NavList:

Some advice about geeking out at the movies:
"The point is not the actual [tech he may be using], but rather what the scene does mean about his character and to the story. Sure, it’s not realistic. But when you’re watching a movie, you’re not bothered by the fact that there’s a camera in this character’s private residence, or that by observing you may be a party to committing illegal acts. Or that time passes differently on-screen than it does in real life. Movies are a construction, and any code that appears in it is as constructed as the rest. It’s selective blindness to be bothered by this one narrative convention amid all the others."

Dood points there. This is from an article at slate.com: In Defense of Movies Ham-Handed Portrayals of Computer Code and subtitled "Yes, Lex, it is a Unix system!" And if you don't get that little comment, you're too young, too old, or you need to get your geek credentials refreshed. :) [refresh here]

It's always fun when they get the little details right. These are examples of "Easter eggs" (in the modern sense) targeted at those of us with expertise in the subject matter. Similarly in movies that portray a bit of celestial navigation, it's always fun when they get a few details right. But does it matter??

Honestly, it may be more fun when they get it wrong! :)

Now if only there had been some celestial navigation in "Jurassic Park". Then we might have more fans for our subject. Imagine Lex opening a book of dusty old tables and announcing in an excited whisper, "It's the Tables Requisite!! I know this!" And then she shoots a lunar, works it up on paper in fifteen minutes while her companions are eaten one-by-one by Deinonychus and T. rex. Hmmm... Maybe Netflix would greenlight this. Working title: "Lex and the Tables Rex". Roll out the red carpet! We're goin' to Hollywood!!

Frank Reed