StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Darth Wong wrote:Unrealistic movie cliches:

1. a man and a woman who hate each other and insult each other constantly are actually madly in love with each other, and at the height of one of their arguments, will suddenly start tearing each others' clothes off. That is so fucking stupid that mere insults cannot do it justice.

Damn. I so wish this was true. Then I might actually get some action.

Darth Wong wrote:Unrealistic movie cliches:

1. a man and a woman who hate each other and insult each other constantly are actually madly in love with each other, and at the height of one of their arguments, will suddenly start tearing each others' clothes off. That is so fucking stupid that mere insults cannot do it justice.

That actually happened to me once....although the circumstances weren't quite like that.

Darth Wong wrote:Unrealistic movie cliches:

a man and a woman who hate each other and insult each other constantly are actually madly in love with each other, and at the height of one of their arguments, will suddenly start tearing each others' clothes off. That is so fucking stupid that mere insults cannot do it justice.

Actually, something approaching that (though not quite to the tearing clothes off extreme) happened to me and someone who I argued with for 11 years, until we went to homecoming together.

100% of Asian men are expert martial artists. Apparently, we're born with the ability.

. Only one of my Asian friends is a martial artist, and she hasn't trained since coming to the US. I'll agree with you on this one.

Bullets sparking when they hit trees or other wood.

The 30second boff-fest that suddenly means the two characters involved have this deep emotional connection (Leathal Weapon 2 as an example).

Cars that explode in mid-air for no apparent reason as they fall to the bottom of a cliff.

Huge fireballs from the explosion of a typical car (no explosives just the car's own fuel) from any kind of accident.

Unbelievable military portrayals, especially the terminology/lingo. Even TNG got it right "One aye is sufficient". None of that "Aye, aye" crap.

People have watched too much Trek. "Locked on" has become too commonplace and it still does not garantee a hit.

(Some of you may have noticed that a lot of my complaints primarilly originate from the American Godzilla movie).

Darth Wong wrote:Unrealistic movie cliches:

1. a man and a woman who hate each other and insult each other constantly are actually madly in love with each other, and at the height of one of their arguments, will suddenly start tearing each others' clothes off. That is so fucking stupid that mere insults cannot do it justice.

Well, it would be nice, but generally you get the ten minutes to three days of awkward silence before you get to the ripping clothes off bit.

[*]people who are actually lifted off their feet and thrown through the air by a punch or kick. Nobody hits that hard, folks.

Actually I saw this happen. One fucker of a kick to the mid section of a guy in a fight. Sent him back a good metre and a bit through the air. I couldn't believe my fucking eyes.

[*]people getting up and continuing to fight after #2.

That DIDN'T happen following the above.

[*]ultra-localized grenades. In the movies, if you can get even six feet away from a grenade before it goes off, you'll be fine.

From the Hong Kong Action Theatre RPG book: "...You read that right, Major and Extreme characters IGNORE damage from grenades. In most action films, characters of that importance merely get blown clear, or find convenient cover when a grenade goes off. This is a Hong Kong action film after all!

[*]muscle mass makes bullets miss. In real life, a man who can bench-press 600 lbs and a man who can bench-press 100 lbs have precisely the same chance of being hit by an enemy bullet (actually, the bigger guy is a slightly bigger target). But in most action movies, the biggest, strongest guy in any group of soldiers will always survive until the end of the battle, so he can fight the other army's biggest, toughest warrior. Apparently, bullets fear muscle mass and will change their trajectories in order to miss.

In reality, having this much muscle mass slightly alters the earths gravitional and magnetic fields, turning the person into the mythical "bullet magnet".

[*]100% of Asian men are expert martial artists. Apparently, we're born with the ability.[/list]

You mean you don't have mad kung-fu skills? Damnit.

Purportedly high explosives always produce huge fireballs.

The level of intelligence in movies and television is such that it'd make for a much shorter thread to simply point out the occasions where characters acted intelligently and battles were realistic.

For some of the particularly stupid errors, however, take a look at my Aliens' Guide to The Conquest of Humanity on my webpage, the now rather well-known evil overlord list, and John van Sickle's venerable SF cliches list. I'd post the lists here but they're way, way too long.

Evil overlord lists:
http://www.eviloverlord.com/lists/overlord.html

SF Cliche list:
http://enphilistor.users4.50megs.com/index.htm#SF

Also there's the 'no so grand cliche list:'
http://amethyst-angel.com/cliche.html

Unbelievable military portrayals, especially the terminology/lingo. Even TNG got it right "One aye is sufficient". None of that "Aye, aye" crap.

