Project Hail Mary, one of the early hits of the 2026 movie schedule, has been praised for the way both handle the science in the story. It’s not the first time Andy Weir, the author of the book on which it is based, has been lauded for this, and it turns out, he puts a lot of pressure on himself to get the science correct. To motivate himself, he just needs to think about how Neil deGrasse Tyson would react to the story. Weir opened up on Tyson’s podcast, StarTalk, recently, and explained how much pressure Tyson inadvertently puts on him. Here’s what Weir had to say.

No ‘Hand-Wavey’ Physics

In Project Hail Mary (and his previous book-to-screen adaptation, The Martian), Weir takes a lot of time to make sure the science in his fiction is plausible, in addition to being accessible to laymen. He doesn’t, as he says, want any “hand-wavey” physics just to move the plot along. Of course, as I’m sure other sci-fi writers can relate, he keeps himself in line by making sure that if astrophysicist Tyson were to read his works, he would approve. On the podcast, Tyson told Weir that he really appreciated the level of real science Weir uses. To that, Weir admitted:

It may come across as a joke, or a playful comment about Tyson’s notorious Tweets when movies and TV shows get something wrong about the science, but Weir was not joking. Tyson then reminded Weir of a quote from the author from some years back (which may have also been from an earlier episode, but it’s not cited by Tyson). Tyson read Weir's words:

Weir emphasized again that he really does picture Tyson standing over his shoulder as he types his story, putting pressure on himself to get it all correct.

It’s A System That Seems To Be Working

Tyson is known for cutting down that kind of “hand-wavy” physics in movies, so earning praise from the famed scientist is no small feat. In fact, Tyson, on the show, again complimented Weir and said:

There is probably no greater compliment a sci-fi writer could receive in today’s day and age than one like this from Tyson. He is, of course, hardly the only scientist who weighs in on science in films, but let’s be honest, he is probably the most well-known astrophysicist in the world today, and laymen like me trust Tyson when it comes to subject matter that is way over my head. I'm not alone in that; even filmmakers, like the directors of Project Hail Mary, ask Tyson about the science. Personally, ‘hand-wavy’ science is all I really need in a story to enjoy, but it’s always great to know that the physics would theoretically work, too.

Tom Cruise has done almost everything on the big screen. The actor known for doing all his own stunts (mostly) seemingly has no limitations on what he’s willing to pull off. At this point, it seems like he picks his projects based entirely on what crazy thing the script will let him do. One crazy thing Cruise very much wants to do is make a movie in space, and one person, who would know, is all for it.

Neil deGrasse Tyson is known for being an astrophysicist and for taking shots at movies that don’t use accurate science. Variety caught up with him at the premiere for Project Hail Mary and asked him about Cruise’s planned outer space movie. It turns out Tyson had conversations with the head of NASA after Cruise revealed his intentions. He said…

Filming in zero gravity has been done before. A handful of films, including most famously, Apollo 13, used a C-131 Samaritan, lovingly nicknamed the “Vomit Comet,” which used a parabolic flight path to create a zero gravity environment. However, because the flight path only allows for a few seconds of zero gravity at a time, the movie ended up with several short clips that needed to be stitched together to make longer scenes.

What Tom Cruise wants to do is film in actual outer space. That may seem like a tall order, but when asked if such a thing would be possible, Neil deGrasse Tyson doesn’t bat an eye. He seems to think the only thing needed to make that happen is money, and Tom Cruise has that. Tyson continued…

Filming in space is certainly possible. In fact, it’s already happened. The Russian movie The Challenge included some sequences that were shot at the International Space Station and aboart space capsules. The filming took place in 2021 and the movie was released in 2023.

Only about 35 minutes of The Challenge’s 165 minute runtime was shot in space. Likewise. The plan for Tom Cruise's movie, at least a few years ago, was that the majority of the movie would be set on Earth, with only part of it taking place in space.

At this point the status of Tom Cruise’s outer space adventure is unclear. Not a lot has been said about it recently. He has other projects he’s currently involved in, including Digger with diretor Alejandro G. Iñárritu and a couple of projects with longtime collaborator Christopher McQuarrie. At this point we don’t know when Cruise might even have time to visit outer space. But it is Tom Cruise, so you can be sure that if making the movie is something he truly wants to do, it will happen.

Anyone who has read (or at least started) Andy Weir’s Project Hail Mary in the lead-up to the new book-to-screen adaptation starring Ryan Gosling knows that there’s a whole lot of "sci" in this sci-fi. I have to admit that, going into it, I was intimidated by the science at the core of this hotly anticipated release on the 2026 movie schedule, as there are some very complex topics, issues, and situations at the core of the new space adventure. That said, I was so off base with those fears.

Without giving too much away (I don’t want to spoil anything), this critically acclaimed sci-fi spectacle is one of those movies that finds the perfect balance between science and accessibility, making it both accessible and enlightening without sacrificing either. If you’ve been on the fence because of this, take a look at what I have to say.

This Movie Takes Complex Topics And Makes Them Easy To Understand

Full disclosure: I started reading Project Hail Mary a couple of years ago, and for one reason or another, I never finished it. It’s not because it was too complex a book to read, as it’s quite entertaining, but it does throw a lot at the reader. From spending the opening pages with Ryland Grace trying to make sense of his surroundings after waking up on a spaceship following a long coma to flashbacks about the life cycle of Astrophage (the microorganism eating energy from the sun) to a ton of math in both timelines, it’s easy to get your wires crossed.

After watching the new sci-fi movie and having some time to digest it all, I have to say that Drew Goddard’s adaptation and the direction by Phil Lord and Chris Miller make this an easy-to-follow (and understand) adventure where you never really get lost in the science. It’s similar to The Martian (also written by Andy Weir and adapted by Goddard) in that it gives you enough information to make sense of the plot but not so much that you’re sitting in a theater with a calculator or pen and pencil.

This Doesn’t Necessarily Mean The Movie Dumbs Anything Down

Just like Ryland Grace speaking with his students early in the movie and making them work to get the answer, Project Hail Mary doesn’t dumb everything down. If you’re worried about some of the book’s more intricate scientific qualities (especially those scenes where Ryland is trying to make the astrophage mate in the lab), those sequences are still there, but just made easier to follow. Instead of including all the nitty-gritty details or eliminating them altogether and saying something along the lines of “Science happened,” the movie finds a good middle ground.

That said, I’m sure Neil DeGrasse Tyson is going to have issues with the math and sciences, but that shouldn’t be a problem for audiences. While it is true that you have to think, you don’t have to think so hard that you lose track of the comedy and emotion at the heart of this fun-loving and eye-popping space adventure.

Project Hail Mary -- the Ryan Gosling-led 2026 movie schedule entry -- is sure to excite book lovers and sci-fi fans alike. It follows the story of a high school science teacher who wakes up on a spaceship with no memory, but soon discovers he has an important mission to undertake. Given the premise of this book-to-screen adaptation, there's a lot of science involved, and directors Phil Lord and Chris Miller asked astronomer Neil DeGrasse Tyson for his thoughts on whether they nailed that material.

An esteemed astrophysicist, Neil DeGrasse Tyson has no problem discussing whether a movie is scientifically accurate. Phil Lord and Chris Miller recently spoke with Sirius XM's Julia Cunningham and recalled asking Tyson for his reaction to Project Hail Mary, which is based on Andy Weir's 2021 book of the same name. Tyson apparently attended a premiere, as Lord and Miller explained to Cunningham:

• Julia Cunningham: At any point was Neil deGrasse Tyson just brought in as a consultant?
• Phil Lord: He was at the party last night.
• Julia Cunningham: He was?
• Phil Lord: And we all mugged him.
• Christopher Miller: We’re like, ‘So how did we do? How did we do?’
• Julia Cunningham: Yes. What did he say?
• Christopher Miller: He said we got the science right. We passed the Neil deGrasse Tyson test, yeah.
• Julia Cunningham: You know, because don't get him started on Armageddon.
• Christopher Miller: I know. Thank god.
• Julia Cunningham: Literally, he's like, ‘You can just kick that asteroid out of the way.’ Look it up.

I'm reminded of the time Neil DeGrasse Tyson roasted Armageddon for its outlandish way of handling the asteroid hitting Earth. With that brutally honest assessment in mind, it’s a huge relief that he’s giving Project Hail Mary a thumbs up.

Seriously, Neil DeGrasse Tyson has had plenty of bones to pick with certain sci-fi movies. He fact-checked Gravity and made note of its many space law flubs, dubbing it “Angular Momentum.” Tyson also tore into Interstellar and felt Star Wars didn’t get the science right. While the StarTalk host wasn’t on the set of Project Hail Mary, there was one astrophysicist who was willing to lend a scientific hand:

• Ryan Gosling: That’s where Andy Weir—I love this story about Andy—is that he said he knew that he was different when he was watching Titanic and when Jack dies, he thought, ‘Those aren't the constellations that would be above them right now.’
• Julia Cunningham: Oh my god.
• Ryan Gosling: Anyway, so we wanted... like, that's where Andy comes from. That's why he started writing his own stories. All of those things are important to him. Neil deGrasse didn't come to set, unfortunately, but Brian Cox did.
• Julia Cunningham: Okay.
• Ryan Gosling: So, we got to pick his brain a little bit.
• Julia Cunningham: Legendary actor Brian Cox or—
• Ryan Gosling: No. Astrophysicist.
• Julia Cunningham: Astrophysicist. I was like, ‘Wow, legendary actor Brian Cox.’ I was like, ‘Did he have a lot of insight?’

It's good thing Brian Cox (the astrophysicist, not the actor) was there. Of course, any science-based movie may have to take some liberties for the sake of its narrative, but it's quite impressive that Miller, Lord and co. managed to keep everything tight enough that even Tyson was impressed.

