Is this concept of interest? Pleased to hear your thoughts, cheers.

Ex Machina (2015)

Accuracy Score: 90/100

Scientific Accuracies: The film accurately portrays advancements in artificial intelligence, including natural language processing, machine learning, and human-like interactions. The Turing Test is a real AI evaluation method, and Ava’s ability to manipulate and deceive aligns with current AI developments in behavioral modeling.

Scientific Inaccuracies:
Ava’s level of consciousness and emotional depth surpasses modern AI capabilities—true self-awareness in machines remains theoretical. Additionally, creating such an advanced humanoid robot with perfect fluid motion and human-like skin would require materials and biomechanics far beyond current technological limits.

Gattaca (1997)

Accuracy Score: 92/100

Scientific Accuracies: The film’s depiction of genetic engineering and eugenics is highly plausible, exploring how DNA profiling could shape future societies. Many ethical concerns raised, such as genetic discrimination in employment, are already emerging today with advancements in gene sequencing and CRISPR technology.

Scientific Inaccuracies: The complete elimination of unpredictable genetic factors is unrealistic—epigenetics and environmental influences still play a role. The idea of predicting every aspect of a person’s abilities solely through genetic markers oversimplifies human biology, as complex traits involve multiple genetic and external factors.

Gravity (2013)

Accuracy Score: 75/100

Scientific Accuracies: Microgravity movement is realistically portrayed, along with space debris hazards and orbital mechanics. The Kessler Syndrome, where debris collisions create more debris, is a real concern, and Newton’s laws of motion are correctly applied to objects in space.

Scientific Inaccuracies:
Space stations are inaccurately close—realistically, the ISS and Hubble are hundreds of kilometers apart. Sandra Bullock's character grabbing a cable in space with her bare hands is unrealistic due to weak grip strength and the lack of atmospheric resistance.

Interstellar (2014)

Accuracy Score: 85/100

Scientific Accuracies: The film accurately portrays black holes, gravitational time dilation, and the physics behind wormholes. The visual rendering of Gargantua is based on real equations, making it the most scientifically accurate depiction of a black hole in cinema history.

Scientific Inaccuracies:
The idea that love can influence physics and transcend dimensions is unscientific. Additionally, falling into a black hole and surviving contradicts our understanding—intense gravity would cause spaghettification, stretching an object into thin strands.

The Martian (2015)

Accuracy Score: 95/100

Scientific Accuracies: The film accurately depicts NASA technology, orbital mechanics, and survival techniques on Mars, including oxygenators, water reclamation, and farming using human waste. NASA procedures and physics-based space travel are well-represented, making it one of the most realistic space survival movies.

Scientific Inaccuracies:
The opening dust storm is exaggerated—Mars' thin atmosphere lacks the density for such force. The characters also move as if under Earth’s gravity, despite Mars' gravity being only 38% of Earth’s, which should affect walking and object handling.

Contact (1997)

Accuracy Score: 90/100

Scientific Accuracies: The film realistically depicts SETI’s use of radio signals to search for extraterrestrial life. It correctly represents peer review in science, as well as the concept of wormholes being theoretically possible based on Einstein’s equations and quantum physics.

Scientific Inaccuracies:
The alien encounter happens in a visually constructed reality, which lacks scientific basis. Wormholes remain theoretical with no evidence they function as depicted. The idea that an alien species could transmit detailed machine blueprints via radio waves is highly speculative.