This is a military movie brain bug. Have you noticed in many movies or shows everyone is always talking like they are in perpetual boot camp?

Example: A Marine Captain needs a pencil.

Movie:
capt: "GUNNY! YOU WILL IMMEDIATELY GET ME A WRITING UTENSIL!"
gunny: "AYE AYE SIR, GETTING YOUR PENCIL NOW SIR!"

I was once sitting in a Marine office talking to a friend and Ive seen an officer ask for a pencil. It was nothing like the above.

It was more like "Hey, Gunny do you have a pencil?"

Ive noticed the guy who produced B5 and Jerimah on Showtime tends to have military lingo like that.

People who smoke on the bridge of a submarine.

How much about movie making do you know? There are people in charge of continuity between shots but gun shots is not something they really pay attention to.

Soldier of Fortune magazine praised James Cameron on his accurate portrayal of the weapons in Terminator.

Another fun one is grossly exaggerated effects of nuclear weapons. Apparently, a nuclear weapon, if buried deep enough, can split a planet-killer asteroid in two!

What about vampires? I won't even bother with the "Buffy" bullshit, but what about the Jonathan Harkers who are able to kill Dracula by *gasp* finding his coffin during the day?

Haven't these guys lived for centuries? You'd think this had to have happened ONCE, and the vampire actually LEARNED to hide his coffin!

One of the best vampire movies ever made, "Fright Night" had a great vampire, Jerry Dandridge. But this guy was an IDIOT! He ordered hookers to come to his house, then killed them? Boy, THAT won't arouse suspicision
would it?!

And then there's the horror fan, Charley Brewster. He finds out a vampire lives next door, and automatically he wants to kill him? Wouldn't he want to meet and talk to a real life vampire?

Darth Wong wrote:
ultra-localized grenades. In the movies, if you can get even six feet away from a grenade before it goes off, you'll be fine.

What about the exact opposite, where tiny frag grenades can destroy an entire building- see the Long Kiss Goodnight for a classic example of this EXTREMELY frustrating shit.

My personal list:

1- Gun sound effects in movies. They're almost invariably too loud. You have poncy little 9mm berettas making a sound like a .50 caliber sniper rifle.

2- The aforementioned super nuclear frag grenades

3- The extremely cliched 'lost Soviet nuke' crap

4- People who hold their guns sideways. Hold it properly and you might hit something, you dumbfuck.

5- People who fire machine guns from the hip. Hold it properly and you might hit something, you dumbfuck

6- Super-smart super-long burn missiles. See 'Behind Enemy Lines' for the most modern example of this idiocy. This is not ROAD RUNNER. I actually expect to see missiles stop at traffic lights now.

7- Really contrived sex-scenes. See Desperado. What the fuck was that?!

8- The last scene of Saving Private Ryan SPECIFICALLY. Never have I seen so much ignorance compounded into a single scene. Tiger tanks and open-top Marders used in URBAN fighting? No German 81mm mortars evident anywhere? Not a SINGLE MG-42 lmg version anywhere, when it was the centerpiece of German infantry combat? Stupidity ...

TrailerParkJawa wrote:

Unbelievable military portrayals, especially the terminology/lingo. Even TNG got it right "One aye is sufficient". None of that "Aye, aye" crap.

This is a military movie brain bug. Have you noticed in many movies or shows everyone is always talking like they are in perpetual boot camp?

Example: A Marine Captain needs a pencil.

Movie:
capt: "GUNNY! YOU WILL IMMEDIATELY GET ME A WRITING UTENSIL!"
gunny: "AYE AYE SIR, GETTING YOUR PENCIL NOW SIR!"

I was once sitting in a Marine office talking to a friend and Ive seen an officer ask for a pencil. It was nothing like the above.

It was more like "Hey, Gunny do you have a pencil?"

Ive noticed the guy who produced B5 and Jerimah on Showtime tends to have military lingo like that.

True. I've taken courses with an Army officer, and none of the other people in the department bothered with formalities. The new guys used it for about two or three weeks, then referred to each other by either rank or last name.

Oh and every single fucking contrived portrayal of the US military- par for the course in every Bruckheimer movie ever made. I'm tired of it.

Lord Poe wrote:

How much about movie making do you know? There are people in charge of continuity between shots but gun shots is not something they really pay attention to.

Soldier of Fortune magazine praised James Cameron on his accurate portrayal of the weapons in Terminator.

