Author Topic: An analysis of 1960's special effects Lunar footage  (Read 16663 times)

Offline AtomicDog

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 372
An analysis of 1960's special effects Lunar footage
« on: October 24, 2012, 09:02:53 PM »
A principal argument of Moon Hoax believers is that the special effects of the 1960s was good enough to convince viewers of the reality of transmissions from the Moon that were actually filmed in a studio on Earth.

I decided to put this theory to the test by analyzing a movie from 1966, made three or so years before the Apollo 11 landing, that had extensive scenes that were set on the lunar surface. So, gentle readers, I present for your perusal, the Jerry Lewis space epic “Way...Way Out.”

(I picked this film instead of “2001: A Space Odyssey” because the latter film made little attempt to simulate lunar gravity, while WWO used wire work and slow motion techniques extensively.)


As delightful as the study of interpersonal relationships is in Part 1, extensive scenes on the moon do not start until:

Part 2.

 

00:52 – Schmidlap throws papers at Hoffman and then kicks a book across the room.


14:20 – Again, no special effects used. Hoffman quickly marches back and forth across the room with no attempt to simulate lunar gravity.

15:30 - Schmidlap nails a right cross on Hoffman's chin. Hoffman flies across the room, hits the wall, and slides to the floor. Cute, but it is clear that his body oscillates on the wire that is holding him. Under true lunar conditions, if he was hit hard enough to fly, the unbalanced force on his head would have sent him into a cartwheel spin, and he would likely have hit the wall upside down and then bounced. Then, in answer to the radio call, Hoffman runs across the room instead of doing a straight legged lope, which Apollo video has shown is more efficient for moving at moderate speeds faster than a slow walk.


17:00 – Schmidlap again swings at Hoffman, but this time misses. Unbalanced, he himself flies across the room instead of tumbling, which would be the more realistic result of suddenly throwing himself unbalanced on the Moon.

17:15 – Lunar Lander descends rotating on a single wire. Exhaust billows in clouds instead of moving off in flat sheets.

17:44 – EVA scene. Slow motion is used for the first time to simulate Lunar gravity (why only outdoors?)  I didn't find it convincing. Instead of loping, astronauts used a high stepping walk.

22:53 - Why is Mattemore stuck on the wall? He's not magnetic.

24:37 – Mattemore climbs the ladder, exerting himself like he is on Earth.

24:50 – The station is on the Lunar limb. Kind of an odd place to place a station devoted to observing the Earth, isn't it?

Part 3.



09:10 – The dance sequence would have been a lot funnier if Igor was on a 1/6 gee wire rig.

09:38 – Igor splashes a glass of vodka; liquid falls at earth-normal rate.

10:13 – Once again, dance would have been funnier if a wire rig was used.

14:10 – No communications time lag between Moon base and Earth, pratfall at 16:13 would have been better with wire rig.

20:00 – EVA fight scene. Combination of slow motion and wire work. I doubt that Mattimore's swing would have launched him across approximately fifty feet of terrain, but if it had, he would continually tumbled instead of rotating 180 degrees and holding that attitude for the rest of his flight.

20:54  - Same criticism of second swing; also Mattimore is clearly oscillating on his harness.

21:10 – Mattimore is swinging on his harness at the end of his leap.


Part 4.



01:00 – After being hit on his head, Igor falls at earth-normal speed.


Conclusion: true, this film is a comedy, and scientific accuracy was not a priority in its production, but I believe that if more care was taken in simulating lunar conditions, the humorous aspect would have been enhanced. On the other hand, if the film's special effects were so easily seen through, it shows how difficult (read: impossible) it would have been to fake Apollo footage.



"There is no belief, however foolish, that will not gather its faithful adherents who will defend it to the death." - Isaac Asimov

Offline Peter B

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1273
Re: An analysis of 1960's special effects Lunar footage
« Reply #1 on: October 24, 2012, 10:35:11 PM »
LOL!

That must have been tough research!  :D
Ecosia - the greenest way to search. You find what you need, Ecosia plants trees where they're needed. www.ecosia.org

Offline darren r

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 233
Re: An analysis of 1960's special effects Lunar footage
« Reply #2 on: October 25, 2012, 09:08:21 AM »
Ah, but you forget, NASA and the CIA had access to CGI and Photoshop technology beyond even what is available today.

They got it off of aliens.
" I went to the God D**n Moon!" Byng Gordon, 8th man on the Moon.

Offline raven

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1639
Re: An analysis of 1960's special effects Lunar footage
« Reply #3 on: October 25, 2012, 11:14:27 AM »
Not sure about the aliens part, but I've heard the CGI claim made. Such as by, likely among others, tsialkovsky on the old forum.

Offline gillianren

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 2211
    • My Letterboxd journal
Re: An analysis of 1960's special effects Lunar footage
« Reply #4 on: October 25, 2012, 11:38:08 AM »
LOL!

That must have been tough research!  :D

It would have been for me.  I hate Jerry Lewis.
"This sounds like a job for Bipolar Bear . . . but I just can't seem to get out of bed!"

"Conspiracy theories are an irresistible labour-saving device in the face of complexity."  --Henry Louis Gates

Offline Sus_pilot

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 337
An analysis of 1960's special effects Lunar footage
« Reply #5 on: October 25, 2012, 01:44:13 PM »
LOL!