Given that they passed the "Tyson test," Lord and Miller have achieved something that even James Cameron missed at one point. Tyson said the real problem with Titanic’s ending was that a poor artist survivor like Jack should have tried multiple times to get him and Rose to fit on the door. But I do find it funny that Tyson was able to notice the constellations in that scene.

Project Hail Mary blasted off on opening night with $11 million domestically, which bodes well for its box office run Science fans who have already booked their tickets (or are thinking about it) may be comforted by Neil DeGrasse Tyson's scientific seal of approval. Looks like Phil Lord and Chris Miller’s mission for their movie was a success—especially if its box office continues to climb. You can watch the Andy Weir-adapted flick in theaters now.

The Superman movies starring Christopher Reeve will always be iconic, and to this day they still hold up. However, Neil deGrasse Tyson has pointed out a scientific fumble in one iconic scene from 1978’s Superman, and you should prepare to be horrified by it.

In the first Superman movie's climax scene, The Man of Steel misses a missile that causes a massive earthquake in California and suffocates Lois Lane to death in her car. A distraught Superman then decides to fly around Earth to reverse time, and by doing that, he successfully saves Lois.

While Superman’s plan worked in the world of cinema, astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson dissected the iconic scene with ComicBook at the premiere of Speak No Evil and the scientific flop is mindblowing! And no, it’s not about man’s inability to take flight:

Wow, who would have thought that being faster than a speeding bullet could have such fatal consequences? I’m completely horrified by the notion that Superman reversing time could have killed billions in real life. I doubt Superman would have gone through with his plan if the consequence of killing billions crossed his mind. However, in that tragic moment, his desperate actions were only done with Lois Lane in mind.

Along with deGrasse Tyson's claims, a University of Leicester study once concluded that the speed the Kryptonian hero would have to fly to reverse time would be 660,000,000 miles per hour, which is nearly the speed of light. Also, Superman would have had to “increase his mass 13.7 million times," which is impossible.

While I'm perfectly fine with the reasoning behind a big moment being "movie magic," there's no denying that the practical consequences of this stunt from Superman are terrifying.

Learning about Neil deGrasse Tyson’s Superman theory reminds me of an episode of one of America's beloved TV shows, The Big Bang Theory, when Sheldon argues with Leonard, Howard, and Raj about another important Superman scene. Sheldon raised a point that it was impossible for Superman to have caught Lois when she fell from the helicopter, because, according to physics, the hero’s steel exterior and his speed would have crushed her when she was caught. That wouldn’t be much of a life-saving maneuver, would it? Leave it to scientists to break down these inaccuracies.

It shouldn’t come as too much of a surprise that Neil deGrasse Tyson could find a scientific fluke in Superman. He’s the genius who roasted big movies like Armageddon and Terminator for “violating” science, and he called out how Tom Cruise would have been “splattered” in a Top: Gun Maverick scene. While scientific minds can easily point out what realistically wouldn’t work in real-life, hopefully it doesn’t ruin the fun of watching cinema classics.

So now we know from Neil deGrasse Tyson that reversing time flying around the Earth would, in real life, lead to the deaths of billions of people. Fortunately in the world of Superman, we can defy the laws of physics without the masses getting killed.

If you are looking to relive that iconic scene in Superman you can do so with a Max subscription or Amazon Prime subscription. Then, make sure to check out Christopher Reeve's documentary Super/Man, as it's set to hit the 2024 movie schedule on September 21.

Astrophysicist Neil DeGrasse Tyson never holds back on the scientific inaccuracies he finds in well-known movies. This is the same man who said Tom Cruise’s character in Top Gun: Maverick should have “splattered” in one particular scene, and shared what he finds nonsensical about Men in Black. So it shouldn’t come as too much of a surprise that he gives his candid opinion of how Armageddon and The Terminator “violate” science.

There are probably thousands of movies out there that fail to get science right. As a man in this field, Neil DeGrasse Tyson took it upon himself to set the record straight on some scientifically inaccurate movies. Four years ago on X (formerly known as Twitter), he thought the sci-fi disaster film Armageddon was the most scientifically flawed movie out there. But as he revealed on SiriusXM when his thoughts on Armageddon were brought up, he now has a new champion.

When you think about it, Roland Emmerich’s sci-fi film does seem to have an outlandish plot. Halle Berry plays an astronaut on a mission to stop the moon from trying to destroy the Earth. I’d like to believe that the moon will never lose control like that. But, it was still important to have movies like Moonfall around during the time of the pandemic. As the film’s star Patrick Wilson said, they’re “escapist” films that help you forget about the times you’re living in and just live in the moment of the movie. Sure, maybe situations like in the Halle Berry-led film may not happen in real life, but maybe that’s all the more reason to watch those movies on the big screen.

Armageddon and Moonfall weren’t the only movies the American author has roasted. He provided his own solution to stopping any large celestial figure from orbiting toward Earth with another sci-fi movie to tie into it, The Terminator.

Neil DeGrasse Tyson wouldn’t be the only scientist to notice inaccuracies with the Michael Bay film. Real-life astronomer Jackie Faherty has been asked about the depiction of science in Armageddon, and she said scientists would know in advance if a big rock were to hit Earth. In fact, they would know how to deflect it before it even reaches. So, you can say she’d be in agreement with Tyson. As for what the Death By Black Hole author said about The Terminator, it’s absolutely true that John Connor could have just time-traveled himself into 1984 and prevented his parents from meeting. But then there would be no John Connor or a memorable franchise for fans to see.

While Neil DeGrasse Tyson made some good points in his roast about sci-fi films like Armageddon and The Terminator, it’s important to go into these movies with a clear emphasis on fiction and less on science. It’s the only way audiences will be able to cherish these movies as a source of entertainment. You can currently watch Armageddon and The Terminator with your Max subscription.  

Within the world established by Barbie, Margot Robbie’s eponymous character, her fellow Barbies, the Kens and even Allan and Midge all hail from the brightly-colored Barbieland, where the houses don’t have any doors and walls, and there’s a complete lack of water, which has people on the internet freaked out. It’s never made clear whether Barbieland is part of Earth as we know it or resides in an alternate dimension, universe, etc. However, if we assume it’s the former, astrophysicist Neil DeGrasse Tyson thinks he knows where it’s located.

Like so many moviegoers in the past few weeks, Tyson finally got in on the Barbenheimer phenomenon, i.e. went to the theater to see both Barbie and Oppenheimer. On the subject of that first movie, Tyson, a man who’s well known for ripping into movies like X-Men, Jurassic World and The Martian, instead put his analytical brain to use figuring out where Barbieland would be positioned on our planet, and he shared his findings on Twitter as follows:

Obviously when one applies logic to Barbieland, the whole thing falls apart, whether we’re talking about the elements mentioned earlier, the fact that none of its inhabitants age, the list goes on. Still, Neil DeGrasse Tyson is a scientist first and foremost, so I don’t blame him for wanting to deduce Barbieland’s location. And to be fair, Margot Robbie’s Barbie and Ryan Gosling’s Ken did journey a long ways to get to the Venice Beach neighborhood in Los Angeles, California, so starting from the Florida Keys would account for all that time spent on the trek. Though that would then beg the question of why normal humans aren’t hanging out in Barbieland all the time, but that could be attributed to it being in a pocket dimension that’s occupies the same space as the Florida Keys, but vibrates at a different frequency… or we could simply not think too hard about this.

What is indisputable about Barbie is how successful it’s been. Even before its wide release, this comedy flick had earned a lot of positive reviews, but it’s now also proved itself as a commercial powerhouse. Barbie is now the second 2023 new movie release to cross $1 billion worldwide, following behind The Super Mario Bros. Movie. Obviously the hype for this movie won’t be dying down anytime soon, but it’s also been reported that Warner Bros. Pictures greenlighting Barbie 2 isn’t necessarily a sure thing given the deals that Robbie, Gosling and director/co-writer Greta Gerwig signed. But even if a sequel does end up moving forward, I wouldn’t count on any information being supplied that confirm or deny Neil DeGrasse Tyson’s deduction.

Once Barbie’s theatrical run is finished, it’ll likely be made available to stream with a Max subscription. In the meantime, you can look over the sublime details our own Riley Utley noticed watching Barbie a second time, or read the big issue that Tyson (and Elon Musk) had with a scene from last year’s Top Gun: Maverick.

Neil DeGrasse Tyson’s official job is the director of the Hayden Planetarium; however, most people on social media probably know Tyson as the guy who is a total buzzkill about movies. He spends a lot of his time on Twitter explaining why your favorite movie doesn’t make scientific sense, and now he’s turned his sights on the biggest movie of the year Top Gun: Maverick, and he’s getting help from Elon Musk.

The fact that Neil DeGrasse Tyson is only just now getting around to tell us what was wrong with Top Gun: Maverick would seem to indicate that he is one of the few people who never got around to watching it in theaters when it was busy becoming one of the biggest box office successes of all-time. 

The particular issue that Tyson has decided to tweet about is the scene at the beginning of the movie, where Tom Cruise’s Maverick is test piloting a supersonic jet. IN the end the plane breaks apart and Maverick has to eject. However, according to your favorite movie buzzkill, Maverick would never have survived the ejection.

I mean, I’m not an astrophysicist, but once that’s said out loud, it certainly makes some sense. Maverick has exceeded the speed of sound by a factor of 10, and it’s not hard to believe that an unprotected human body is going to have trouble moving at that speed, and then stopping suddenly, which is essentially what happens when Maverick pulls the ejection handle. Even jets themselves can have trouble with those speeds, which is something Tyson explains in a follow-up tweet.

It’s enough to make one wonder why Maverick’s plane even had an ejection option, since technically at the speeds the plane was designed to go, it would never have been much use. It seems that Elon Musk had a similar feeling, as he replied to one of Neil DeGrasse Tyson’s tweet’s to suggest a different mechanism should have been used for ejection, as it might have meant actual survival. 

Neil DeGrasse Tyson’s movie criticism encompasses Gravity and more (there is a lot of it), is at least interesting. It does often make you consider things in movies from a scientific perspective that most people probably don’t usually take into account. Sometimes, however, the guy can just get picky at a  CinemaSins level of ridiculousness. Tyson doesn’t stop his critical comments with the supersonic light, he also goes after the end of the movie, being critical of the plan for no real reason.

In the end, I doubt Neil DeGrasse Tyson is going to ruin Top Gun: Maverick for anybody. Knowing the science is interesting, but I’m not sure anybody was expecting perfect scientific accuracy from the action movie.

It was just about a month ago that fans of Star Trek found out that the series’ OG Captain Kirk, actor William Shatner, was set to be the oldest person launched into space, at 90 years old. While Shatner had made his desire to head above the clouds known for many years, he did also admit to some trepidation leading up to the flight. Luckily, for all involved, the October 13 space trip went off without a hitch, and Shatner and everyone else aboard returned to Earth safely. There were, however, a lot of questions beforehand about whether or not his trip was really a good idea, and Neil deGrasse Tyson weighed in on Shatner going into space.

As you probably know, Neil deGrasse Tyson is a respected and very well-known astrophysicist who’s become famous for being able to take our questions about things like the universe, space, and space travel, and break down the answers so that we can all understand these things better. Before William Shatner took his history-making flight, deGrasse Tyson was asked by TMZ if there should have been special training for the actor, and the scientist said:

While we all know that something like space flight carries an inherent risk, from what deGrasse Tyson said in his interview, it definitely sounds like that risk is a lot smaller than what it used to be, which is likely one of the reasons that those behind Blue Origin, the company which launched Shatner and his cohorts into space on their tourism rocket, didn’t seem to have any qualms about the nonagenarian fulfilling his dream to go where very few of us have gone before.

It probably also helps that these tourism trips are just that; little jaunts to suborbital space which last only a few minutes (Shatner’s entire trip reportedly only took about 10 minutes), where non-astronauts can get the opportunity of a lifetime. They don’t have controls to check on, experiments to do, or repairs to make. Aside from the anxiety most people would experience from being blasted into space, it’s now a short, relatively low-pressure adventure. Neil deGrasse Tyson offered further advice, and noted:

By all accounts, despite some shade from his former co-star George Takei, William Shatner was able to do just that, and made some wonderful history for all of us, and memories for himself in the process.

As the world continues to mourn Alex Trebek, there's also been some speculation on who would take over his mantle as the host of Jeopardy!. Some clear favorites are certainly towards the top in terms of odds they'll be the next host, though there's been a real concerted effort by some to put Levar Burton in the mix to help bring the franchise into a new era.

According to new information from Bet Online, that effort may be paying off. LeVar Burton, who is known for his roles in Reading Rainbow, Star Trek: The Next Generation, and Roots, is now the third most likely person in the eyes of oddsmakers to become the next host of Jeopardy!. That puts only two men ahead of him with better odds of getting the job, Jeopardy! GOAT Ken Jennings, and famous ABC news anchor George Stephanopoulos.

This update comes following a viral petition circulating to give LeVar Burton the gig, which as of writing has over 83,000 signatures. Though he has no experience hosting a game show, there seems to be a growing number of people who can get behind the idea of seeing it happen for the first time. Burton took notice of the petition and shared it with fans while expressing his gratitude for the consideration.

While it is true that LeVar Burton is the third-highest person on oddsmakers' list to host Jeopardy!, it should be stated that Burton's odds of becoming host currently aren't rated as entirely likely. Burton's odds of becoming host are currently at +900, which is better than the next man in line Neil deGrasse Tyson who has +1400 odds. With that said, George Stephanopoulos has considerably more favorable odds at +325, and Ken Jennings odds are +100. When compared to those two, it seems like the people determining bets do not think Burton are incredibly high.

Of course, that's not entirely Burton's fault, but because there are so many who think the job is for Ken Jennings to turn down. Jennings is the record holder of some of Jeopardy!'s most prestigious records and, as mentioned earlier, defeated other prominent players James Holzhauer and Brad Rutter to receive the title of Greatest of All Time. Jennings also recently became a consulting producer of the show in 2020, so one would think the transition to host would be rather easy.

Of course, just because it's easy doesn't mean that's what will happen. Oddsmakers are wrong all the time and, for all we know, Jeopardy! could end up giving the job to a relatively obscure newcomer the public is not familiar with. Really, we just don't know what will happen yet, so it's silly to count anyone out just yet, including LeVar Burton.

Jeopardy! will have some time to think about its decision, as Alex Trebek's remaining episodes are set to run until Christmas day 2020. Continue to stick with CinemaBlend for more on the franchise in the meantime, and for the latest news happening in television and movies.

After a months-long absence, Jeopardy! is back with new episodes, and it truly feels like some semblance of normalcy has been restored. Of course, there has been some chatter about who might replace Alex Trebek as host in the future. Trebek himself has joked that Betty White could take on the role, being younger and funnier and all (!). Yet the search goes on but, when astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson was approached about it, he revealed why he could never replace Trebek on the show.

Neil deGrasse Tyson has joined Bill Nye in becoming one of the many public faces of science, but is he ready to take on the challenge of hosting Jeopardy! in Alex Trebek’s place? While it’s hard to imagine anyone else in the role, some believe Tyson to be a solid choice. The astrophysicist appeared on The View recently to promote his show and was asked if he’d be game to host. Here’s what Tyson said about why he wouldn’t be:

It sounds like Neil deGrasse Tyson has his priorities straight, though I think most viewers wouldn’t mind if he popped in for a guest spot or two. He’s done his own fair share of hosting TV shows, including StarTalk and Cosmos: A Space Time Odyssey. Up next is hosting the long-awaited documentary series, Cosmos: Possible Worlds, on Fox. That said, I'm sure being an astrophysicist keeps Tyson busy, and his schedule is all booked up.

As for Jeopardy!, it would seem that the audience always has their eyes out for the next potential host. When Ken Jennings, the game show’s Greatest of All Time champion, returned to the series this season as a consulting producer and Jeopardy! ambassador, it led many to believe that he was being primed to eventually take over in Alex Trebek’s place.

It makes sense considering how beloved and familiar Jennings has become to fans of the show. However, as of right now, Ken Jennings is simply working behind-the-scenes, and viewers will see him appear in the occasional video category. And besides, Jennings isn’t interested in the gig anyway, at least for now. Not to mention that Alex Trebek believes he’ll be replaced by a female host (sorry to Neil deGrasse Tyson and Jennings). Either way, I sincerely hope all the “who will host?” talk will be put off as long as possible so long as Trebek is still around.

Jeopardy! airs in syndication, so check your local listings for airtimes. You can also check out Neil deGrasse Tyson’s Cosmos: Possible Worlds when it premieres on September 22 at 8:00 p.m. on Fox. For more on what to watch this fall, be sure to check out our updated TV premiere schedule.

Neil deGrasse Tyson has long been a notable figure in the science fact and pop culture field for some time now, often throwing out commentary on movies and television and what they have done correctly or incorrectly in regards to science. Now, amidst the Covid-19 crisis, the StarTalk and Cosmos star is sharing his viewpoints on viruses and society.

While Neil DeGrasse Tyson is generally known for pithy takes on pop culture, his thoughts on the crisis humanity is currently going through are deadly serious. He painstakingly talks out how a virus like the coronavirus is an even greater threat than others that humanity will face, noting,

In a lengthy interview with The Gazette, Neil deGrasse Tyson detailed further why viral spread happens quickly and why it will take cooperation between communities and even countries to eradicate the virus meaningfully.

The world is definitely more interconnected than it has ever been. People are currently at home with a wide breadth of information at their fingertips thanks to the world wide web, but one of the criticisms of this crisis has been that communities and people in varying fields cannot get on the same page about how to respond to Covid-19. From Neil deGrasse Tyson’s point of view, he’s asking people to listen to scientists and “the advice of science” in general.

Obviously, this is just the outlook of one professional in the scientific community and Neil deGrasse Tyson isn’t a virologist by any means, but his passion for science can clearly be seen in these coronavirus-oriented comments.

For now, to hear more from Neil deGrasse Tyson, you can catch new episodes of Cosmos: Possible Worlds on NatGeo, Monday nights only (the new season started on March 9). While theaters have shutdown for now, TV is still rolling, and you can check out what’s on with our full schedule.

With the emotional angles out of the way, are there any Game of Thrones fans wondering about the science behind one of the most shocking moments in the final season? Well, Neil DeGrasse Tyson has offered up an explanation for the penultimate episode of Season 8, in which Daenerys Targaryen claimed definitive victory against Cersei Lannister’s forces.

Sitting on her last surviving dragon, Daenerys decided to further her revenge by going on a wide-range rampage, ordering Drogon to blast King’s Landing to smithereens. Stone buildings exploded, and scores of people (including children) were murdered in the attack. How did dragon fire manage to blow up King’s Landing in the first place? Did Game of Thrones stretch science too far? Astrophysicist Neil DeGrasse Tyson explained why the show likely did not, telling Insider:

There you have it! For those who had conspiratorial doubts about the scientific probability of Daenerys’ Game of Thrones meltdown, Neil DeGrasse Tyson’s answer should resolve them. The key to the sequence being possible is that Drogon was not merely burning down the buildings in the way a fire usually ravages populated areas.

