Bullshit. A hell of a lot of fascinating, gripping, dramatic stuff happens in reality, and if you are free to choose a setup and some character personalities, you can make some incredible on-screen fiction that doesn't clash with realism at every turn. Someone mentioned Apollo 13 - a hell of a dramatic story that did indeed occur within boring old Reality.

I don't mind a bit of fudging in a movie myself, and I am willing to accept some unlikely premise on which a story can be built, but what drives me crazy are the things that are wrong for no good reason. The direction of an orbit could have been chosen correctly with no plot impact or cost (assuming this happened in the initial visual planning), most movie science errors are just dumb for no reason whatsoever, a tiny dialog change could resolve half of them. Even technobabble that demonstrates they know the error and are asking our indulgence to forward the plot is usually enough to maintain the suspension of disbelief.

Suspension of disbelief, btw, is a delicate balance, not a suit of armor you put on before entering the theater. It's the movie's responsibility to maintain it, and a movie that breaks it stops being entertaining. A movie that breaks it for no good reason at all deserves to be shit upon for it.

For the record it sounds like Tyson is not complaining about loss of S.O.D., and didn't dislike the film, but it's his job to educate, and big sciency movies are a good vehicle. It's not nitpicking, it's his job.

8 terabytes per day, according to TFA. Add the ability to effectively query, slice, dice and present that much data on a long-term basis... yeah, that's a hell of a lot of vacuum tubes.

For comparison, the LHC does upwards of 27TB/day[1], Hubble 3-5[2].

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LHC_Computing_Grid
[2] http://hubblesite.org/the_telescope//hubble_essentials/

Spatula City already led this revolution, perhaps just a bit too far ahead of its time.