Annoying action movies cliches

Adrian Laguna · Post by **Adrian Laguna** » 2008-06-12 10:44pm

SAMAS wrote:The novel actually tries to justify it, having them hanging onto a grating, and the constant flow of air being sucked through it by the explosion keeping them from getting suffocated or roasted.

The problem is that there would be more burning air at the other end of the grating, not fresh air.

Shinn Langley Soryu · Post by **Shinn Langley Soryu** » 2008-06-13 01:50am

This probably isn't so much a cliche as it is a pet peeve of mine, but I've noticed that there are certain guns that the protagonists almost never seem to use, yet are somehow available in great quantity to the antagonists. A rather egregious example of this phenomenon is the Steyr AUG. The list in that article speaks for itself.

Also, there are other guns that tend to go neglected by good guys and bad guys alike. When was the last time you saw, say, a Tokarev TT-33, an FN FAL, or an IMI Galil in an action movie?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-06-13 02:11am

Yeah, but those guns suffer from a fatal weakness: for some reason their bullets are incapable of hitting a person who is cartwheeling or somersaulting. In fact, cartwheeling and somersaulting appear to make you virtually invulnerable to machine-gun fire in general

Shroom Man 777 · Post by **Shroom Man 777** » 2008-06-13 02:11am

I think the Fibbies used a Galil in The Kingdom.

Post by **weemadando** » 2008-06-13 02:28am

Shroom Man 777 wrote:I think the Fibbies used a Galil in The Kingdom.

Not that I saw. There were G3s, M4s, every variety of AK that you can imagine and plenty of shotguns, but I didn't see a Galil.

*edit* oh, and of course the quintessential movie gun: the MP5 in several varieties too IIRC.

Post by **Vympel** » 2008-06-13 04:20am

Not so much an action movie cliche - but why is it in fantasy movies that they think it's so important for the protagonist and villain to take off their helmets before they get stuck into each other for the last time? They're fucking there for a reason - it happened in Troy between Hector and Achilles, it happened in Prince Caspian between Peter and Miraz, it happened in Ladyhawke between Navarre and Marquet - and probably others.

Ted C · Post by **Ted C** » 2008-06-13 09:28am

Vympel wrote:Not so much an action movie cliche - but why is it in fantasy movies that they think it's so important for the protagonist and villain to take off their helmets before they get stuck into each other for the last time? They're fucking there for a reason - it happened in Troy between Hector and Achilles, it happened in Prince Caspian between Peter and Miraz, it happened in Ladyhawke between Navarre and Marquet - and probably others.

Because the director wants you to be able to see the Hero's face, no matter how stupid it is to take off your helmet in the middle of a fight.

Shroom Man 777 · Post by **Shroom Man 777** » 2008-06-13 10:55am

That's also another annoying thing in science fiction, with goofy nBSG-style pilot helmets. I mean, look at real life pilot helmets (and masks). They cover up the face pretty well, giving us an excuse for Maverick and Goose and Ice Prick to rip off their masks to scream homoerotic innuendo radio chatter.

But seriously, those nBSG helmets are meh. At least the Star Wars helmets in ANH were cool. Way cooler.

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2008-06-13 11:03am

Vympel wrote:Not so much an action movie cliche - but why is it in fantasy movies that they think it's so important for the protagonist and villain to take off their helmets before they get stuck into each other for the last time? They're fucking there for a reason - it happened in Troy between Hector and Achilles, it happened in Prince Caspian between Peter and Miraz, it happened in Ladyhawke between Navarre and Marquet - and probably others.

If you can't see the face, aside from really overt body language, you don't empathise as an audience.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-06-13 11:12am

In honour duels, it's a bit silly to question the tactical wisdom of taking off a helmet. The whole concept of an honour duel is tactically unwise anyway. If your prime concern is tactical effectiveness, you would never have an honour duel in the first place. He who had more allies would simply kill the other guy with strength of numbers. Honour duels are culturally motivated.

Megabot · Post by **Megabot** » 2008-06-13 11:17am

Shroom Man 777 wrote:That's also another annoying thing in science fiction, with goofy nBSG-style pilot helmets. I mean, look at real life pilot helmets (and masks). They cover up the face pretty well, giving us an excuse for Maverick and Goose and Ice Prick to rip off their masks to scream homoerotic innuendo radio chatter.

But seriously, those nBSG helmets are meh. At least the Star Wars helmets in ANH were cool. Way cooler.

With the whole fighter pilot in space theme I've always thought it's just people combining flight suits with space suits, with the helmets being more like those of astronauts than fighter pilots. And yes, the Rebel helmets were much better-looking, but still not very believable, with them being unsealed and all. Though in the ANH infinities comic Luke ejected from his X-Wing and was seen with a pilot-style gas mask (which I thought was cool).

Zixinus · Post by **Zixinus** » 2008-06-13 11:18am

Not so much an action movie cliche - but why is it in fantasy movies that they think it's so important for the protagonist and villain to take off their helmets before they get stuck into each other for the last time? They're fucking there for a reason - it happened in Troy between Hector and Achilles, it happened in Prince Caspian between Peter and Miraz, it happened in Ladyhawke between Navarre and Marquet - and probably others.

There is also the issue that the battle is most likely climatic and both fought allot before and are overheated. Those medieval helmets were made for protection ,not comfort, its easy to see why they could get stuffy.

EDIT: Also, helmets always block vision a bit.

Pulp Hero · Post by **Pulp Hero** » 2008-06-13 11:41am

Shroom Man 777 wrote:That's also another annoying thing in science fiction, with goofy nBSG-style pilot helmets. I mean, look at real life pilot helmets (and masks). They cover up the face pretty well, giving us an excuse for Maverick and Goose and Ice Prick to rip off their masks to scream homoerotic innuendo radio chatter.

But seriously, those nBSG helmets are meh. At least the Star Wars helmets in ANH were cool. Way cooler.

Not being able to see the characters faces would get pretty confusing and hinder their acting ablity.

Davey · Post by **Davey** » 2008-06-13 04:42pm

Well on the note of helmets...

...the heroes, well, we can always see their faces even if they are wearing a helmet. But the legions of enemy troopers always seem to wear full face masks, dark googles or have big thick visors that obscure their features. And they're all the same! Every last one of them!

Yet at the same time while the bullets fly and debris goes flying the hero's (especially if the hero is female) face always remains so clean and scratch free. Hey, maybe all the heroes' clothes have built in invisible bubble shields that protect their faces and the bubble shields have tractor beams and moisturizers and climate control circuitry to keep their hair perfectly clean, neat, dirt-free and styled.

Post by **weemadando** » 2008-06-13 10:34pm

Crazy pilot helmets don't have to be scifi.

The JSF pilot's helmet:

And another shot of a slightly different version:

Dark Flame · Post by **Dark Flame** » 2008-06-14 12:34am

I was watching Eraser for a few minutes, and it hit me. I've read through this whole thread as it was updated, and I don't remember seeing this one. However, I'm sure it's so obvious that someone else had to post it.

Anyways, body-builder heroes. Why? I realize that skinny nerdy computer techs wouldn't make good commandos, but it hardly seems that the ideal form is Arnold Schwarzeneger. I can't recall many action movies with a small-ish, more-running-less-iron-pumping kind of hero.

Deathstalker · Post by **Deathstalker** » 2008-06-14 01:18am

Anyways, body-builder heroes. Why? I realize that skinny nerdy computer techs wouldn't make good commandos, but it hardly seems that the ideal form is Arnold Schwarzeneger. I can't recall many action movies with a small-ish, more-running-less-iron-pumping kind of hero.

How many movies have you scene? Body-builder heroes are fairly rare. Sly Stallone in Rambo started the trend, IMO, and he really wasn't that big. Had Steve McQueen lived and taken the part, I wonder if Arnie would have gotten any work. But once Sly started the trend, and Arnie started to make money, a lot of ex wrestlers and strong men started to get work, but nobody was as successful as Arnie.

Bruce Willis bucked the trend as an average joe kind of hero, and there are plenty of examples of non He-men type heroes. All of the Bonds, most of the martial arts actors are the norm. Most of the hero roles go to good looking guys and gals who aren't bulked up

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-06-14 01:44am

Deathstalker wrote:
Anyways, body-builder heroes. Why? I realize that skinny nerdy computer techs wouldn't make good commandos, but it hardly seems that the ideal form is Arnold Schwarzeneger. I can't recall many action movies with a small-ish, more-running-less-iron-pumping kind of hero.
How many movies have you scene? Body-builder heroes are fairly rare. Sly Stallone in Rambo started the trend, IMO, and he really wasn't that big. Had Steve McQueen lived and taken the part, I wonder if Arnie would have gotten any work. But once Sly started the trend, and Arnie started to make money, a lot of ex wrestlers and strong men started to get work, but nobody was as successful as Arnie.

Bruce Willis bucked the trend as an average joe kind of hero, and there are plenty of examples of non He-men type heroes. All of the Bonds, most of the martial arts actors are the norm. Most of the hero roles go to good looking guys and gals who aren't bulked up

Have YOU ever seen any action movies? Almost all action heroes are bulked up. Even actors like Nick Cage and Brad Pitt spent months in the gym working on their physiques in order to play the part of action heroes. The fact that they're not all Schwarzenegger-size doesn't mean they're not all bulked up. It's pretty much a de facto action movie standard nowadays, and has been for quite a while. Hell, even the new James Bond is far more muscular than any Bond before him.

The fact is that people are no longer willing to suspend disbelief for a skinny guy kicking the crap out of people unless he's an Asian kung-fu master. They expect an action star to look like he's spent a lot of time in the weight room. The days where people could actually swallow the idea of a guy like Roger Moore beating up anything more substantial than a Beanie Baby are gone.

The action-movie cliche of the muscular hero isn't that unreasonable, given the high levels of hand to hand combat in those movies. The problem is the prevalence of hand to hand combat, not the physical strength that is required to plausibly win those battles.

Havok · Post by **Havok** » 2008-06-14 03:13am

Damon in the Bourne trilogy wasn't that bulked up that I recall. The best action hero, John McClain has never been more then a chubby alcoholic cop.

Look at POTC... Johnny Depp and Orlando Bloom? I think there is a good balance of the super big guys like Diesel, The Rock etc and the regular type guys.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-06-14 09:37am

havokeff wrote:Damon in the Bourne trilogy wasn't that bulked up that I recall. The best action hero, John McClain has never been more then a chubby alcoholic cop. Look at POTC... Johnny Depp and Orlando Bloom? I think there is a good balance of the super big guys like Diesel, The Rock etc and the regular type guys.

Even the "regular type guys" undergo a weight training regimen before they do a movie. You only think they don't look muscular because you're comparing them to guys like the Rock or Schwarzenegger. The fact is that this is the norm now.

Zixinus · Post by **Zixinus** » 2008-06-14 11:58am

On the note, how about action girls? We can't have a capable, strong women who doesn't have a stick shoved up her ass and appears to have more testosterone then a teenage guy? You know, they type of women that so damn feminist that she didn't just join the army and kick ass but she automatically rejects any form of non-professional approach with violence, especially the sexual kind no matter how politely it was done (Lara Croft comes to mind)?

Havok · Post by **Havok** » 2008-06-14 12:45pm

Darth Wong wrote:
havokeff wrote:Damon in the Bourne trilogy wasn't that bulked up that I recall. The best action hero, John McClain has never been more then a chubby alcoholic cop. Look at POTC... Johnny Depp and Orlando Bloom? I think there is a good balance of the super big guys like Diesel, The Rock etc and the regular type guys.
Even the "regular type guys" undergo a weight training regimen before they do a movie. You only think they don't look muscular because you're comparing them to guys like the Rock or Schwarzenegger. The fact is that this is the norm now.

No I don't think they don't look muscular, I don't think they look bulked up. When I look at someone like Pitt in say Fight Club, I compare him to Bruce Lee not Arnold. Muscular and lean with out the mass. I also don't think it is the weight training that has become the norm, but the dieting that goes along with it. Try getting the old timers like Douglas, McQueen or Heston to do the whacky diets that the actors today do and they would tell you to go fuck yourself.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-06-14 01:07pm

havokeff wrote:No I don't think they don't look muscular, I don't think they look bulked up.

Pure nitpickery. The underlying point is that you need to look like you spent time in the gym in order to be an action star. The question of whether people go for the "bulky" look or the "muscular and lean" look is irrelevant.

Havok · Post by **Havok** » 2008-06-14 01:47pm

Darth Wong wrote:
havokeff wrote:No I don't think they don't look muscular, I don't think they look bulked up.
Pure nitpickery. The underlying point is that you need to look like you spent time in the gym in order to be an action star. The question of whether people go for the "bulky" look or the "muscular and lean" look is irrelevant.

Not really. A bulked up star like Diesel isn't going to be cast as a James Bond, Jack Ryan type or a Jason Bourne, but would certainly get a True Lies type which is an over the top parody of Bond in a way. At the same time even a bulked up Ed Norton or Johnny Depp isn't going to win a Conan casting call.
And if that is the underlying point, well weight lifting for an action star isn't anything new at all, hell even for just for a leading man. It has been the "norm" for decades. The only thing that has changed is the intensity of it and the diet, which lets you actually see the muscle definition.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-06-14 03:29pm

havokeff wrote:And if that is the underlying point, well weight lifting for an action star isn't anything new at all, hell even for just for a leading man. It has been the "norm" for decades. The only thing that has changed is the intensity of it and the diet, which lets you actually see the muscle definition.

I'm old enough to recall when it wasn't really that important for a guy to have muscle on his frame.