As Neil DeGrasse Tyson explained, it was a combustible action that took place, thus justifying what viewers saw and heard. Drogon blew a huge amount of fire and hot air into a large number of buildings with closed off rooms in them, leading to an array of explosions rocking King’s Landing as Arya and others on the ground tried to survive. Which is all the more difficult when hiding spots are blowing up left and right.

Daenerys’ attack inevitably led to the eventual demise of Cersei and Jaime Lannister. As Tyrion confirmed in the finale, the pair were crushed by the rubble when the Red Keep fell. Jaime's fate had been the subject of speculation heading into the series' ender, which might not have been the case had he exploded or burned alive.

Game of Thrones’ penultimate episode may have left many enraged for what some fans believed to be a rushed character arc. But whatever people think of the character's motivations, Daenerys and Drogon's ability to legitimately destroy King's Landing has been settled.

Game of Thrones had its issues with goofs and obvious mistakes, like the coffee cup and the water bottle situation. Daenerys burning and blowing up King’s Landing, however, was not one such error.

Daenerys’ actions marked one of the darkest moments of the series, in my opinion. Her rampage marked the forever fall of a character that many viewers perceived was a hero leading up to the mass destruction.

In the end, Daenerys’ crime sealed her own fate, as it also metaphorically signed her death warrant. Confronted in the finale with all the carnage she caused, Daenerys had no regrets for her actions. Following a talk with Tyrion, Jon Snow killed her as they stood in front of the Iron Throne, with her reign ending just as it began.

Game of Thrones fans have the summer to continue contemplating a penultimate episode that still has people talking. At least they will have some summer television premieres to keep them company while they do so.

How will the Avengers defeat the all-powerful Thanos in Avengers: Endgame? If you ask the internet, the answer to that question is easy: Ant-Man will shrink down and enter Thanos’ butt, and once inside, he will return to his normal size or, if he wants to maximize the splash zone, expand into Giant-Man, thus exploding the Mad Titan. This viral theory has gained serious traction, to the point that even Josh Brolin has addressed it.

Another person who has addressed the so-called “Thanus Theory” is astrophysicist and person who tears apart science fiction movies, Neil DeGrasse Tyson. The Cosmos host has some hilarious thoughts about the obstacles such a tactic would present for Ant-Man. Neil DeGrasse Tyson said:

Neil DeGrasse Tyson, perhaps best known for using cold logic and hard science to explain why things in movies wouldn’t work in real life, is here conjecturing about the fecal matter of a fictional alien dictator. Fantastic. He brings up an interesting point too, namely that Thanos is an extra-terrestrial and an ultra-powerful being and venturing inside him could pose some major dangers to Ant-Man.

The Avengers and Ant-Man don’t know exactly how Titanian physiology works, and Thanos especially, as a corrupted and powerful being, may indeed have 'powerful poop.' These are unknown variables, and as Neil DeGrase Tyson said on StarTalk, you don’t want to find yourself in that environment. His comments actually remind me of Armageddon. In that film the heroes too sought to destroy a threat from the inside, describing the asteroid as the “scariest environment imaginable.”

Venturing into Thanos’ butt might turn out to be a suicide mission for Ant-Man. He may be successful, but is his suit built for that? Being exposed to poop that powerful and malicious might be a death sentence, either from a biological standpoint where contact results in an incurable affliction or where the psychological trauma of seeing Thanos’ poop and the inside of his butt is too horrible to comprehend and Ant-Man’s psyche fractures beyond repair as a result of it.

Beyond the potentially fatal nastiness of this theory and strategy, Neil DeGrasse Tyson also believes that it is completely unnecessary and there are easier answers. He went on to say:

‘Whatever it takes’ may not need to mean that Ant-Man has to go in to Thanos himself. We have seen that the Pym tech in the films allows the shrinking and expansion of objects in addition to heroes like Ant-Man and the Wasp. So Ant-Man can just use something else to expand in Thanos instead of going in himself. See if he can borrow Stormbreaker from Thor, or maybe that Hello Kitty Pez dispenser from Ant-Man and the Wasp is still available.

Of course, that leaves things to chance, and this dirty job may be something that Ant-Man has to do himself to ensure that it’s done. You can hear all of Neil DeGrasse Tyson’s thoughts on the matter in the video below.

These are just a few of the obstacles Ant-Man could face in order to defeat Thanos. We still don’t know if he has protections in place against such an incursion, and one imagines that if he is aware of it, he can utilize the Space or Reality Stone’s to render the plan useless.

Find out if this theory pans out when Avengers: Endgame opens in theaters on April 26. Check out our 2019 release schedule to keep track of all the biggest movies headed your way this year, and stay tuned to CinemaBlend for more sophisticated discussions such as this.

Neil deGrasse Tyson has become a figure in pop culture thanks to his TV hosting gigs and his scientific commentary on things like movies and TV shows. Tyson has been off the air for months, however, due to allegations of sexual misconduct leveled against him. An investigation into the allegations took place, and Tyson is now returning to Fox as host of Cosmos.

Cosmos was originally intended to premiere its second season on March 3, but it was delayed indefinitely in early February. His Nat Geo show StarTalk was pulled from the airwaves as well back in November due to the allegations and the investigation. For his part, Neil deGrasse Tyson said that he welcomed the process and could recognize "the value of an independent investigation."

No premiere date for Cosmos has been announced just yet, but it will apparently return to Fox. The show will also air on Nat Geo. Neither Fox nor Nat Geo reportedly commented on the investigation, but Deadline states that the investigation did not turn up anything that would warrant Cosmos and StarTalk remaining off the air. In a joint statement, Fox and Nat Geo said this:

Allegations of sexual misconduct surfaced back in November, with three women coming forward to accuse Neil deGrasse Tyson of groping, unwanted advances, and rape. Fox and Nat Geo took the accusations seriously enough to launch the investigation, which apparently ran for months.

Neil deGrasse Tyson was open about his point-of-view on the incidents that resulted in accusations from the women. With regard to the groping allegation, Dr. Katelyn N. Allers came forward. Dr. Allers stated that she does not consider the reported incident to be assault, but still disrespectful to "female bodily autonomy." For his part, Tyson said that the action that Dr. Allers found objectionable was "simply a search under the covered part of her shoulder of her sleeveless dress."

His former assistant, Ashley Watson, is the woman who claimed unwanted advances from Neil deGrasse Tyson, and she quit her job after feeling uncomfortable when he extended an invitation to a wine and cheese evening. The rape allegation came from Tchiya Amet, who was a graduate student alongside Tyson back in the 80s. Her claim was that Tyson had drugged her and then sexually assaulted her, traumatizing her and throwing off her career.

We may never know what the investigation did or did not turn up, but the two networks clearly felt it was appropriate to bring Tyson back to TV. StarTalk will be back on Nat Geo in April, and Cosmos will return to Fox at a later but currently unspecified date. There are plenty of other viewing options now and in the not-too-distant future as well.

Science was set to return to primetime this midseason with the return of Neil deGrasse Tyson’s Cosmos to Fox and National Geographic. The Season 2 premiere was originally slated for early March, but that premiere date has reportedly been pushed back due to the sexual misconduct allegations against the host and famous science guru. Here’s what we know.

Fox and National Geographic are expected to postpone the second season premiere, according to Deadline. The Fox premiere was originally scheduled for 9 p.m. ET on Sunday, March 3, placing it in the somewhat unlikely slot behind the network’s animated comedies. No details are currently available and no official statement has been released from Fox. As such, no new target release window has been announced. For now, we can only wait and see.

The premiere date had been set prior to reports of sexual misconduct being leveled against Neil deGrasse Tyson back in November 2018. The accusations resulted in the launch of an investigation by Fox, Nat Geo, and Cosmos producers.

The delay is reportedly not due to any findings of the investigation, but rather that the investigation is still happening, and Fox and Nat Geo don’t want to make any permanent decisions about the series until the investigation is complete. Neil deGrasse Tyson also hosts Nat Geo’s StarTalk; that program has been off the air ever since news of the allegations against him broke.

The allegations that surfaced in late November came from three women, and Neil deGrasse Tyson was accused of groping, sending unwanted advances, and rape. Neil deGrasse Tyson responded to the accusations against him in a lengthy post on Facebook, in which he specifically addressed each instance of alleged misconduct.

In response to the groping accusation, Neil deGrasse Tyson states the instance was “simply a search under the covered part of her shoulder of the sleeveless dress,” stating that he only learned that the woman involved was uncomfortable with it nine years later, and would have apologized immediately if he’d known. This allegation came from Dr. Katelyn N. Allers, who said that she feels deGrasse Tyson doesn’t respect “female bodily autonomy,” although she does not consider it assault.

The woman who claimed that he had initiated unwanted advanced was his former assistant, Ashley Watson. She quit her job after feeling uncomfortable when he invited her to a wine and cheese evening at his place. Neil deGrasse Tyson stated that he apologized when she expressed her discomfort the next day, but she quit her job anyway.

The rape accusation came from Tchiya Amet, who attended graduate school with Neil deGrasse Tyson in the 80s. She claimed that deGrasse Tyson slipped her a date rape drug and then sexually assaulted her, which she says gave her PTSD and threw her career off track. In response, deGrasse Tyson said that it was “as though a false memory had been implanted,” as she could not remember what had happened that night.

Only time will tell what the investigation by Fox and Nat Geo produces and whether Cosmos will make it back to the air. For some viewing options now that Cosmos won’t be back, check out our midseason TV premiere schedule.

A few days ago, news broke that Fox and National Geographic would be looking into a series of sexual misconduct allegations related to incidents occurring across the last several decades. Now, Neil deGrasse Tyson has written a detailed post explaining the allegations and apologizing to the women for any discomfort he may have caused.

