Not at all. I'm saying that his legs floating away from him in any direction is suspicious.
One of the biggest giveaways in Hollywood space flight is that things
don't slowly drift off in various arbitrary directions. Instead they tend to wiggle around arbitrarily in a limited space. A good example is the shuttle scene in
2001: A Space Odyssey when Dr. Floyd chats with a crew member while eating. His food tray suddenly rises, wiggling a little left and right at the same time but not rotating. Newton's first law of motion states that objects change momentum only when acted on by external forces. If they're stopped, they stay stopped. If they're moving, they continue to move in the same direction. There was no force to make his tray suddenly start moving upward, nor to make it wiggle from side to side.
The scene may have worked fine when
2001 first came out because we had yet to see people actually weightless in a large cabin. Now that we've all seen decades of real weightlessness from Skylab, Shuttle, Mir and ISS, the
2001 scene looks downright hokey. Even recently faked zero-G scenes just don't look right. In real zero-G it's almost impossible to completely remove all angular and linear velocity from every free-floating object. Everything tends to slowly move in straight lines in different directions at constant speeds. They often have a little angular momentum too, and here the physics gets
really complicated and counterintuitive; suffice it to say that the best place to demonstrate the physics is in space.
Going underwater simply won't do. It may be good enough for training to make each object neutrally buoyant as a whole but that won't fool anyone who's seen real zero-G. You'd have to make
every part of every object neutrally buoyant so they would not tend to rotate with their lightest sides up. Water has far too much drag. Even pure water is far from completely transparent and colorless. Water's refractive index is higher than air (and vacuum). And on and on.
The
only way to do truly convincing zero-G for a sophisticated audience without actually going into space is with parabolic lobs in an airplane, as in Ron Howard's
Apollo 13. Even that has many giveaways, mainly the limitation of airplane weightlessness to about 20 seconds at a time. That works in Hollywood where edits are rapid anyway, but not for your typical space TV footage with static shots lasting many minutes.
The bottom line is simple: it remains simply impossible to produce a fake spacewalk scene that can fool modern viewers who understand physics and know what real spacewalks look like. That includes doing it underwater. The Chinese spacewalks are perfectly real.
