Duh Moment at WaPo: Fired Employees Baffled by Turned-Off Computers and Door Badges
Born in America, Trained in America, Sold Out to Commie China: NBC Can't...
Joy Reid Says MSNBC Hosts Were Not Allowed to Lie Due to Journalistic...
Lame Claim: Governor Tim Walz Says Forget the Feds, Prosecuting Fraud in Minnesota...
Scott Jennings Says Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear Proved He’s No Moderate Democrat While...
Woman Says If You Are White, You Cannot Trust Your Own Thinking on...
Facelifts and ‘Fascist’ Grift: Lefty Podcast Jennifer Welch Cuts Promo Ad for Upcoming...
Attorney Freezes When Asked How His Client Returned to $2.3 Million Mansion She’d...
Team USA Curler Would Be Remiss Not to Mention What’s Going on in...
NBC News: Lawyer Says Toddler Returned to ICE Detention and Denied Prescription Medication
Lawless Left Strikes Again: Minnesota Agitators Swarm ICE, Try to Free Massive Meth...
Two Philadelphia Men Plead Guilty to $3.5 Million in ‘Fraud Tourism’ in Minnesota
Hollywood Reporter Tells How Bad Bunny Became the Celebrity Who Finally Broke Trump
'Just a Decision to Steal': FL Teachers Union Execs Sentenced to Prison After...
Rep. Shri Thanedar Tells CBP Commissioner ‘You Better Hope You Get Pardoned’

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