Science Fact or Cinematic Fiction
It
is often obvious when an action and reaction from a film is exaggerated. And,
because it is obvious it can make a movie unrealistic, but it opens up our
imagination and gets us to wonder, what if? Most movies go by Newton’s Third
Law: action-reaction principle, but will exaggerate it to keep the viewers
interest.
In
the Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 2,
Bella has become a newborn vampire and was about to meet her daughter for the
first time. Seconds after meeting her she finds out that Jacob had imprinted on
her daughter, meaning that they are both destined to be together forever.
Raging with anger, Bella lashes out at him pushing him around. To Jacob’s
defense, his friend Seth who is in a large wolf form jumps at Bella. Instead of
the large wolf knocking Bella over she catches Seth in mid-air and throws him
against a tree. This is called an Action-Reaction Pairs, where Seth exerts a
force on Bella, and as a reaction Bella exerts a force back on Seth. Because
these two characters are both unusually stronger than an average human and an
average wolf, maybe the action-reaction principle was realistically executed.
However, if Bella was just a human and Seth was really a wolf then Newton’s
Third Law would have been applied differently. Realistically speaking, Bella
would have been knocked over easily and would not have been able to push Seth
off at all.
When
person A and person B both push off of person C there should be a major
reaction to person C but that is not the case in the movie Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle. Towards the end of the movie
Cameron Diaz, Lucy Liu, and Drew Barrymore are faced with an evil character
played by Demi Moore. The last final kick that ends up killing Demi was an
action where Lucy and Drew jump on Cameron’s hands and they push off from it,
with a little push from Cameron as well. When Lucy and Drew kick Demi, her
reaction is of her unrealistically flying far from the kick and the force
causes her body to break through the stages wooden floor, causing Demi to fall
to her death. There were a number of things that did not look right. First,
when two people’s entire weight is on one person it shouldn’t have that one
person react as if the other two were light as feathers, because obviously they
are not. The two women that used Cameron’s hands to push off should have had
Cameron reacting by moving back. Because Cameron did not react to the push, it
only tells us how strong Cameron is because then that would mean that the
action force of the two women and the action force from Cameron was equal. For
Demi Moore’s character her reaction to the kick was overly exaggerated making
it obvious that her character used wires in the scene because when she broke
through the wooden floor it created a dramatic impact force. By manipulating
the action-reaction principle it gave this semi-comedic/action film a “lighter”
story line, pun intended.
This
next scene was obviously illustrated the action-reaction principle incorrectly.
A 250 pound panda bear gets his teeth knocked out by an air filled punching
bag, how is that possible? It is not. In
Kung Fu Panda, Po is asked to hit the
air filled punching bag. He gives the bag a sissy punch and it just wobbles in
place with not much reaction. The second time around he gives the bag a good
punch and the bag swings off screen for a second or two then the bag swings
back, knocking Po to the ground and even got a tooth knocked out of his mouth.
Physically the air bag cannot possibly swing back so fast and hard that it
knocks out someone’s tooth. Po is much more heavier than the air filled
punching bag so it would be like the bag is hitting a wall, causing no reaction
to Po. Newton’s Third Law is broken when Po gets knocked over by something that
he should have knocked over. Even though the action-reaction principle was
broken, it worked well with Po’s character. Po’s character was portrayed
perfectly in that scene because it showed how big of a weenie he was and that
even an air filled bag could defeat him. It pushed Po back so far that it was
more entertaining to watch him bounce back and grow strong enough to beat Tai
Lung. In this case I think that breaking the action-reaction principle played
will in the main characters favor.
Sometimes
movies need to break Newton’s Third Law because if it were to be as real as it
gets it would just make the movie boring, and have the viewers feel like it is
something they already seen. Of course when it is a serious story line being
extra realistic will heighten the seriousness of the story. However, for an
action film or animated film it helps to exaggerate and break the
action-reaction principle. We, as viewers want a break from reality and want to
be entertained by something that isn’t possible in the real world. It not only
opens up our minds for imagination but it also leaves us wanting more of it. If
the Newton’s Third Law were based on human emotion and feelings, then I would
say that the creators of these films executed the action-reaction principle
correctly. The principle of action and reaction plays a big roll in how the
animators want the characters to be portrayed. Being able to withstand a large
wolf lunging at you or being able to push off two people with your hands and
not reacting to it shows how strong that character is, which is what they want
the viewers to know. Or, literally a full-grown panda being knocked over by an
air bag shows how weak he is with an extremely low stamina, which is what the
animators wanted the viewers to know about him before they take on the story further.
Science
fact and cinematic fiction are both considered when making a movie. They push
the action-reaction principle to draw the viewers’ attention but sometimes not
too much, where it might look extremely fake that the viewers don’t absorb the
story and process it in their minds. There is a line between science facts and
cinematic fiction, and it is up to us to decide where to draw the line
depending on what type of theme, mood, etc., you want the viewers to get
involved with.