Terminator didn't have that much gun action. Did the mag count how many shots came out of each gun? I'm talking the real hard-core action movies. Compare that to something like The Killer or Hard-Boiled in terms of gun shots. It isn't something to really care about in the grand scheme of making a movie.

neoolong wrote:

Lord Poe wrote:

How much about movie making do you know? There are people in charge of continuity between shots but gun shots is not something they really pay attention to.

Soldier of Fortune magazine praised James Cameron on his accurate portrayal of the weapons in Terminator.

Terminator didn't have that much gun action. Did the mag count how many shots came out of each gun? I'm talking the real hard-core action movies. Compare that to something like The Killer or Hard-Boiled in terms of gun shots. It isn't something to really care about in the grand scheme of making a movie.

Actually HKAT is generally fairly good with ammo. Its the guns that are the problem. I mean, fuck reloading, just grab another PAIR from under your coat. How many berettas can one man carry?

ID4
What the fuck is the chance of someone from Primitive Civilization A using an inferior electronic device to hack into the electronics of the star fleet of Local Star God B? I thought so....
To the ID10-T Droids running Hollywood:

I have a bit of a peeve against poorly done aircraft special effects. Mainly I'm talking about when the aircraft move in such an obviously wrong fashion as to be blatantly fake. This happens sometimes with models and a lot with CGI aircraft. They just don't move right (ID4, Godzilla).

Also on that note, what was up with the Apache's in Godzilla? Has anyone ever seen them configured that way? Extra large wings, fixed machine guns and no moveable chaingun..WTF?

Tsyroc wrote:I have a bit of a peeve against poorly done aircraft special effects. Mainly I'm talking about when the aircraft move in such an obviously wrong fashion as to be blatantly fake. This happens sometimes with models and a lot with CGI aircraft. They just don't move right (ID4, Godzilla).

Also on that note, what was up with the Apache's in Godzilla? Has anyone ever seen them configured that way? Extra large wings, fixed machine guns and no moveable chaingun..WTF?

Not to mention the dumb fuck pilots. GO UP!

weemadando wrote:

neoolong wrote:

Lord Poe wrote: Soldier of Fortune magazine praised James Cameron on his accurate portrayal of the weapons in Terminator.

Terminator didn't have that much gun action. Did the mag count how many shots came out of each gun? I'm talking the real hard-core action movies. Compare that to something like The Killer or Hard-Boiled in terms of gun shots. It isn't something to really care about in the grand scheme of making a movie.

Actually HKAT is generally fairly good with ammo. Its the guns that are the problem. I mean, fuck reloading, just grab another PAIR from under your coat. How many berettas can one man carry?

Actually a lot of John Woo films are edited so that the guns seem to continuously fire. No reloading necessary. They only reload to make a plot point or because it looks cool.

Specialist wrote:I hate when woman always have on a blank chest high.
Father forgot stupid 8 year old brat's birthday.

I'm confused by this.....

*pokes the n00b!*

TrailerParkJawa wrote:Ive noticed the guy who produced B5 and Jerimah on Showtime tends to have military lingo like that.

B5 has an excuse, though, at least as far as EA is concerned. As with real-world military forces operated by fascist states, Earthforce was basically a political tool for EA internal security rather than a tool for war. Political armed forces tend to go in for excessive formality over functionality: making sure that everyone knows their place and will follow official leadership no matter what else happens is far more important than finding reasonable ways to get things done.

Enlightenment wrote:

TrailerParkJawa wrote:Ive noticed the guy who produced B5 and Jerimah on Showtime tends to have military lingo like that.

B5 has an excuse, though, at least as far as EA is concerned. As with real-world military forces operated by fascist states, Earthforce was basically a political tool for EA internal security rather than a tool for war. Political armed forces tend to go in for excessive formality over functionality: making sure that everyone knows their place and will follow official leadership no matter what else happens is far more important than finding reasonable ways to get things done.

Actually, from what he said I wasn't sure if he meant B5 & Jeremiah had good use of lingo or bad. The last example he stated was of more realistic language. I don't recall significant amount of bad military jargin in B5 and I haven't seen Jeremiah so I took his comment about JMS to be in favor of how he writes the military (for the most part).

Tsyroc wrote:Actually, from what he said I wasn't sure if he meant B5 & Jeremiah had good use of lingo or bad.

The station crew did things differently but from what I remember the conversational style used by the mainline portions of EF certainly seemed to fit into the bootcamp category.