutation. Mutations don't happen as a result of a changing environment! They are random!!

	tallsaul:	Apr 25th, 2010 at 13:35 GMT	1 point
	Mutation doesn't equal evolution; mutation equals a potential starting point for natural selection

	mbalota:	Apr 26th, 2010 at 11:00 GMT	2 points
	Fun quiz, the only problem i had is that some clues contain the scientific inaccuracy ("Man survives a nuclear blast in a fridge") and others contain an explanation why it's inaccurate("Virus would kill host too quickly to spread"). Maybe you should choose just one form of the clue not to confuse anyone (I admit staring at "Plants are sentient and can control their bodily functions" and wondering if it was an inaccuracy or not :)

	tallsaul:	Apr 27th, 2010 at 00:17 GMT	1 point
	@mbalota: great point! Didn't even give it a thought until you mentioned it.

	y2jdilemma:	Apr 27th, 2010 at 13:17 GMT	2 points
	HAHA. nice quiz. Although what drives me craziest about Waterworld is that in aplanet covered in water, Dennis Hopper always has a dry cigarette. Where did he find them!?