Previously, three incidents were listed: A woman who claimed Neil deGrasse Tyson groped her, a woman who said Tyson sent her unwanted advances and a woman who accused the astrophysicist of raping her in the 1980s.

In his social media post, Neil deGrasse Tyson chose to address each incident separately. Of the allegations coming from Dr. Katelyn N. Allers, the woman who is connected to the groping incident, Neil deGrasse Tyson says he did lift up the sleeve of her shirt to take a closer look at a planetary tattoo (there are photos of this happening), but his interest was in whether or not she had included Pluto as part of her tattoo, not her arm.

Of the groping incident, Tyson wrote:

Dr. Allers has previously said she did not think the incident was assault, but that she feels the astrophysicist doesn't respect "female bodily autonomy."

Speaking out about his former assistant Ashley Watson, who quit her position after claiming Neil deGrasse Tyson sent her unwanted advances during a wine and cheese get together after she drove him home at the end of a long day of work, Tyson says that he and Watson had become friendly and had conversations of a more in depth and personal nature during their time working together. He admits he did invite her to hang out at his place, where he says nothing happened. They ate wine and cheese together and he says he shook her hand, giving her a special handshake he specifically remembers came from a Native elder near they Grand Canyon.

He stated that Ashley Watson did come to him the next day and tell him she thought the wine and cheese invitation was creepy, whereupon he says he apologized, but that Watson decided to quit her position anyway. He says he thought they had ended on friendly terms. Per Tyson:

The previous 1980s rape allegations are also touched on. Previously, Tchiya Amet has accused Neil deGrasse Tyson of raping her after slipping her date rape drugs while they were at school together and that the incident later gave her PTSD and derailed her career. They were at school together at the same time and Tyson admits they had a brief relationship. However, he says of the alleged accusations:

Tyson closed by mentioning that Fox and Nat Geo, networks which air his popular programs Cosmos and StarTalk, are looking into each of these allegations. Both Fox and Nat Geo have said they will look into "the evidence" and make a decision accordingly. Neil deGrasse Tyson is saying in response that he "welcomes[s]" the chance for the networks to reveal exactly what happened in each of the three situations. He said:

Times Up has made many changes in Hollywood over the past year as famous producers, actors and more have been accused of various levels of sexual misconduct by accusers. Some of these individuals, such as Harvey Weinstein, have dealt with some legal troubles related to allegations. Others, like Chris Hardwick, have been investigated and gone back to work.

Fox and Nat Geo only announced that it would be looking into the allegations on Friday. We will have to wait and see how the findings pan out and we will keep you posted regarding the findings as soon as that information is available. The popular series from Neil deGrasse Tyson, Cosmos: Possible Worlds, has been set to air on March 3, 2019 for some time, but that date could change, depending on the investigation's results. In addition, StarTalk kicked off a new season this winter with an episode featuring Anthony Bourdain meant to pay tribute to the travel vlogger and chef. Currently, no decision has been made about the future of that series either.

If you'd like to look specifically into Neil deGrasse Tyson's word choice and everything he has said about each of the three alleged incidents, you can read his full blog post over at Facebook.

Famed astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson can be credited with bringing science into mainstream pop culture, offering hot scientific takes on everything from Godzilla to Game of Thrones and its dragons. As it turns out, Tyson also contributed his science know-how to an episode of Family Guy, but he didn't know it at the time. Yes, Family Guy creator Seth MacFarlane tricked Neil DeGrasse Tyson into sharing science thoughts for Family Guy, as Neil deGrasse Tyson shared in a fantastic story:

In the Cosmos: Possible Worlds panel at San Diego Comic-Con, Neil deGrasse Tyson shared the story of the time Seth MacFarlane asked him to lunch, prompting Tyson to clear his schedule and sit down for a meal with the Family Guy bigwig. At first, Tyson believed that MacFarlane was simply into science, which must have been a nice surprise. After all, as enthusiastic as Tyson seems to be regarding the application of science to pop culture, I'm guessing he was happy to carry on a conversation about pure science rather than TV or movies. As far as he knew, MacFarlane was simply a celebrity who happened to have an interest in the Big Bang!

Fortunately for Seth MacFarlane, Neil deGrasse Tyson wasn't upset at the reveal that their lunch had really been all about research for an episode of Family Guy. A less magnanimous man might have been furious to discover that his lessons were really for the sake of a TV show, but not Tyson. If Family Guy was going to do an episode touching on the Big Bang, Neil deGrasse Tyson had to be pleased that Family Guy was doing it right. Besides, he got a "science consultant" credit. The episode -- called "The Big Bang Theory" -- aired back in 2011 and followed Stewie and Brian on a mission to go back in time. It's not the weirdest thing to possibly come out of a Seth MacFarlane project!

Interestingly, Neil deGrasse Tyson contributed to Family Guy in a way other than as science consultant. In an episode that aired five years after "The Big Bang Theory," Neil deGrasse Tyson provided his voice. Viewers got to see an animated version of Neil deGrasse Tyson, and that's not something you get every day. Tyson can boast that he's been part of Family Guy as both a consultant and a guest star! Good for him.

If you're now in the mood to relive some Family Guy fun, you can find 14 seasons of the show streaming on Hulu. If you're in the mood for something more current, check out our summer TV premiere schedule. If you'd like some more Neil deGrasse Tyson wisdom, take a look at what Star Wars gets right and what it gets wrong in his scientific opinion.

Astrophysicist and author Neil deGrasse Tyson is known for being an incredibly inspiring orator who extols the virtues of science and exploration, while also being a huge buzzkill who tears apart our favorite science fiction films by explaining why they aren't possible. Neil deGrasse Tyson can find fault with even less fantastical sci-fi films like Gravity that appear realistic to the layman. So what does he have to say about the goofy 1997 sci-fi comedy Men in Black? Well, speaking at the Cosmos: Possible Worlds Comic-Con panel attended by CinemaBlend's own Jessica Rawden, Neil deGrasse Tyson took issue with the film's Macguffin. He explained why the galaxy on Orion's belt is not a possible world, saying:

Neil deGrasse Tyson touched on all kinds of stuff here, but basically, his reasoning that a cat can't have a galaxy the size of a marble on his collar is because scientists have went super small before, discovering the particles that make up the universe, and alas, there are no super small galaxies within them. Also at that super small scale, the laws of physics operate differently, meaning that a galaxy as we understand them would not form in the same way at that scale. In some ways, the nucleus and the particles orbiting it look like what we see on the macro level of solar systems and galaxies. So it perhaps wasn't entirely off base to consider a small galaxy a possibility at one point, but we have long since moved beyond that as we've gained better understanding.

You have to appreciate that in any debunking of movie science, Neil deGrasse Tyson is sure to provide a science lesson explaining the history of our scientific knowledge and exactly why something doesn't make sense. And even in explaining why something fantastical in a movie couldn't exist, Neil deGrasse Tyson still manages to fascinate us with his depictions of the wonders of real science.

Scientifically accurate or not, I always thought Orion's Belt was one of the cooler parts in Men in Black. It provides a MacGuffin to hunt, a great 'aha' moment and gives the cat more screen time. All in all a win win, I'd say. It's kind of funny too that in a silly movie with all kinds of crazy aliens and such, this is the one thing that sets off his astrophysicist believability alarm. Speaking of aliens, Neil deGrasse Tyson's new season of Cosmos, titled, Cosmos: Possible Worlds will, among other things, explore topics like extrasolar planets, astrobiology and paradoxical realities. Cosmos: Possible Worlds arrives on Fox sometime in 2019.

Also arriving in 2019 is what I'm assuming will be more scientific inaccuracy in the Men in Black spinoff. The spinoff will star MCU vets Chris Hemsworth and Tessa Thompson among the new faces, while also including at least one returning one. The Men in Black spinoff hits theaters on May 14, 2019. For movies hitting theaters a little bit sooner and probably riddled with scientific errors, check out our 2018 release schedule.

Neil deGrasse Tyson is a man who has spent a large chunk of his career connecting science with pop culture as a means to reach people everywhere. Some science fiction franchises have fared better than others under his discerning eye. The Star Wars universe has earned some flack from the Cosmos host for not being scientifically feasible over the years, but this weekend during the 2018 Cosmos: Possible Worlds panel at Comic-Con, the scientist explained that while Star Wars has gotten a lot wrong over the years, he feels that it is high time he gives Star Wars Episode IV a little bit of credit for getting one science concept right. Per Tyson:

A few years ago, Neil deGrasse Tyson shared a bunch of the things Star Wars has gotten wrong over time, which includes stuff like the way BB-8 is shaped and how that wouldn't work the way the movies show or the fact parsecs have nothing to do with time, making the famous line about the Kessel run totally moot. Star Wars isn't the only movie franchise or property Neil deGrasse Tyson has turned his critical eye toward over the time, but it is one of the most popular franchises and his scrutiny of the Disney and Lucasfilm property has garnered attention. So, although he has some issues with the ways Star Wars plays with science, he is more than willing to give credit where credit is due, in this case on Tatooine.

And in this particular circumstance, the 1977 Star Wars flick really got it right, even down to smaller details. As the famous scientist elaborated:

If you'd like to check out Neil deGrasse Tyson setting his sights on Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 or even Titanic, we have you covered. For more insights on science and humanity, tune in for Cosmos: Possible Worlds when it airs on Fox and National Geographic in the spring of 2019. And be sure to avoid quoting Han Solo's famous "under 12 parsecs" line if you are ever within Tyson's hearing.

It's been 20 years since Titanic first hit theaters, and in that time one of the longest lasting debates related to the movie has been whether or not both Rose and Jack could have perhaps survived the fated shipwreck. About a year ago, Titanic lead Kate Winslet even told Jimmy Kimmel she did think Leo DiCaprio's character could have fit on the door. However, now scientist and pop culture personality Neil deGrasse Tyson has explained the real reason he doesn't buy into Titanic's ending. Here's why he doesn't really think the door scene works.

If you've seen Titanic--and even if you're not admitting it there's a good chance you totally have--after the Titanic sinks into the sea, there are a ton of passengers left freezing in the water. Rose and Jack are among them, and happen on some of the debris that was thrown/came off of the ship as it was sinking. After one brief attempt for both of them to balance on the door in the water, Jack bravely shimmies off into the freezing water to give Rose a better chance. According to Neil deGrasse Tyson, that's bollocks. No human on the planet would try only once if survival were on the line. James Cameron's movie believes in romance and sacrifice, but Tyson told the Huffington Post he believes that in real life the will to survive would trump chivalry. Although he does not believe there is enough evidence to confirm Jack would also have survived, he knows they would have tried, and feels that is the movie's big failure.

When Kate Winslet spoke out about the famous scene a year ago, she stated under no uncertain terms that she thought Jack could have absolutely made it, noting,

Oppositely, James Cameron has stated before that there is no way that Jack would have ever fit on the door, calling out those who disbelieve his story and saying that they are "full of shit." After all, it's his story, and he's basically the expert on what happened. If you can't buy into the movie magic, Titanic may not be the movie for you. Interestingly, Neil deGrasse Tyson actually filmed an episode with James Cameron for StarTalk this season, but apparently they talked Avatar and not Titanic, so this seems to be the end of the debate for now. Regardless of whether or not you are team Cameron or team someone else, Titanic did end with love cut short in its prime. It could have been much worse, really.

If you hear the word Godzilla, you pretty much instantly get it. He is a giant lizard with atomic breath, and the ability to lay waste to an entire city. You love him, I love him, and he has become endlessly iconic on the big screen since his introduction back in the 1950s. Now, what if I told that you that a monster such as Godzilla could never exist in real life, because of his overall size and shape? Crazy right? There's science to back this up, and Neil deGrasse Tyson recently decided to drop some knowledge on all of us. He explained:

Well la-di-da, Mr. Scientist! Seriously, leave it to Neil deGrasse Tyson to ruin our collective fun when it comes to one of the most iconic Kaiju monsters of all time. The science behind why Godzilla could never exist seems quite a bit technical, but the basic gist appears to be the fact that the dimensions of the legendary reptile don't match up with how evolution would proportion a larger animal. If a monster like Godzilla ever actually existed, then he would immediately "collapse under his own weight." A giant monster could technically exist, but it would require much thicker legs to hold itself up.

Of course, because I am a glutton for punishment, I would also like to implore Neil deGrasse Tyson to explain why Godzilla's famous "atomic breath" could never work in real life as well. Please Mr. Tyson, you already ruined my childhood with your recent appearance on StarTalk Radio. Why not go one step further?

Then again, maybe it's for the best that a Godzilla cannot happen in real life. Based upon the destruction that we saw in Gareth Edwards' 2014 reboot (not to mention all of the action that we have been promised in the upcoming sequel), it sounds like a behemoth such as Godzilla is better left on the silver screen where the action is entirely make believe. The MonsterVerse appears to be coming together beautifully (particularly with the recent release of Kong: Skull Island), and will get even more intense once Godzilla and the giant ape duke it out in the aptly titled Godzilla Vs. King Kong -- which is set for a May 22, 2020 release.

Everyone's favorite (and apparently scientifically implausible) monster will return to the silver screen when Michael Dougherty's Godzilla: King of the Monsters debuts on March 22, 2019. Here's everything that we currently know about the burgeoning MonsterVerse. Beyond that, check out our movie premiere guide for more of 2017's most highly anticipated theatrical release dates.

Science becomes more and more advanced every year, but certain tenets of the science fiction genre remain consistent in movies and television. As a result of this, it has gradually become easier and easier to poke logic holes in even the most beloved sci-fi properties. That is exactly what Neil deGrasse Tyson recently did when he set his sights on Alien: Covenant and Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, and the result is nothing less than pure, unadulterated, geeky glory. Check out the video below to see for yourself.

I am sure Neil deGrasse Tyson is a nice guy, but that video from a recent episode of The Late Show with Stephen Colbert makes it pretty clear that you probably wouldn't want to go to a science fiction movie with him. Taking careful aim at Ridley Scott's Alien: Covenant and James Gunn's Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, the pop culture icon carefully dissects the inherent absurdity of a manned colonization mission to a remote planet without the aid of reconnaissance robots. Additionally, he points to the fact that Guardians fall into the age old trap of showing sound in space -- despite the fact that it's physically impossible to hear an explosion in space. He generally makes valid points, but maybe we would be better off ignoring some of those points and embracing the movie magic of it all.

Once he has torn through this month's most highly anticipated sci-fi debuts, Neil deGrasse Tyson then sets his sights on another major upcoming movie release: Baywatch. Oddly enough, it appears that a seemingly ridiculous sequence in which The Rock carries two refrigerators is not that absurd when we crunch the numbers. He is a big guy, so picking up two (probably empty) refrigerators should be no challenge for him.

Although Neil deGrasse Tyson is clearly having a ton of fun poking holes in these science fiction movies, it has also become abundantly clear that he has a passion for fantastical universes that lack any real scientific basis. The legendary scientist has become a pop culture mainstay in recent years, even appearing in films like Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice as a surrogate for the scientific community. Neil deGrasse Tyson has essentially become shorthand for "really smart guy that you can probably trust" in film and television, and there's certainly no doubting that he seems to love that status.

Of course, whether or not the science aspect of these science fiction films means anything to you is entirely subjective. If you are not bothered by logical holes in space-based adventures, then make sure to check out Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, which is currently in theaters, as well as Alien: Covenant, which will debut in theaters later this month on May 19.

We all love Neil deGrasse Tyson. He's the world's coolest astrophysicist. Unfortunately, he's also kind of a buzzkill. If you've ever seen him on Twitter you know that he has a tendency to tear apart the depictions of science used in movies. Now, the scientist takes a few minutes to ruin all your favorite movies in rapid fire succession.

It doesn't start out all bad. When discussing Ex Machina with The Wrap, Neil Degrasse Tyson seems to feel that artificial intelligence rising up and killing us all is somewhat unlikely, although, that's mostly because the way that we have actually been working toward AI doesn't really match what we see in the movies.

If we did create a fully autonomous intelligence, it would probably murder us all. From there, it all goes down hill however, as your dream that you might actually be an X-Man who hasn't discovered their power yet has now been dashed. According to the Cosmos star, gaining even low-level X-Men like powers through human mutation is impossible. Although, Tyson doesn't really explain why this is the case. Maybe he's hiding something.

The highlight of the video, however, is the exchange regarding The Martian. First, it's excellent to see Neil Degrasse Tyson give his interviewer a hard time for having not seen the movie. Seriously, if you haven't seen The Martian yet then there is something seriously wrong with you and you need to go fix this error immediately. The more interesting thing is that Tyson seems to give the movie a pass even though he admits they got Martian gravity wrong. When asked about the gravity being inconsistent, Tyson says:

This seems like exactly the sort of thing that we'd expect Neil Degrasse Tyson to go off on Twitter about, but he's apparently cool about it. It is an interesting footnote for the film. Apparently, when we see Matt Damon in his spacesuit we all understand that he's on Mars, but when he's dressed normally we forget that he's on another planet and as an audience we just expect the gravity to be normal.

Finally, if we ever figure out how to bring dinosaurs back from extinction, Neil deGrasse Tyson seems confident that they will absolutely cross breed into super dinosaurs like they did in Jurassic World and kill us all. That's just what life does, animals breeding and creating stronger forms of life that are better able to reproduce is just the way it works.

What are your "favorite" moments when Hollywood took liberties with science? Let us know in the comments.

The Ice Age franchise kicked off in 2002, and 14 years later, it's giving moviegoers its fifth installment with Ice Age: Collision Course. There a number of new character's being introduced in the new movie, like Jesse Tyler Ferguson's Shangri Llama and Melissa Rauch's Francine, but one of the more unusual casting additions is a astrophysicist extraordinaire Neil deGrasse Tyson. Most of the population knows him as arguably pop culture's most famous scientist, and he'll be spreading his vast knowledge in the new Ice Age movie as a creature who's...let's just say not all there.

Tyson will play Neil deBuck Weasel in Ice Age: Collision Course, and as you'll see if you head over to EW for the first look at the character, the two of them humorously resemble each other, from the hairstyle to his decorative vest to even hanging out on a replica of the Cosmos ship. Weasel will be a figment of Buck's (voiced by Simon Pegg) imagination who helps the main characters as they try to stop an asteroid from destroying the planet. That sounds right. If the Ice Age characters need some scientific knowledge on dealing with an asteroid (no matter how futile that may be), who better to turn to then a weasel who knows about the galaxy? The only thing is that since Buck is the only one who's seeing Neil deBuck Weasel, there might be something lost in translation if he passes along his imaginary friend's messages.

Over the last few years, Neil deGrasse Tyson has cameoed as himself in movies like Zoolander 2 and Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, but voicing an animated caricature is taking things a crazy step further. According to director Michael Thurmeier, it was simply an idea that came up in a story meeting, and while the creative team was intimidated to approach him at first, fortunately for them, he accepted the role. Once he was there, not only did he voice Neil deBuck Weasel, but he also provided some advice on how to ground the movie's science somewhat. According to Thurmeier:

Tyson's appearance is sure to be bizarre, but hey, that's par for the course with the Ice Age movies. Whether the kids watching Ice Age: Collision Course know who he is and understand the meta humor is less likely, but maybe this can serve as the first step towards getting them to watch Cosmos and get their science education on.

Ice Age: Collision Course hits theaters on July 22.

