We have had a number of interesting discussions here regarding how Hollywood possesses a fundamental misunderstanding as to what constitutes "true" science fiction--as opposed to the nonsensical, implausible fantasies it passes off as SF. In the process, directors of big-budget Hollywood summer fare almost completely ignore scientific accuracy. And one of the most common failings is Hollywood's universal tendency to make over-optimistic guesses as to when certain events might be possible. In the beginning of the overrated but endearing original 1968 version of Planet of the Apes, we see Charlton Heston's Taylor seated in the cockpit of an interstellar spacecraft on a mission that takes place in the last years of the 20th century. Never mind all the rest of the story's implausibilities (apes speaking perfect English, among other things), but that's so typical of what Hollywood calls SF. Now, I haven't seen Tim Burton's "re-imagining" of the film. But I have read numerous reviews. What I know is this: somehow Wahlberg's spaceship crashes on an "Earthlike" planet in the year 2029. My question: Was he supposed to be on an interstellar mission? If so, did Tim Burton really think that such would be possible just thirty years from now? Really? If we're lucky, a manned expedition to Mars will probably have occurred by then. But interstellar travel is at least five-hundred--maybe a thousand or more--years away. Why does Hollywood adamantly refuse to do any sort of homework? It would be nice to have some genuine science fiction coming our way. Please advise. Thanks.