NavList:

DaveP, you wrote:
"1. That looks like a two day Moon to me, so the Moon should be about 26° ahead of or behind the Sun.
   Going on semi-diameters, the Sun and Moon are only about 1.5° apart.
2. The red glow on the undersides of the clouds at the side of the house suggests that the Sun should be lower than shown.
3. If the Moon was that close to the Sun, it would be hidden in Sun glow.
4. Either a filter is in use, or the sun is much lower. If using a filter, the Moon would be harder to see.
5. There's no chimney on the house for Father Christmas to get down."

Ha ha ha. Your point 5 is really the most important flaw in this so-called "masterpiece". There's going to be one very unhappy 'space baby' at the end of this movie!

Back to the astronomy, yes, I agree on all of the others. I had not noticed until this latest viewing how the clouds were illuminated from below. Good catch! Another small detail: the Moon is a little tilted... The line through the horns is not properly perpendicular to the direction to the Sun. Finally, in the category of artistic license, the Sun and Moon are much too large. This is normal in films though. If the Moon really was that large in angular diameter, and assuming the distance to it hasn't changed in four million years, then where is the observer? If we make some reasonable estimates of the size of the monolith, where would we have to be to see the Moon and/or Sun at those angular sizes?? I think maybe the australopithecines were digging a deep pit overnight! :)

Frank Reed