Advertisement Advertisement The top realistic movie is "Gattaca," from 1997, which is so good in its depiction of contemporary genetics scientists have expounded upon the idea with a thoughtful 2022 paper . Also notable, "Contact," with Jodie Foster, is based on a novel by Carl Sagan, who is a real astronomer and scientist. Apparently, he slowed down production because he wanted it to be extremely accurate (via Far Out ). At that rate, it was always going to be realistic. Seeing "Jurassic Park" on the list, maybe it's time to crack open fossilized amber to see how much of it is real? If you're curious, Neil deGrasse Tyson's approved sci-fi list also features several of these titles. Others he called out are "The Matrix," "The Martian," "Interstellar," the ever-classic "Back to the Future," "Deep Impact" from 1998, and Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey" released in 1968. Read more: 12 Real-Life Inventions That Were Inspired By Science Fiction What are the least realistic sci-fi movies on NASA's list? NASA's list also explores the least plausible movies by science standards. The worst offender is "2012," actually made in 2009. If you want to know all the reasons why "2012" is dumb, refer to NASA's Donald Yeomans, the head of the Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous mission, who emphasized the Earth's core could never heat up as quickly as it did in the movie, which is the entire cause of the disasters depicted (via The Times ). The runner-up is 2003's "The Core," which seems to ignore even the basic concepts of geology. Advertisement Source: https://uk.style.yahoo.com/most-scientifically-accurate-sci-fi-211700451.html