More info on the movie may be found here: http://www.sunshinedna.com/

I'll be interested to see the BA's review of this one.

The lady who did the blog is married to the film's science advisor and has posted on the BAUT a few times. She said that her husband was brought on board after Garland had already written the script, so there may not have been a hell of a lot he could change. Given the howling scientific inaccuracies in the script for '28 Days Later' (also written by Alex Garland), the story for this movie represents an improvement, I think.

As far as your comments go, antoniseb, I'd wondered about those issues myself. I'm guessing that some artistic license was taken to move the plot along, as a 7-year journey through the sun would not be very interesting to watch.

Frankly, I'm really looking forward to this movie, scientific bloopers notwithstanding. Whatever your opinion of the accuracy of the science in his scripts, you have to admit that Alex Garland knows how to tell an engrossing story. '28 Days Later' was outstanding, despite its flaws.

__________________
The dose makes the poison--Paracelsus (1493-1541) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paracelsus

I don't know. That's why I'm asking--Noclevername

Intelligence may not be clearly defined, but you know stupid when you see it--Noclevername

Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowledge--Carl Sagan (1934-1996)