That must have been tough research!  :D

It would have been for me.  I hate Jerry Lewis.

To paraphrase Romancing the Stone:  You must not be French.

Offline raven

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1639
Re: An analysis of 1960's special effects Lunar footage
« Reply #6 on: October 29, 2012, 02:55:27 PM »
Another one worth analysing might be Countdown

Offline smartcooky

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1959
Re: An analysis of 1960's special effects Lunar footage
« Reply #7 on: October 29, 2012, 10:54:54 PM »
Another one worth analysing might be Countdown



OMG; a Gemini Capsule perched upright on top of a LM descent stage.



If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong.

Offline AtomicDog

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 372
Re: An analysis of 1960's special effects Lunar footage
« Reply #8 on: October 29, 2012, 11:09:35 PM »
Another one worth analysing might be Countdown

I looked for Countdown, but I couldn't find any video I could link to online.
"There is no belief, however foolish, that will not gather its faithful adherents who will defend it to the death." - Isaac Asimov

Offline AtomicDog

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 372
Re: An analysis of 1960's special effects Lunar footage
« Reply #9 on: October 29, 2012, 11:19:34 PM »
Another one worth analysing might be Countdown



OMG; a Gemini Capsule perched upright on top of a LM descent stage.






Ha! I doubt that a LM Descent Stage could carry the weight of a Gemini Capsule and its Service Module.

At least the producers had the foresight to put an RCS on the Descent Stage.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2012, 11:21:29 PM by AtomicDog »
"There is no belief, however foolish, that will not gather its faithful adherents who will defend it to the death." - Isaac Asimov

Offline Count Zero

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 380
  • Pad 39A July 14,1969
Re: An analysis of 1960's special effects Lunar footage
« Reply #10 on: October 30, 2012, 02:25:43 AM »
Ha! I doubt that a LM Descent Stage could carry the weight of a Gemini Capsule and its Service Module.

At least the producers had the foresight to put an RCS on the Descent Stage.

Encyclopedia Astronautica lists the LM ascent stage gross mass as 4,547 kg (10,024 lb), but the Gemini spacecraft as only 3,851 kg (8,490 lb).  Note that it lists the height as 18.6 ft, so presumably it is including the mass of the adapter module.

This doesn't surprise me.  The LM AS had to carry a lot more fuel than Gemini.

There were also proposals for landing Gemini on the Moon in a direct-ascent mission mode.  Although the Encyclopedia's Mark Wade unabashedly touts this idea as cheaper and possibly faster than Apollo, I have serious doubts.

For starters, how does the pilot land the thing?  Either he has to be flat on his back, or provisions must be made for him to reposition to see downward, and have a separate control panel for landing.

This brings us to the problem of systems integration.  The Apollo LM had all kinds of challenges associated with creating its control system, and that vehicle only had to land on the moon and take-off again.  The direct ascent vehicle has to do this, and take-off from Earth and navigate to & from the Moon and re-enter the Earths atmosphere.  Don't forget that the Gemini spacecraft (and the Apollo CM) were also aerodynamic lifting bodies (i.e. flying machines).  I think Wade seriously underestimates the challenges of packing all of this into a spacecraft smaller than the Apollo LM and getting it to work in a realistic time-frame.

Lastly, the Gemini lander would not have been as flexible as the Apollo LOR spacecraft.  I just do not see the space or weight margins for a lot of lunar science packages, and you can forget about a lunar rover.

Of course, in the Countdown scenario (i.e. landing is the only objective), we wouldn't have to worry about some of these considerations...
"What makes one step a giant leap is all the steps before."

Offline raven

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1639
Re: An analysis of 1960's special effects Lunar footage
« Reply #11 on: October 31, 2012, 08:34:53 AM »
Given the technology of the time, some kind periscope would probably be the best idea. Might still be for simplicity and power consumption purposes.
I wouldn't want to have to walk down that ladder though in a spacesuit without some kind of clip system.

Offline Al Johnston

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 151
Re: An analysis of 1960's special effects Lunar footage
« Reply #12 on: October 31, 2012, 12:13:30 PM »
Maybe the pool of astronauts would have been further limited - to those who'd flown one of these ;D
"Cheer up!" they said. "It could be worse!" they said.
So I did.
And it was.

Offline raven

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1639
Re: An analysis of 1960's special effects Lunar footage
« Reply #13 on: October 31, 2012, 01:39:06 PM »
Maybe the pool of astronauts would have been further limited - to those who'd flown one of these ;D
Apparently the Germans had a similar idea during World War 2.

Offline Noldi400

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 627
Re: An analysis of 1960's special effects Lunar footage
« Reply #14 on: November 03, 2012, 06:04:18 AM »
Where would they put anything, I wonder? Every astronaut who went EVA during Gemini reported having considerable difficulty re-entering the spacecraft. (Well, except Buzz Aldrin, who probably just wouldn't admit it.)
"The sane understand that human beings are incapable of sustaining conspiracies on a grand scale, because some of our most defining qualities as a species are... a tendency to panic, and an inability to keep our mouths shut." - Dean Koontz