They don't care if the science is accurate or not.

I once talked with a screen writer who honestly wanted to know why
science fiction fans made such a big deal about the science being
accurate in SF films. I told him because we don't accept total nonsense
just as you would not accept a hospital drama where the doctors
operating on a person save the patient's life by waving a magic wand.

He said Yeah, but that's reality. So I slapped him (in my mind).

So not only are they generally ignorant of science and physics, they
don't care about it, either, and assume most of their audiences are
clueless and apathetic as well.

Even in films like Contact, which had Carl Sagan of all people trying to
keep them scientifically accurate and honest, there were deliberate
decisions to choose dramatic license over accuracy even in the little
stuff.

For example, Jodie Foster's character wore earphones while listening for
any signals from ETI. When Sagan pointed out that most radio astronomers
conducting SETI let computers do all the searching, Robert Zemeckis
replied that the only people who would know the difference were a few
scientists.

In Seth Shostak's new book on SETI, he gave advice to the Contact
creators that being inside a cosmic wormhole would be utterly dark
except for two points of light at either end where the image of the
entire Universe would be compressed. Instead they went for the
glowing swirling roller coaster tunnel.

I think there is more than a little truth to the scene in the original version
of Mel Brooks' The Producers when the director comments on the script
Springtime for Hitler that the Nazis were losing World War 2 with utter
surprise when it comes to people who don't have a clue about the world
outside their own. And we will continue to pay for it with most SF being
lousy and a large segment of the public getting their "education" from
the media.