Gun play is a simple technology in films, but is often enhanced for over-the-top special effects. In a lot of films, we see a short burst of fire emanating out of the barrel of the gun. In reality, when a gun fires you never see a burst appear out of the chamber.

Another example of bad gun play in film is the notion that a bullet can be used to blow up a car. Although a bullet can penetrate a gas tank, all it will do is make a hole and allow the gasoline to leak out through the tank. It looks great on the big screen, but if you're sitting next to a Humvee, have one bullet left, and are surrounded by terrorists I suggest that you just get the hell out of there.

The appeal to a generation of computer users is open market for studios who want to make a quick buck. The problem is that most people writing screenplays only know how to use a word processor, and create bizarre scenarios with plot holes aplenty.

A classic example is the film WarGames with Matthew Broderick. Using a dial-up modem, Broderick hacks into NORAD through a “backdoor”, forgetting the fact that the military always has the latest and greatest computer technology and could immediately arrest him the moment he even tried to hack their system.

Most films about hacking, including Hackers and Swordfish, use computers as plot device, never explaining the methods behind it. Most of the computers you see in those movies never show an actual computer monitor, but instead just a bunch of moving circles and blobs on a computer screen. The fact of the matter is that Hollywood wouldn’t be caught dead with geeks.

In most films dealing with the effects of radiation on human beings the outcome is spectacular. In fact, most superhero stories began with this plot line. For example, The Incredible Hulk's protagonist Bruce Banner creates an experiment that goes horribly wrong, giving him superhuman powers.

In reality, radiation creates horrible outcomes for anyone in contact with it. The amount of gamma rays put into film characters would not only cause implacable harm, but also death. Just ask Marie Curie, who was exposed to merely half as much radiation as the characters in some science fiction films, only to die an unpleasant death from radiation poising.

Cloning has lent itself to a variety of genres in film. The problem is that too many liberties have been taken. In recent experiments, the cloned specimens have been weak or feeble and, in a good case study, a mirror of the subject cloned. In cinema, cloned copies of human subjects are often mutations different than the original. This would not be the case at all. Exact cloning would make a literal mirror, and if genetic alteration were involved, the clone would suffer from a variety of deficiencies that would render its strengths useless. Hollywood just hasn’t caught up with science. Let's be honest, though - they probably don’t care.

This is a staple among science fiction fans, especially because of the Star Wars series and the light sequence in 2001: A Space Odyssey. Although there may be people who argue that it could exist someday, traveling toward the speed of light is plausible only in dreams. According to Einstein’s theory of relativity, when an object approaches the speed of light the amount of energy required to propel it must be infinite. Unfortunately for us, the notion of faster than light time travel would not work for any human being in space. That doesn’t mean it isn’t cool to watch, though.