If betelgeuse were to go supernova in the next few decades, what should we do to increase the chance of getting to watch it happen with our own eyes?

reddit.com › r › space › comments › 17068lu › if_betelgeuse_were_to_go_supernova_in_the_next

Step 1: don't die before it happens Step 2: there will be so many notifications that a neutrino burst has been detected that you will have had to fail at Step 1 to miss it. Answer from Jupiter3840 on reddit.com

reddit.com › r/movies › official discussion - supernova [spoilers]

r/movies on Reddit: Official Discussion - Supernova [SPOILERS]

February 20, 2021 -

Poll

If you've seen the film, please rate it at this poll

If you haven't seen the film but would like to see the result of the poll click here

Rankings

Click here to see the rankings of 2021 films

Click here to see the rankings for every poll done

Summary:

Sam and Tusker are traveling across England in their old RV to visit friends, family and places from their past. Since Tusker was diagnosed with dementia two years ago, their time together is the most important thing they have.

Director:

Harry Macqueen

Writers:

Harry Macqueen

Cast:

Colin Firth as Sam
Stanley Tucci as Tusker
Pippa Haywood as Lilly
Peter MacQueen as Clive
Nina Marlin as Charlotte
Ian Drysdale as Paul
Sarah Woodward as Sue
James Dreyfus as Tim

-- Rotten Tomatoes: 87%

Metacritic: 73

VOD: Regular VOD

Watched this on Tuesday, only saw one trailer and the Sunday morning interview with Tucci and instantly wanted to see the movie. It’s really quiet and beautiful. Tucci and Firth have great chemistry and know it’s controversial with non lgbtq actors in those roles but liked that they weren’t trying to explicitly be a film about a gay couple it was just about the relationship that shouldn’t be polarizing in any way. Wish the Oscars race for best supporting actor wasn’t so stacked, because Tucci needs to be honored with an academy award for his long underrated career in film. It’s a really beautiful little film that everyone should check out.

I love that at the start of production Stanley & Colin were cast in each other’s roles but then decided to swap. Each are absolutely perfect. Such a beautiful movie.

reddit.com › r/damnthatsinteresting › the largest supernova in a decade just exploded. i was lucky enough to photograph it.

r/Damnthatsinteresting on Reddit: The largest supernova in a decade just exploded. I was lucky enough to photograph it.

January 7, 2023 - ... Images I photographed last week and then last night show the sudden appearance of a supernova in M101, the Pinwheel Galaxy. SN 2023ixf is a Type II supernova — the catastrophic destruction of an aging supergiant star responsible for the ...

Videos

r/kpop on Reddit: IVE X David Guetta - Supernova Love

aespa - Supernova (The First Take) : r/kpop

November 30, 2023

r/kpop on Reddit: aespa - Supernova

February 13, 2024

reddit.com › r/telescopes › supernova

r/telescopes on Reddit: Supernova

June 13, 2023 -

There’s going to be a nova explosion between now and September and since it’s once in a life time I want to experience it. It can be seen with naked eyes but I want a closed detailed experience. Any tips with what type of simple telescope I can see it, any locations where it would be better seen

It's a nova, not a supernova. It's expected to be around magnitude 2.0, that means that although it's easily visible to the naked eye from a city, it won't be particularly eye-catching.

It's good to know that since a nova is a kind of star, a telescope will make it appear brighter but not larger. You won't be able to see the surface of it or other details.

The nova is located in the constellation of Corona Borealis, so it's easily visible from the northern hemisphere and from most of the southern. It's visible all through the night until September.

I have listed a few decent beginner telescopes on my website. The pinned quick-guide in this sub also has nice info about choosing your first telescope.

Unless you’re an astrophysicist, it’s really not gonna be a big deal to see visually

reddit.com › r/space › if betelgeuse were to go supernova in the next few decades, what should we do to increase the chance of getting to watch it happen with our own eyes?

r/space on Reddit: If betelgeuse were to go supernova in the next few decades, what should we do to increase the chance of getting to watch it happen with our own eyes?

October 5, 2023 -

I've been watching YouTube videos about how there's a chance that betelgeuse could go supernova within the next century. The idea of watching a star going supernova with my own eyes has captivated me and i would give literally anything to be lucky enough to see it happen.

One youtube video mentioned that we would actually have some amount of notice when it was about to pop and that people could actually know when to look at it so they can see it happen. Does anyone have any details on this? How much warning are we talking about? Minutes? Hours? Weeks? I want to do everything in my power to be able to witness this event should we be lucky enough to have it happen soon.

EDIT: do any of you guys realize how silly you look when you say "acktually betelgeuse is 600ly away so it would have to go supernova 600 years ago for you to see it now" ?

EDIT: also it turns out that the observation that this theory comes from was most likely flawed so unfortunately betelguese will most likely not go supernova in our lifetimes

Step 1: don't die before it happens Step 2: there will be so many notifications that a neutrino burst has been detected that you will have had to fail at Step 1 to miss it.

Say its name three times and it will be showtime

reddit.com › r/kenya › what sites do you use to stream movies, series etc.

r/Kenya on Reddit: What sites do you use to stream movies, series etc.

January 15, 2022 -

The site I have been using to stream has become unreliable. Any one of you know some reliable sites I could use Thanks

Fmovies.to Cmovies.ac

reddit.com › r/askscience › during a supernova, what process results in all of the energy released?

r/askscience on Reddit: During a supernova, what process results in all of the energy released?

April 25, 2014 -

I understand that a supernova is a star collapsing upon itself, but don't understand what causes all of that energy to be released.

Main sequence stars generate energy due to gravity crushing down matter into a close space (resulting in fusion). Is the energy released during a super nova just this on a much grander scale (i.e. a massive fusion explosion?) If this is the case, then why are black holes so stable and don't experience super novas too.

I want to expand a bit on u/Eulerslist 's answers. Everything comes down to Gravity. To address your question in the description: no, the source of the energy and light of a supernova is different in principle from that of a stable star. When the core is stable, gravity provides inward pressure that crushes and compresses the gas its composed of. From basic chemistry, many have likely learned PV=nRT, describing the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. The key to get from this is if you increase the pressure, you increase the temperature. The gravitational pressure being exerted is immense, and without sufficent outward force to balance it out, it would be crushed into a black hole immediately (if sufficiently heavy). This outward force is generated by what can be thought of as a continuous series of Hyrdogen Bomb explosions going on in the core (for main phase; don't get too bogged down in the details). These fusion reactions going on in the core generate a lot of heat. The core is very hot. 15,000,000K. Or C. Yes, at that temperature the difference between Kelvin and Celsius is negligible, and if you want to correct me, shut up. This heat propagates out through the whole star, but it is only hot enough to fuse hydrogen in the core. The outside of the sun is a balmy 5,000-6,000K. As anyone who has played with electric stoves or toasters knows, hot shit glows, and hotter shit glows brighter. That's where the sun's light comes from. It's the blackbody radiation of the outer-most layer of the star just because it's glowing hot, not light directly from the fusing core like some people imagine. Why the long preface? To explain that the light is kind of similar, and kind of different from steady light you get from a stable star. When you run out of fuel, you cut off that outward force that counters gravity. The star begins to collapse. Depending on where you are in its life and its size, the core may reach a new, hotter temperature that is sufficient to fuse something new and exciting, or it may pass a point of no return, and not generate enough force. The star begins to truly collapse. What is that like? Well, it's like of like dropping each atom of the star from its surface and letting it fall until it collides with the core. Kind of. Up to an integration factor. Energetically, it's a bit like slamming two stars together in a head-on collision. The biggest difference is the symmetry, which makes the collapse so much more devastating. When two stars slam together (this virtually never ever ever ever actually happens in space), they can just blast a lot of this material off to the side, in the plane of the collision, reducing a lot of the destructive potential. Not so with a mostly symmetrical, unilateral collapse. So, the surface of the star falls towards the center in freefall, accelerating like a skydiver falling towards the sun, but looking more like like the surface of an inflated balloon that just had all of its gas vanish. It's now just a giant ball of gas, falling in on itself, Fast. Accelerating under a star's gravity towards the center. Then it, more or less, slams into a brick wall and the formation of a Neutron Star. This is getting a bit long, so let me finish up. The energy indeed comes from Gravity, and is released when the star more or less slams into itself like a skydiver without a parachute. A supernova can outshine a galaxy for ~2 weeks, despite the fact that it releases about 99% of its energy in the form of invisible neutrinos. When the collapsed core forms a neutron star, an immense number of neutrinos are released, which batters the outer layers and blasts them away into space. Neutrinos are weakly-interacting, and typically their presence is literally undetectable, but in large quantities with large energy, (pardon the cheesy line) They Can Move Stars. See u/starslayer67 's comment below for more information. Edit: It's been a while since I TA'd an astrophysics class. If anyone has additions or corrections, please post. Edit 2: I've updated some information thanks to u/starslayer67

Simple as i can make it; The collapse frees a lot of gravitational energy which rapidly increases energy density in the core layers. The mass of all the material 'above' restricts the normal process of expansion due to increased pressure balancing the increase in energy. In a larger star, this accelerates the fusion process so that more energy is produced than can be absorbed, even by the formation of elements heavier than iron, and by the time the process reverses, enough energy has been concentrated in the core that the outer layers are blown away violently.

reddit.com › r/astronomy › what would be the idea distance for a supernova to occur according to astronomers?

r/Astronomy on Reddit: What would be the idea distance for a Supernova to occur according to Astronomers?

January 15, 2024 -

A recent excellent xkcd jokingly plotted the distance from a supernova to how excited Astronomers would be, from very very dead, to ecstatic, to run of the mill. I was wondering what the ideal distance would actually be with current instrumentation? How significant would the data? I was also wondering how much disruption you guys would consider worth it to get excellent data?

Ideal distance would be 50-100 light years away (depending on the size and type of star) before it would be problematic for our planet. Good news - Betelgeuse is 642.5 light-years away from Earth. If Betelgeuse were to go supernova, it would be quite a spectacle! Imagine looking up at the night sky and seeing something as bright as the full moon, visible in the daytime. This brilliant display would be visible even in daylight. But don't worry, even with this cosmic fireworks show, we'd be perfectly safe here on Earth, given Betelgeuse's distance of over 600 light-years. It would however pose a challenge for nocturnal creatures who require darkness for safety. It would be 'full moon light' for almost a year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_supernova_observation In the year 185 CE, astronomers recorded the appearance of a bright star in the sky, and observed that it took about eight months to fade from the sky. It was observed to sparkle like a star and did not move across the heavens like a comet.[3][4] These observations are consistent with the appearance of a supernova,[4][2] and this is believed to be the oldest confirmed record of a supernova event by humankind. SN 185 may have also possibly been recorded in Roman literature, though no records have survived.[10] The gaseous shell RCW 86 is suspected as being the remnant of this event, and recent X-ray studies show a good match for the expected age.[11] It was also recorded in the Book of the Later Han, which told the history of China from 25 to 220 AD.[12] I was also wondering how much disruption you guys would consider worth it to get excellent data? Is the puzzling star Betelgeuse going to explode in our lifetime after all? https://www.space.com/betelgeuse-supernova-in-our-lifetime-study-unsure

reddit.com › r/theouterworlds › what are some major tips for supernova?

r/theouterworlds on Reddit: What are some major tips for supernova?

May 21, 2023 -

not sure if i want to do supernova yet, got my final mission up, cleaning some last dlcs missions for the time being.

so, what are some major/crucial tips for supernova? survivability? build or perk? will most likely be using AR.

also, how to delete save files on PS5? i have a lot of them and just feel unorganized, went to system save files but, it only gives me the option to delete all saves of the game as a package!!

Recently platted the game.

Supernova was a really only hard the first few hours.

-Yes you can save. Fast traveling to your ship creates an auto save in the location you traveled from.

-Invest in long guns initially. Tinker them early. Use the rifle to pick off enemy groups.

-Set companions to passive, before every encounter have them positioned far back. Permadeath is on for them. This is a non issue later on.

-Dialog options, hack, security gets you out of thick situations.

-Invest in determination to help your companions HP.

-Tinker armor early on.

XBone player here.

Pausing the game, you can select load game or save game and then delete save files from there. You can have up to 100 manual saves and 3 auto saves.

Not sure if the ps5 has that for an option.

As for supernova.

Loot, steal, and take everything you can. Don’t get caught.

The botanical labs have mock apple trees and you can take the mock apples on the ground. There is some in the storage closets on the sides of the main lab building, I think I got around 50 mock apples. Then you don’t have to worry about hunger for a while.

As soon as I have enough bits, which the price depends on your highest dialogue skill and your reputation, I head to the botanical labs and go to Stefan’s store. I buy the Fiver and tinker it as high as I can. It has the same damage as a vermin, but shoots as fast as a revolver. The only downside is it has the super scoper sight, which can be tough in certain situations. If you send the power to edgewater, you won’t be able to buy it, so buy it before you divert the power. The fiver carries me to the groundbreaker, then it gets too expensive to tinker.

You can sleep on the cot in the hold of the unreliable before it gets powered up. Remember to manual save while you’re on the ship. Every time.

The hardest part of the game is gathering gear, gathering supplies, and leveling up a few times for perks and skills. By the time you leave the emerald vale the game should get easier.

Hope this helps.

Find elsewhere

Google Bing Mojeek

reddit.com › r/movies › supernova | official trailer

r/movies on Reddit: SUPERNOVA | Official Trailer

September 10, 2019 - The characters will realize our sun doesn't have enough mass to go supernova and so we'll get a happy ending. I'm sure this film will have a happy ending, right?

reddit.com › r/astronomy › have we observed a supernova that we know has resulted in the formation of a black hole?

r/Astronomy on Reddit: Have we observed a supernova that we know has resulted in the formation of a black hole?

June 22, 2024 - The most massive stars (40 solar masses and up) are thought to collapse directly into black holes without producing any kind of explosion, essentially blinking out of existence, but this has never been observed due to how rare these stars are. ... If its part of a binary star system, then the binary system will still have the same dynamics even though one star has turned into a stellar black hole. ... Coming from a layman, but my understanding is that currently we cannot observe solar mass black holes directly, we only captured a couple of supermassive ones and these are def not created during a supernova.

reddit.com › r/movies › supernova a film released an early 2000 film with quite the backstory

r/movies on Reddit: Supernova a film released an early 2000 film with quite the backstory

August 20, 2024 -

The film dates back to 1988 when the writer William Malone sold the idea and called it Hellraiser in space. The movie sat around a bit and had difficulty getting into production. The original title was dead star and H.R. Giger did some paintings for it. The movie finally entered production in the late 90s with indie directtor Geoffrey Wright attached he had directed several indie hits like the fantastic film Romper Stomper. He would soon quit two months into principal photography after disagreements with MGM.

Walter Hill was brought in and replaced him and was really excited to work on a big horror space epic and imagined it to be this grotesque makeup and effects driven film. Principal photography was mostly finished but much of the effects work wasn't done when MGM decided they wanted to show a rough cut of what they had to test audiences and Walter Hill was firmly against this saying that it was going to fail because they were showing a sci fi horror film without any effects or horror elements. Walter Hill would soon leave after 24 weeks of editing a rough cut and MGM would show the film to test audiences and they would fail.

Jack Scholder a director who has made horror and sci fi films comes aboard for more filming and editing to be done, but now the studio wants a hip sexy sci fi film. Jack Sholder would heavily re-edit the film and shoot new footage and the new cut would be test screened with better results, the new management at MGM is still unhappy with the film and orders more reshoots and more editing, they come back to Walter Hill who wants more time and money to finish and he is turned down. So in comes Francis Ford Coppola who they hire to do some heavy editing. The studio wants a PG 13 rating, which Francis Coppola's version doesn't get.

Eventually the movie gets released in January of 2000 with all the makeup effects shots deleted and heavily cut for a PG13. There are some bizarre trailers made that make it looks like a sci fi comedy with a light hearted narrator saying things like if you can't stand the heat get out of the universe. The first trailer also has I just want to fly playing in the trailer for some reason. Also much of the trailer features scenes and some of the make up effects that doesn't happen in the final film. It cost between 60 million and 90 million to make and was a huge dud.

I saw the movie years ago when I rented it and the movie had no real bite to it some of the ideas were there but it was all really routine and the huge back story starting come out in the weeks and months after the movie was released. There were a lot of deleted scenes on the DVD showing that the film could have at least been a somewhat better movie

I saw this in theaters back when I was a projectionist. I was paid to watch it and still wanted my money back.

Feel like you're leaving out the best part of the re-edits: the sex scene between Angela Bassett and James Spader was re-edited from a sex scene between Robin Tunney and Peter Facinelli with them "darkening" Tunney's skin in the editing process. At every point in this film's production, it was getting bad reception and they carried forward.

reddit.com › r/kpop_uncensored › thoughts on aespa supernova??

r/kpop_uncensored on Reddit: Thoughts on AESPA SUPERNOVA??

May 13, 2024 -

They took the word experimental to a whole new level with this one. Also the way WINTER was spinning and flying around throughout the mv and then yeeted herself away lmao. Anyway about the music, my ears definitely need more time to get used to the song. What are y'all's thoughts? Did you listen to Armageddon?

The only thing i dislike on the MV is that AI moving picture effect, is so weird. first ive and now aespa hope this trend dies because its awful. The song is kinda ok, still prefer drama.

I like it, and I think it’s very aespa. I personally place a lot of value into an artist having a clear cut sound / identity so I’m happy to see them go back to something like this. I disagree with people saying this is too risky or too late to do something like this, Next Level was a risk too and that was earlier in their career. And it performed well. edit: i also love the sample dem jointz used, he’s got a special touch when it comes to sampling songs

reddit.com › r/astronomy › could a supernova actually destroy (literally) a planet?

r/Astronomy on Reddit: Could a supernova actually destroy (literally) a planet?

May 7, 2023 -

I was just wondering, would the planets orbiting a star when it goes supernova remain structurally intact (or better put, would they at least remain planets) afterward? Or is a supernova powerful enough to completely obliterate/vaporize any nearby planets unfortunate enough to be orbiting the star? My intuition is that it’s unlikely that the planets would be completely annihilated Krypton-style, because I just don’t think the influx of material hitting them from the exploding star would have nearly enough mass, but I could be wrong.

There's a rule of thumb with supernovas, I got it from Randall munroe: no matter how big you think supernovas are, they're bigger. So yes. To put it in numbers, after a quick googling the earth's gravitational binding energy, the minimum energy it would take to disassemble, is around 1032 joules. The energy emitted by a supernova is around 1044 joules (obviously ballpark). I estimate the solid angle of the earth from the sun at around 10-10, so the earth will receive around 1034 joules, enough to disassemble it Obviously back of an envelope calculations. It's closer than I was expecting actually. Looks like a planet like Jupiter might not be completely disintegrated using those numbers.

Let's put it this way. You know how a hydrogen bomb can instantly turn say, water in the ocean into steam in the immediate vicinity? Well, a supernova is a billion billion billion times more powerful than that, and even though it would be a lot farther away from any habitable earth-sized planet, we're talking about enough heat energy alone to instantly vaporize steel and then some. And after several hours to a day of a planet roasting in the absolutely insane radiation coming from this event, the star's actual matter and atmosphere would come smashing into it. So like a billion times more matter (heated to like, 100 million degrees on top of that) than the planet itself, comes smashing into whatever is left of the planet. It would be like a semi truck hitting a half-melted burning marshmallow at the speed of sound. Except on fire. From getting nuked. So a semi truck blasted out of ground zero, and you can't even tell it was ever a truck anymore. Yeah, that's the metaphor, except way bigger, because astronomy is like that.

reddit.com › r/askscience › if we viewed a star "going supernova" in real time, would it look like a violent explosion, or does it take a long time?

r/askscience on Reddit: If we viewed a star "going supernova" in real time, would it look like a violent explosion, or does it take a long time?

January 10, 2015 -

edit: Wow, I wasn't expecting this huge response! This really... (puts on shades) ...blew up.

Thanks everyone!

A type I supernova begins when the star undergoes electron degeneracy collapse - meaning that all the electrons and protons in the star undergo reverse decay and merge into neutrons. The process takes about 20 seconds, which is a pretty amazing speed for anything to happen on the scale of a red giant. But other posters are right, the actual explosion (which happens when the outer layers of the star rebound against the newly-formed neutron core) would take several minutes to become apparent. Though still, that's incredibly fast for an enormous, billions-year-old star. edit: gilded! Thanks guys! (Not really, but I just always wanted to say that.) edit: gilded for real! Thanks! It's like my very own supernova.

The size of a SN explosion is so large that it takes a considerable amount of time to cover those distances even if stuff would move at the speed of light - and it usually moves quite a bit slower than that. Time lapse of Eta Carinae, spanning 13 years: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1412/CarinaExpanding_Hubble_750d.gif http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eta_Carinae edit: (not actually a supernova, but still somewhat supernova-ish - thanks several commenters) 2nd edit: I should include a link to the full page of NASA's "Astronomy Picture of the Day" archive where that image is from: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap141202.html about the lobes/bubbles: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap140717.html

reddit.com › r/askscience › what is exactly happening when a sun goes supernova?

r/askscience on Reddit: What is exactly happening when a sun goes supernova?

March 5, 2013 -

Title, and also how elements are formed as a result of it.

Stars are basically just big bags of gas, pulled very strongly together by gravity. In a regular star, this pulling is counteracted mainly by the radiation pressure coming from the fusion reactions happening inside the core. The fusion reactions fuse two four hydrogen atoms into helium, and if the temperature is high enough, you can also fuse helium into carbon, oxygen and higher elements all the way up to iron. Now, a normal star starts by burning hydrogen into helium, and it keeps doing this for most of its life. After the hydrogen reserves run too low, and the fusion rate drops, the gravitational pull starts winning against radiation pressure, and the star collapses a bit, increasing the temperature in the core and allowing for new fusion reactions to ignite. For a heavy enough star, this can continue until the star has a solid iron core, and you are no longer able to extract energy from fusion. At this point, if the core mass is higher than the Chandrasekhar limit, approximately 1.4 solar masses, then nothing can hold the star up against the pull of gravity, so it collapses violently. The collapse releases lots of energy, which goes into gamma rays and creating all elements heavier than iron. Eventually the density and pressure grow large enough for the collapsing matter to rebound. This starts a massive shock wave, which hits the infalling matter and sends it flying all over, at very formidable speeds, seeding the universe with heavier elements. This is roughly what happens with type II supernovae. The end result is approximately the same for other types, but the initial collapsing phase is different. EDIT: numbers are hard

Answer with more detail: So there are two main types of supernova (SN), one being the core collapse SN and one being the so called type 1 supernovae, which are basically white dwarfs (WD) exploding, and depending on the type of WD we have exploding there are different subcategories of type 1 SN. A WD is a star that doesn't fuse elements heavier than oxygen/silicon (depends on mass), generally stars less massive than 8 solar masses (M_sun) will end up as a WD, in which the gas is kept from collapsing in by the electron pressure (they don't like being close to each other). So, how can a WD explode? Well, a very high fraction of stars are in binary systems (estimates range from 20 to 60%, the Gaia mission will shed light on this). In a binary mass transfer can occur between the stars. Now imagine you have a WD and a regular star in a binary. As time goes on the binary will become tighter and tighter because the orbital energy is being radiated away with gravitational waves, and at some point mass transfer will commence. Once the WD has taken enough mass from it's companion it will go above the Chandrasekhar limit and go supernova. The mechanisms for this is not fully understood at the moment, and is being researched quite a lot. The other type of SN is what teramut described, but let me elaborate. A star with an initial mass above 8 solar masses will fuse elements up to iron, since iron is the most energy-efficient nucleus ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Binding_energy_curve_-_common_isotopes.svg ). At that point, the nuclear burning will stop and the star will start constracting. When it contracts, the temperature and the pressure in the core of the star will start rising. It goes so high that the thermal photons in the core will have enough energy to split the iron into protons and electrons, so called photodisintegration. What then happens is that protons and electrons will fuse, creating a neutron and a neutrino. What remains of the star at this point ( it loses a lot of mass in stellar winds) is incredibly dense, so the photons cannot penetrate the gas, however the neutrinos can. The neutrinos carry away 99% of all the energy from the core, only dumping 1% of it in the mantle. This 1% is more than sufficient to have the mantle fly away at near light-speed velocities. What we're left with then is a so called proto-neutron star. Whether this thing cools and becomes a neutron star or if it collapses to a black hole depends on the mass of it. There is no clear limit where the star becomes a black hole (BH) or a neutron star (NS), but we generally say that if the initial star is 8 M_sun

reddit.com › r/greatestgen › so i watched supernova.

r/greatestgen on Reddit: So I watched Supernova.

March 15, 2024 -

A lot more nudity than I expected from a PG-13 rating, fantastic cast, but otherwise not a lot to recommend to it--I watched it on Tubi and even they didn't have commercials. They had commercial breaks but they were just a little screen blink and the movie started back up.

I'm really looking forward to tomorrow's TGT episode to hear why they recommended this movie for the Film Festival! It had a really troubled production history, multiple edits and reshoots and entire plot beats edited out. I wonder if that has something to do with it?

Or maybe they just saw Wilson Cruz and declared it Canonical Trek 😂

Only slightly related, but I remember the first time I went to San Diego Comic Con and SciFi (Imagine Greater) would buy out a restaurant right by the convention center, remodeled it as Cafe Diem from Eureka. They had a special menu full of SciFi show puns like Battleggstar Galactica omelettes or whatever. Lou Diamond Philips was in Eureka so they named an item after him: Lou Diamond Flapjacks. Lou Diamond Flapjacks was better writing than the second half of this movie (probably because of the re-edits and reshoots and whatnot).

I watched the whole movie and couldn’t tell you what happened or what it was about

reddit.com › r/brisbane › what’s the general thoughts on supernova?

r/brisbane on Reddit: What’s the general thoughts on Supernova?

November 10, 2024 -

Sort of curious to hear what people’s thoughts are on it. If it really worth it or not? If it’s a little over hyped for what it actually is? … little more context around my experience below

Had a free ticket to Supanova, so I figured I’d check it out since I had nothing else planned for Sunday.

Honestly, I was a bit underwhelmed. I was expecting more of an expo vibe with interactive vendors and booths, but it felt more like a giant Sunday market— but cost around $50 just to get in.

There were some activities and panels, but they seemed more like an afterthought than the main draw of the event.

I get that if you’re really into the different fandoms represented, it might be a good chance to connect with others who share your interests. But still, I wonder if the ticket price is really worth it. Even meeting the celebrities came with an extra charge or required buying tokens.

I think a lot of the draw of these events is particular niche communities using it as a default meet up event, especially cosplay groups. Most people also don't just "go to Supernova", they're going there to meet a particular celeb, compete in some competition, or even just buy shit from the stalls run by artists who don't have their own brick and mortar shop. That being said, I haven't been to Supernova in years, but that was my experience with PAX Melbourne a year or two ago.

I'd say don't go to the Queensland ones, because they are held in summer or spring and the last time I went to the Gold Coast supernova dressed up and god it was so hot I was sweating so much the whole time. They also had the line wrapped around the building with not much shade, I still do recommend going through

reddit.com › r › SupernovaGame

February 26, 2015 - Supernova is a MOBA with an RTS twist. If you would like to play Supernova, visit: https://primalgs.com/supernova/#playforfree Feel free to ask questions and socialise with other players and we look forward hope to see you on the battlefield!

reddit.com › user › supernova

supernova (u/supernova) - Reddit

August 25, 2022 - Skip to main content · Copy link · Copy link · u/supernova · Overview · Posts · Comments · back · forward · New · Open sort options · Hot · New · Top · Change post view · Card · Compact · r/MachineLearning · Beginners -> /r/mlquestions or /r/learnmachinelearning , AGI -> /r/singularity, career advices -> /r/cscareerquestions, datasets -> r/datasets ·

reddit.com › r/movies › supernova - starring colin firth and stanley tucci - is heartbreaking and beautiful

r/movies on Reddit: Supernova - starring Colin Firth and Stanley Tucci - is heartbreaking and beautiful

January 22, 2022 -

Watched it on a flight the other day and the whole noise and distraction of the plane just melted away. Firth and Tucci played two men deeply in love with one another, taking a trip, and struggling to stay optimistic despite one of them experiencing early stages of dementia.

It's a deceptively simple tale. It gives both men and their friends/family time to breathe. It's sentimental, poetic, and at times devastating. I'm tearing up just thinking about it.

I'd recommend it to everyone. Just be prepared to cry a little. It's worth it.

Watch “big night.”

I really enjoyed this as well. I saw it a few months ago at the cinema and loved all the sweeping shots of the Lake District in autumn. So beautiful and cozy and heartbreaking. It's a lovely little tale of enduring love.