WA Superintendent of Schools: It's Inaccurate to Say Biologically That There Are Only...
FAKE NEWS! Ro Khanna Goes Full Greta Thunberg With 'Detention' Stunt on a...
Randi Weingarten Being Harassed by Congress for Using Teachers' Dues to Promote Her...
FBI Calls MS NOW's Scoop on Kash Patel Being Called to the White...
Shattering the Irony Meter: Ellen Page Rants Against 'Vile Losers' Who Can't Accept...
Try Listening to Tim Walz's Argument Against Deporting a Child Rapist He Pardoned...
For Jim Acosta, Questioning Election Results Is Only 'the Big Lie' If a...
Zohran's Got Some 'Splainin' to Do: Mamdani Admin Gets Caught Setting Up Meetings...
Ratio Alert! Dem Rep. Jayapal Has Seen Enough of This Lawless Behavior (From...
DEMS IN CRISIS: Maine Senate Shake-Up Fuels Midterm Battle for America's Future
'What a Joke'! Look What the Calif. Secretary of State JUST NOW Certified
The White House Getting Security Upgrades Is All the TDS Crowd Needs to...
Jake Tapper Slathers Himself In Shame by Entertaining Rosie O'Donnell's Frothy-Mouthed Mad...
Graham Platner's Withdrawal Statement Is as Dignified as He Always Was (i.e., NOT...
‘Minnesota Man’: Guardian US Headline About Illegal Alien Child Rapist Is a Combo...

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