These days, it wouldn’t be a big science fiction film release without noted celebrity astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson chiming in and pointing out various scientific inaccuracies. He’s sounded off on the dubious physics of Star Trek Into Darkness, picked apart Gravity, and now he has turned his sharp eye on Star Wars: The Force Awakens.

There are some SPOILERS beyond this point.

The college professor, author, and host of Star Talk admits he’s more of a Star Trek fan, citing the harder science element of the series. He took to Twitter to expose some of the factual issues he had with the seventh installment of the Star Wars saga. His criticisms are all spot on, though some of them are bit obvious even to us lay folk, like how the was a noticeable lack of skidding on the sand and hard surfaces for the round droid BB-8.

The Force Awakens reiterates Han Solo’s previous claim that the Millennium Falcon, despite her junky appearance, once made the Kessel Run in 12 parsecs.

And Tyson points out the oft-stated fact that a parsec is not actually a measure of time but instead a measure of distance.

If you paid attention in science classes in high school, you know that sound travels as waves through air. You also know that space is a vacuum, where there is no air, hence, no sound. If the space battles in Star Wars were just shots of ships zooming around, blasting each other in silence, they would lack a certain gravitas, but Tyson still, rightly, points out the discrepancy that ships appear to make the same noises in space as in the atmosphere of various planets.

To power the First Order’s massive, planet-turned-weapon, Starkiller Base sucks the energy from a sun until it disappears. We all know that this, in reality, would be a very, very bad idea with disastrous consequences. But dammit it looks really cool, and gives the heroes a ticking clock looming in the sky.

I love Neil deGrasse Tyson, I think he’s a damn national treasure, but some of his movie criticisms are wee bit nitpicky. We get that cinema stretches the truth and is full of things are aren’t always strictly accurate, but this willing suspension of disbelief is part of the social contract we engage in when we got to the movies.

Such glaring flaws in the science obviously haven’t been an issue for moviegoers, as Star Wars: The Force Awakens has only been out for a few days, but continues to smash box office records, garner positive reviews, and delight fans of the saga the world over.

I don’t think Han Solo ever had this problem. Everyone’s favorite astrophysicist weighs in on how complicated makin whoopee at zero gravity truly is.

On a recent episode of his successful TV Show Star Talk, Neil DeGrasse Tyson truly walks us through the logistical issues with having sex in space, saying:

You really do learn something new everyday. I have to say, I get a kick out of watching Tyson try to explain step by step how to successfully have intercourse in space. It looks like you need at least a dab of kink in order to properly create the *ahem* friction, as Tyson calls it. That’s right, Tyson says that leather straps are a must in order to make like bunnies in zero gravity.

While Neil DeGrasse Tyson has been a leading expert on astrophysics and astronomy for years, he began to become a bit of a pop culture icon starting in 2006 with his PBS program NOVA ScienceNow. While this was stint on television was his first venture into becoming a household name, he gained further notoriety and pop culture status beginning in 2009 with his podcast Star Talk, which is currently still in production 6 years later. National Geographic has since produced a television series of the same name, once again starring Tyson.

Tyson has also accrued quite the Twitter presence since he has begun pointing out the inaccuracies in Space-based movies. While generally not giving opinion about the quality of the films, Tyson simply states the ways the visual team and director failed to be truly accurate in their depictions of space. Perhaps his most well-known twitter rant was the fact-checking of 2013’s megahit Gravity, pointing out errors in the depiction of a zero gravity environment.

I have to say I found this recent video extremely enjoyable. Watching Tyson struggle to get his point across while refraining from saying anything profane is hilarious, with his clear discomfort palpable...

Furthermore, the visual of space heroes like Han Solo carrying around a bag of leather straps- just in case Princess Leia was feeling squirrely is one I can’t get out of my head.

If we do ever plan on exploring Mars and colonizing other planets ala Lost in Space, the price of leather straps is sure to skyrocket- so get those Cyber Monday deals now. While you can.

You can always count on astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson talk about science in an entertaining way, and he occasionally applies his vast knowledge to the world of fiction. Recently he touched again on what was wrong with the science in Interstellar, and in late May, the Star Wars: Rogue One writers asked for his help on an astronomy question. Now Tyson has offered his take on who would win in a cage match between Batman and Superman, and in the right circumstances, he thinks the Dark Knight could emerge victorious.

We all know that Batman is at an enormous disadvantage going up against Superman since he’s a human without any powers. As much as some of us may want him to be, Bruce Wayne isn’t Bat-God. That’s why Tyson told Tech Insider that for Batman to win, it would require an "outside the box" situation. Tyson said:

In most stories, Batman doesn’t try to take down Superman with just his Batsuit and Batarangs given that…well, he’s not stupid. If he’s not carrying a piece of Kryptonite, he’s either donning massive armor, as seen in The Dark Knight Returns and next year’s Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, or using other unique gadgets to help level the playing field.

Instead of the Caped Crusader fighting the Man of Steel, Tyson feels that a better fight would be between Batman and Marvel’s Iron Man. In that scenario, Tyson gives the edge to Iron Man since Tony Stark created the Iron Man technology himself while Batman has "people in the back" (like Lucius Fox or ignorant Wayne Enterprises employees) working on his exoskeleton and other gizmos. You can watch Tyson’s full comments below.

This is just the latest insight Tyson has given on DC Comics. In 2012, he assisted the comic book company in finding a believable parent star for Krypton, and subsequently appeared in Action Comics #14 to show Superman where his home planet had been located. He was also heard in the Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice teaser trailer as one of the many talking heads giving their opinion on what Superman’s presence means for Earth, and recently explained his view on why the heroes are dueling.

While Tyson’s logic is certainly sound, moviegoers will find out how Batman and Superman’s first live action fight turns out when Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice arrives on March 25, 2016.

Over the course of a couple short years, Neil deGrasse Tyson has gone from an astrophysicist that was known widely in science geek circles to pretty much a household name. He's done this not only through his hit podcast (now late night TV show) StarTalk Live, but also by being a tenacious fact checker for Hollywood films depicting scientific concepts. Gravity, Interstellar and even Titanic have all drawn the attention and the scientific knowledge of Tyson, and now a filmmaker is actually seeking that guidance out before filming has begun. Either Chris Weitz is a bold man, or a damned fool.

Taking to his official Twitter feed, Weitz – the writer of such films as About A Boy and Disney's recent Cinderella remake – has asked for the following advice from everyone's favorite personal astrophysicist:

While Neil deGrasse Tyson is very outspoken when it comes to science in the movies, this has to be the first time we've ever heard of a writer contacting Tyson for his direct input into the script phase. The most we've ever seen is Tyson's involvement in the anniversary re-release of Titanic, as James Cameron invited him to correct the star field for historical accuracy. This is kind of cool, because if Chris Weitz is asking for astronomical advice for his Star Wars Anthology spinoff, this means that Rogue One could have all sorts of awesome science-intensive sequences.

Everything from the behavior of ships during climactic space battle sequences, to the possibility of a scene where the first Rogues need to navigate towards an Imperial site by using a star map, could all be very good scenarios that could not only heighten the reality of Rogue One, but also help the film stand up to the eventual CinemaSins inquisition it shall receive. Also, we can't help but feel like Neil deGrasse Tyson, for all of the hard work he will possibly be providing to the Rogue One team, will at least be offered a cameo of some sort in the finished product.

Unfortunately, we need to bring ourselves back to reality before we get too ahead of ourselves. The sad reality is that, so far, it doesn't look like Tyson has not accepted Chris Weitz's Twitter offer to act as a scientific consultant on Rogue One. Now this shouldn't be seen as a slight, as there's a good chance that Neil deGrasse Tyson is busy with StarTalk Live, as well as his duties as director of the Rose Planetarium at the Museum Of Natural History. Or maybe he just dropped the screenwriter a DM? Still, we could imagine this is the type of gig that Tyson would jump at, should he have the time. That is, if his allegiances to Star Trek aren't so great that they would prevent him from helping the opposition.

Star Wars Anthology: Rogue One takes formation on December 16, 2016.

The Batman versus Superman debate rages on. This time, however, astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson and The Daily Show host John Stewart weigh in on the topic, with surprising results. Neil deGrasse has an interesting revelation that pretty much sums up why the two superheroes are going head to head, and why it all comes down to Batman's attachment to the city.

Recently, astrophysicist and StarTalk host Neil deGrasse Tyson stopped by The Daily Show with John Stewart to discuss his latest project. But, when The Daily Show host broached the subject of Superman versus Batman, the conversation, which already revolved around—you guessed it—science, turned super serious as Tyson intellectually laid out his reasoning for the existence of the duel between Batman and Superman, a dynamic that may just play directly into the new movie Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. Basically it all comes down Superman not answering to anyone we know of:

Stewart initially brought up the subject, mentioning that the audience was debating the topic previously before weighing in himself. He then confessed that he didn’t see how it was indeed a contest because "Batman is just a guy with a nice belt", while "Superman is invincible, he is faster than a speeding bullet and he can fly." The Daily Show host then posed the question to his guest. Tyson’s answer was classic. The StarTalk host broke down his answer like only an astrophysicist could, first starting with his own set of questions: "who does Batman report to," "who does Superman report to," pausing only briefly to allow Stewart to answer each question as he built up to his point. Then the StarTalk host deduced for Stewart and the audience that Superman doesn’t report to anybody we know, unlike Batman who ultimately reports to the Gotham City. For Tyson, therein lies the problem, a likely setup for the new Batman v Superman movie, perhaps?

Particularly noteworthy from that very enlightening exchange between John Stewart and Neil deGrasse Tyson is that could he may have just given us insight into the plot of new Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice movie. To paraphrase the StarTalk host, people aren’t necessarily happy with the idea of some alien from another planet not having to "report to anyone that we know." Tyson is probably dead on with this clue as we’ve already seen in footage of the first official trailer that dropped last week. Remember the news coverage about Superman and the lines about "human beings looking for a savior" and "having a horrible track record of following people with great power?" Obviously, this could be problematic for Superman, that is until he is able to perhaps prove his allegiance, if that is even possible. Batman, however, may not have always had the people on his side, but he does have the cooperation of the city he serves, which is a big difference. Tyson just took the conversation to a whole new level. Wouldn’t you agree?

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice doesn’t hit theaters until March 25, 2016, but until then stayed tuned to CinemaBlend for the latest updates.

As the late night talk show circuit is in flux with hosts coming and going willy nilly, viewers looking for something more out of this world will be happy to know that genius astrophysicist Neil DeGrasse Tyson has set a premiere date and a stellar guest list for his upcoming series StarTalk. NatGeo has set StarTalk to debut on Monday, April 20, at 11 p.m. ET, so you can be sure that (insert weed joke here).

StarTalk, which is a small screen version of Tyson’s acclaimed podcast of the same name, will deliver an hour-long look at the world of science and space, as viewed through the pop culture prism that has made Tyson a celebrity in his own right. Each episode will be filmed in front of an audience at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City, and fellow beloved brainiac Bill Nye the Science Guy will be featured in a pretaped segment where he presents his own views on the topics covered, such as technology and Star Trek.

Speaking of the hit franchise, the first episode will take on the theme “Star Trek as Inspiration for the Future,” with series star and author George Takei popping by to talk about how the futuristic aspects of the show fit in with today’s society. Next up? None other than director Christopher Nolan, who will talk with Tyson about Insterstellar and how he peppers his films with his love for science. Will Tyson still have his initial opinions on the film, or will they have changed by that point? Comedian and Bob’s Burgers star Eugene Mirman will also be a part of that episode and others.

Seriously, StarTalk’s guest list over its ten-episode stretch is pretty extraordinary, and strays far from network talk shows’ celebrities pimping their latest projects. Later episodes will feature journalist and fellow podcaster Dan Savage talking about love and science, Huffington Post co-founder Arianna Huffington talking about the Information Age and communication, astronaut Chris Hadfield discussing social media in space, and former president Jimmy Carter talking about eradicating epidemics. Other guests include author and biologist Richard Dawkins, Twitter co-founder Biz Stone, NASA administrator Charles Bolden, and iconic TV producer Norman Lear.

This will be Tyson’s second attempt to bring science and knowledge to TV audiences en masse, as he was also the host of last year’s Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey. A gorgeous CGI-filled update on Carl Sagan’s classic 1980 series Cosmos: A Personal Voyage, the newer version garnered high acclaim, Emmys, and decent ratings. So here’s hoping StarTalk can follow in those intergalactic footsteps.

StarTalk will debut on NatGeo on Monday, April 20, at 11 p.m. ET, with encores airing every Friday night at 7 p.m. ET.

When it comes to the world of late night TV, a host’s skill set normally revolves around his or her ability to make people laugh. But for Nat Geo’s first foray into post-primetime, they went with someone who could amuse people as well as blow their minds with the ever-amazing world of science: astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson. I’m already won over.

Star Talk is partially based on Tyson’s podcast of the same name, which brings together science and pop culture for always interesting and informative stories. For the late night show, Tyson will be welcoming celebrities, comedians and scientists to discuss all things outer space and the universe. I think we can already expect Chris Hardwick and Wil Wheaton to be on the first episode, right? Maybe a hologram of Carl Sagan? I’m really hoping Tyson uses this series for some movie debunking as well, which he’s been known to do for science-heavy features.

The series’ episodes will be taped at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City, in front of a live studio audience. That’s almost the complete opposite of the last series that Tyson was involved with, Fox’s Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey, which was mostly just Tyson in front of a bunch of green screens with gorgeous shots of space on them. That show, which never quite soared very high in the ratings, was spearheaded by Family Guy’s Seth MacFarlane, so I bet we can expect him to make his way to Star Talk at some point as well.

That isn’t the only series Nat Geo is bringing to audiences, though. The docu-comedy miniseries History of the World will present a humorous and animation-friendly approach to educational topics, like the evolution of man and the origins of civilization. It’s being put together by the producers behind Silicon Valley, King of the Hill and Parks and Recreation. There’s no telling how many episodes it’ll end up being, but it sounds good to me.

And then there’s the Impossible Factual-produced science series Dino Autopsy, which will smash biology and paleontology together for what seems like a fun exploration of dinosaurs. And finally, the miniseries American Genius, which focuses on competitive rivalries between the brainiacs of history, including Steve Jobs vs. Bill Gates and Nikolai Tesla vs. Thomas Edison. The eight-part series will use both reenactments and expert interviews to show audiences how some of these idea-fueled headbuttings worked out.

Star Talk, History of the World and Dino Autopsy will all premiere later in 2015, with American Genius aiming for a spring debut. Which one are you guys most excited about?

In the realm of astrophysics, there is a man so esteemed that his scientific opinion is pretty highly regarded whenever a film that operates in that discipline is released. That man, as you may have guessed, is Neil Degrasse Tyson – the director of the Hayden Planetarium, as well as host of Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey and StarTalk Live. Tyson has not only sounded off on films like Gravity and Titanic, but he's also now weighed in on Christopher Nolan's outer space opus Interstellar.

The results are very positive, and when we say "very positive" we mean that Tyson's series of Tweets this past Sunday (compiled thanks to Entertainment Weekly) has America's favorite astrophysicist praising the film on scientific factors, such as its depiction of the theory of relativity and zero G activity. What follows is a couple of the choice tweets that Neil Degrasse Tyson broadcast this weekend (despite the fact that he saw the film in advance,) and it starts with this apt comparison to 2001: A Space Odyssey:

While scientific accuracy is Tyson's specialty, even he's aware that women are pretty under-represented in these sorts of movies. That said, he does make an interesting point about the film's main characters:

Out of all of the tweets that Neil DeGrasse Tyson dropped on the public, these last two are the best indicators that even he understands that the public might need some extra reinforcements for the plot as well as the science.

While Neil deGrasse Tyson enjoys films like Interstellar and Gravity, he isn't afraid to do his job with the material they give him. Considering that theoretical physicist Kip Thorne worked with Jonathan and Christopher Nolan to make the film as accurate as possible, it's no surprise that the former film fared better over the latter - though both had about the same level of involvement with the folks at NASA. The moral of the day: if you're going to make a science fiction film that's supposed to be grounded in hard sci-fi territory, make sure to hire an expert to help you flesh out the idea. Otherwise, you might be on the receiving end of Neil deGrasse Tyson's Hammer of Truth.

Interstellar is in theaters now, and The Science of Interstellar is in bookstores now. If you'd like to listen to more of Neil deGrasse Tyson's thoughts on movies, TV, and anything science related; you can listen to him at StarTalk Radio. And yes, he does cover superhero movies too!

Alfonso Cuaron’s Gravity has a spectacular weekend, posting an estimated $55 million to win the weekend box office and break some surprising records in the process. By most everyone’s accounts, it was a huge win for a brilliant movie. But not everyone was so easily impressed.

Noted astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, for example, caught Cuaron’s space-walk thriller and left with a few very specific complaints. Using the identifiable hash tag “Mysteries of #Gravity,” the scientist talked to his 1.4 million followers about the various issues he had with Cuaron’s film. It’s really hard to argue with just about everything that he brings up. I kind of feel bad that Tyson’s incredible wealth of knowledge took him out of the experience of Cuaron’s wild ride, but given his position, I totally understand. Here are a few of my favorite Tweets Tyson posted in response to Gravity:

Now, does that mean Tyson hated the film? Absolutely not. In fact, a Tweet he posted days earlier might have predicted how he’d respond to that question:

I’m trying to put myself in Tyson’s shoes. If Hollywood ever got around to making a movie about film criticism of entertainment journalism, I’m sure I’d take to Twitter and nitpick the hell out of it. Doesn’t mean I didn’t like it. In fact, if Charlie Kaufman ever gets around to completing Frank Or Francis, I just might get the chance. Until then, we can just sit back and enjoy Tyson’s informative, entertaining Twitter feed, which gives us yet another interesting way to look at Cuaron’s fantastic film.

Though James Cameron is a famous perfectionist who knows very well how much visual effects have improved since he made Titanic in 1997, he resisted the urge to tweak the film's effects when preparing it for a 3D re-release. So while the 3D conversion on the film is top-of-the-line and modern, some of the CGI-- the crowds milling on the deck, the steaming breath near the end-- may look kind of dated. It was all a deliberate effort on Cameron's part not to risk tweaking his movie to death, and he seemed all set to keep it exactly the way it was in the 90s… until Neil deGrasse Tyson came calling.

Tyson, the world-renowned astronomer, sent what Cameron calls a "snarky" e-mail pointing out that he'd botched the alignment of the stars glimpsed above the North Atlantic after the Titanic sank. Here's how Cameron said it himself to The Telegraph:

Obviously, this isn't a change that anyone other than an expert astronomer will notice-- which is why it's so delicious and wonderful that Cameron made the change anyway. As a mogul and a filmmaker with the unrivaled ability to do absolutely whatever he wants, Cameron can follow his every whim, and could very easily have used his famous temper to tell Tyson to fuck off. Instead, he bowed in respect to the scientist and made the change-- the only element of Titanic that will have changed at all. Compare this to how George Lucas has crammed the original Star Wars films with CGI and made the true original copies unavailable. Admire Cameron's restraint-- especially given that restraint is something you'd never, ever associate with James Cameron otherwise.

Here's a video of Tyson talking about the error if you want to see the nerdery happen before your eyes: