Top 20 Movies With BS Science

“Twister” (1996)
Blockbusters from the mid-to-late nineties were some of the best popcorn movies ever made, but that doesn't mean they're accurate. At the end of "Twister," Helen Hunt and Bill Paxton survive a massive tornado by strapping themselves to a pipe with a leather belt. Let's break that down. Tornados of that size can have winds topping out at more than 300 mph. That level of force can uproot trees and decimate buildings. The pair would, at minimum, likely have been hit by flying, deadly debris. Moreover, even if the leather belt could have withstood the extreme force of the winds, the pipes would not. Joints, as a rule, are not designed to handle massive forces and would likely have been torn apart.

“After Earth” (2013)
When returning to their home world in "After Earth," Will and Jaden Smith face a planet where life has evolved to be particularly hostile towards humanity. Their take on evolution is deeply flawed. A millennium is not enough time to witness such massive evolutionary changes. Evolution operates on a much longer timescale. At best, significant adaptations occur over thousands of years, or millions. The idea that plants and animals could evolve so rapidly to specifically target humans is biologically impossible. Evolution is driven by natural selection over generations. Major environmental shifts do not trigger immediate, drastic changes in species. Humans being absent for only a few hundred years wouldn't lead to such radical transformations in Earth's ecosystems.

“Independence Day” (1996)
In "Independence Day," scientist David Levinson - played to perfection by Jeff Goldblum - saves the world. In a matter of hours, David was able to understand alien technology and software enough to connect it to a mid-90's era PC. Somehow, the tech of an interstellar civilization runs on binary code, and was easily accessible by outdated human software. That concept relied on the audience's general lack of understanding of computer systems. In real life, their language, protocols, and systems would be utterly alien to our experience. Even within human systems, hacking into secure networks takes extensive time and specialized knowledge. Computer viruses like David's need to be specifically designed for the vulnerabilities of a particular operating system.

“Transformers” franchise (2007-)
One of the most amusing aspects of the "Transformers" franchise is the way in which giant robots treat human bodies like toys. Sam and his friends are tossed around like footballs by Opitmus, Bumblebee, and Megatron. Usually they're caught and saved, or a Transformer morphs around them to prevent harm. Unfortunately, these scenes completely ignore basic Newtonian physics. According to the laws of momentum, when a human is thrown with significant force, their body experiences extreme acceleration or deceleration. When caught mid-air by a robot, the sudden stop would generate immense G-forces: enough to crush internal organs or snap bones. The film treats human bodies as if they were indestructible. In reality, even a moderate impact at high speed could result in severe trauma.

“Journey to the Center of the Earth” (1959)
The Hollow Earth theory has long captivated both science fiction writers and conspiracy theorists. Today, it lies at the center of the MonsterVerse films. The conceit, though, dates back to cinema classics like the 1959 adaptation of Jules Verne's "Journey to the Center of the Earth." The film presents a fantastical underground world, complete with oceans, jungles, and prehistoric creatures. While scientists entertained the concept in the 19th century, it has long since been debunked. The immense pressure and heat beneath Earth’s surface would make survival impossible. Gravity would act differently at such depths, making it unlikely for people or ecosystems to exist. Vast, hollow caverns at the earth's center defies the understanding that Earth's solid layers are necessary to support its structural integrity.

“The Day After Tomorrow” (2004)
As the existential issue of our time, more and more Hollywood films and tv shows have tackled climate change. One of the first was made twenty years ago: "The Day After Tomorrow." The film's take on climate science, though, is less than stellar. The film shows drastic temperature drops and extreme weather events happening almost instantaneously. In reality, climate change is something that occurs over time. It would be nearly impossible for the earth to plunge into a new ice age in a matter of days. Such shifts occur over long periods due to the complex interplay of atmospheric, oceanic, and ecological systems. Nor could massive superstorms instantly freeze entire cities; heat cannot dissipate that rapidly on such a large scale.

“The Matrix” franchise (1999-)
The "Matrix" trilogy may have become a cultural touchstone, but its central premise is scientifically ridiculous. In the world of "The Matrix" human beings are grown on large farms and plugged into massive power plants. Human bodies do, in fact, produce energy through metabolism. We are not, however, efficient power sources. The energy required to sustain a human through food far exceeds the energy a body could generate. Humans are net energy consumers, not producers. It would take more energy to keep the humans alive than could ever be harvested from their bodies.

“Gravity” (2013)
"Gravity" may be a compelling space thriller, but it's also riddled with inaccuracies. The drama begins with a noble sacrifice when George Clooney's character detaches from the tether to prevent pulling Bullock away. The only problem: this is unnecessary in a vacuum. Without air resistance or significant gravity, once they stop moving, no force would pull them further. Clooney could have been easily pulled back without drifting away. Worse, the film shows the International Space Station and the Hubble Space Telescope as objects in close proximity. In reality, the ISS orbits Earth at around 260 miles, while Hubble orbits at around 335 miles; in other words they are in different orbital planes. Traveling between them would require vast energy and time.

“2012” (2009)
Sometimes - especially with disaster movies - the loose 'science' is only there to justify the suspension of disbelief. It's not actually meant to provide legitimacy to the plot. Such is the case with the 'science' behind the apocalyptic "2012." Its central premise - that neutrinos from a massive solar flare could heat Earth's core, sparking catastrophic geological events - is completely insane. Neutrinos, while abundant, interact very weakly with matter. Tectonic systems cannot, in fact, generate simultaneous tsunamis, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions on a global scale. The film also features rapid continental drift; entire land masses move and sink within hours. In the real world, this process takes millions of years.

“Star Wars” franchise (1977-)
The Star Wars franchise, while beloved by fans for decades, isn't exactly famous for its strict adherence to the laws of physics. One of "Star Wars" cardinal sins is its consistent portrayal of sound in space. The thrum of ships moving, the buzz of hyperspace drives, and the booms of explosion would all be silent in a vacuum. The movement of ships in space, too, is less than accurate. There is no air resistance or gravity in space, but fighters act like terrestrial-bound planes. In space, they would move in straight lines unless acted on by external forces.

“Moonfall” (2022)
Despite decades of scientific evidence, the conspiracy theory that the Moon is hollow or serves as an alien base has persisted. Adherents believe that the Moon may be an artificial structure and is hollow inside. The 2022 film "Moonfall" plays into this absurdity. In it, the moon is indeed an alien construct, threatening to destroy the earth with a deadly collision. The film's premise disregards basic astrophysics and geology. The Moon's structure has been studied extensively through both terrestrial observation and lunar missions. Evidence shows conclusively that it is a solid body with a complex internal structure.

“Volcano” (1997)
The plot of the movie "Volcano" hinges on the catastrophic eruption of a volcano beneath Los Angeles. The likelihood of such an event actually occurring is exceedingly low. Los Angeles is not located near any active volcanoes; the nearest volcanic activity is nearly 200 miles away. The region is shaped by tectonic activity, but that activity isn't likely to create a volcano. In some instances, a tectonic fault can cause volcanic activity if it forces one plate under another. But the San Andreas fault’s plates slide side by side, which can cause earthquakes but shouldn’t typically generate magma. While California does experience some volcanic activity, the specific scenario depicted in “Volcano” is scientifically implausible.

“Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” (2008)
Indiana Jones has faced the power of the almighty, aliens, and time travel. In "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull," he also survives a nuclear blast by hiding inside a refrigerator. While this is a fun way to start a film, it's also unlikely. A refrigerator doesn't necessarily offer much protection against radiation. Even assuming that it was lead-lined, and did insulate Indy, there is the blast. The immediate blast radius would incinerate anything within a few hundred meters. Even at a distance, the intense heat would likely melt the fridge. Being launched several hundred feet would subject Dr. Jones to extreme, possibly deadly G-forces. The potential blunt force trauma upon landing would also likely have killed the adventurous archeologist.

“Waterworld” (1995)
Kevin Costner's post-apocalyptic epic "Waterworld" was one of the first Hollywood films to tackle climate change. It portrays a future where Earth is completely submerged underwater due to the melting of the polar ice caps. While climate change is causing ice caps to melt, the complete flooding of the planet is virtually impossible. Even if every bit of ice on earth melted, scientists estimate sea levels could rise by about 70 meters. While that would be cataclysmic - most of the world lives relatively close to a coastline - it wouldn't come close to covering the entire world in water. Additionally, the notion of human survival on floating atolls raises questions about sustainable living. There is very little food or fresh water out on the open sea.

“Jurassic Park” franchise (1993-)
Could humanity truly play God? Could cloning bring extinct animals back to life? Audiences have been asking these questions ever since 1993's "Jurassic Park." Broadly speaking, no: the genetics in the films are not particularly accurate.The films suggest that scientists could extract viable DNA from ancient mosquitoes preserved in amber. In truth, DNA degrades over time. It'd be extremely unlikely to find intact genetic material after millions of years. Moreover, the franchise oversimplifies genetic engineering. It implies that dinosaurs could be cloned and almost perfectly replicated from fragments of DNA combined with that of modern species. In reality, cloning extinct species is far more complex. Scientists would need complete and well-preserved genomes, as well as an understanding of the organism's full biology and behavior.

“Lucy” (2014)
"You only use 5-10% of your brain." We've heard that for years, and science fiction films like "Lucy" have played with that concept to our collective delight. The film suggests that unlocking more brain capacity leads to superhuman abilities. Unfortunately, neuroscience has long since proved that the notion is a myth. Humans utilize virtually all parts of our brains constantly throughout the day. Brain imaging studies reveal that even during simple tasks, multiple regions are active. Each part of the brain has specific functions. While not all are firing simultaneously, this doesn’t mean they aren't being used.

“Armageddon” (1998)
While audiences rocked out to Aerosmith, scientists around the world collectively cringed while watching "Armageddon." It stars Bruce Willis as an oil driller sent to blow up a world-killing asteroid from the inside. Virtually everything we see is wrong. The asteroid's surface couldn't be less accurate, and it's all but impossible that one so big could get so close to earth without being discovered well in advance. Even if we had a bomb powerful enough to blow an asteroid in half as depicted - and we don't - the pieces would still likely be pulled to the earth's surface by gravity. Even if the drillers were able to land and accomplish their mission, they would have all been stuck: space shuttles can't take off horizontally.

“The Core” (2003)
From geography to physics, from chemistry to climate science, few movies are as aggressively wrong as "The Core." Calamity ensues after scientists discover that the Earth's core has stopped rotating thanks to a top secret geological weapon. There is no piece of any human technology that exists which could affect the earth's core or mantle. Nor does the core’s rotation directly influence the planet’s surface events in the way depicted. It does play a role in generating the magnetic field, but destabilization would take much longer to occur. When it comes to sending a ship into the earth, forget it. The extreme temperatures and pressures found at such depths would easily destroy any human-made craft.

“Die Another Day” (2002)
Movies tend to treat scientific technology in the same way they treat magic. It takes a concept that audiences are loosely familiar with - like genetics - and takes it to an absurd extreme. The Bond film "Die Another Day" presents a ludicrous notion of transracial genetics. It suggests that gene therapy can alter a person’s DNA, changing their race and face. Human traits like skin color, hair texture, and other racial characteristics are influenced by multiple genes and environmental factors. Such transformations were impossible twenty years ago, and unlikely today. While gene therapy is advancing, it remains primarily focused on treating specific genetic diseases, such as sickle cell anemia or thalassemia.
Hollywood has always had a loose relationship with scientific accuracy. Let us know your favorite films with bad science in the comments below.