Three Salvadoran Nationals Charged With Possession of Molotov Cocktails in NYC
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand Demands Sen. Tommy Tuberville Apologize for Islamophobic Post
Vehicle Used in Attack on Synagogue Registered to US Citizen From Lebanon Who...
Trump Derangement Syndrome: Ed Krassenstein Cheers China's Ridicule of White House Prayer...
MS NOW Hosts Wonder If the Michigan Synagogue Attack Is the Fault of......
Old Dominion Shooting Suspect Previously Convicted of Providing Support to ISIS
Veep IRL: Ohio Democrat Sues Trump for Exclusion — Invitation Was in Her...
Tuberville Sounds Alarm on Mamdani's Ramadan Iftar as Threat—Mamdani Plays It off as...
Anti-ICE Dems Block DHS Funding Again As Synagogue in Michigan Is Attacked
Steven Crowder Taking ABC and Their Iran 'Slopaganda' APART Point-by-DAMNING-Point Is a BE...
Guy Benson Sarcastically Applauds Dems Who FINALLY Found Some Gov't Spending They’re Willi...
Senate Dems Pretend to Suddenly CARE About Gas Prices to Dunk on Trump...
Thune Advances the Save America Act After Trump Demands Results
The DESPERATE Way Eric Swalwell Is Trying to SPIN 'Fake Residency' Story, WOW,...
'Should Be Immediately Retracted'! Karoline Leavitt Shreds ABC News' 'BREAKING' Iran Threa...

Neil DeGrasse Tyson attempts to illuminate facts on another movie and people are less than bowled over by his 'science'

With Walt Disney’s ”Frozen 2” having become more successful a number of questions resulted. Why are people braving the winter weather to go watch a film about the frigid conditions? Why do the two female voice actresses switch characters to sing the songs? Just how many products can Disney brand to the film???

Advertisement

One inevitable question also with a film this popular arrives: How will celebrity astrophysicist Neil DeGrasse Tyson attempt to ruin the film with his cinematic hot takes? Tyson, as we have come to understand, enjoys arriving on the scene with a pithy science-based rejoiner for films to overexplain things and annoy fans. This time Neil delivers, but in far less impressive fashion.

This seems underwhelming. For all of the mysticism and questionable physics we witness, Tyson was only able to find an issue with the appearance of a character — in a cartoon?

Advertisement

This is a common issue with Neil’s entertainment quips — they only work if you refuse to understand the films are presenting an exaggerated reality.

This would make more sense than this descriptive correction he offered up. Considering the things that take place in this animated fantasy it seems taking scientific shots at appearances comes off as somewhat shallow.

Advertisement

There may have been a time when these wry observations were somewhat amusing. This is just half-hearted scrounging for something to post.

There is just one response to Mr. Tyson.

 

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement