Originally Posted By NYthrillseeker This topic seemed to be touched on in another post, and I found myself going off topic trying to make examples of some movies that really stretch the boundaries of realism. Therefore I am starting this topic, if anyone would like to discuss or mention any movie at all, that you many have problems with because of how far fetched or ridiculous a scene might be. This doesn't mean that you have to dislike the movie. Another LPer and I exchanged comments about a few things about Star Wars and Jurassic Park that don't really make any sense, but we still like those movies. Obviously if a film is a sci fi movie, or fantasy flik, then reality can definitely be thrown out the window in some areas, but it's still fun to talk about things that don't make much sense. I'll give an example to start: In the Star Wars movies: It takes place a long time ago, in a galaxy far far away, yet everyone speaks English. Ok, I know what you're thinking, the movie wouldn't be the same if it were in subtitles with a made up language spoken. But does it make sense that every planet they visit has the same gravity force and roughly the same atmosphere? Not to mention all the ships have anti-gravity, something that basically is an impossibility. Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking Star Wars, it's a classic and I love it. I'm just making an example. Anyone like to add to this? About any movie.
Originally Posted By Autopia Deb I have a friend who doesn't like 'Raiders of the Lost Ark', because the "sailors" on the German sub are wearing Army uniforms and not Naval uniforms. He's a military historian by hobby and this sort of thing takes him right out of the movie.
Originally Posted By Shooba Overly unrealistic moments in movies take my mind out of movie, and definately detracts from the film (though not usually enough to "ruin" the movie for me). A movie can have an unrealistic premise, but it doesn't excuse the rest of the movie from being unrealistic in the context of that same premise. For example, in the second POTC movie, I can accept undead pirates and bizarre creatures such as Davy Jones, as it's a fantasy movie. However, in that same movie, it bugged me that Jack Sparrow, a human character, fell off a cliff attached to a pole, and managed to land safely without so much as a scratch. The scene was unrealistic, even in a fantastical movie, and I ended up thinking about that at that moment, instead of being immersed in the movie. Another example was in Superman Returns. I can accept that someone from a far-off planet would be granted super powers from our Sun. It's an unrealistic fantasy, but it makes for an interesting premise. What I couldn't accept, was Lois Lane, a human character, being bounced around an airplane as it plummets towards the Earth, and again walks away without so much as a scratch.
Originally Posted By NYthrillseeker Very good points, this is exactly the kind of stuff I was talking about. Another thing in POTC 3 that bugs me, and for those who have not seen it yet, skip to the next paragraph. I don't want to SPOIL anything for you. In the 2nd movie Jack is taken my the Kracken to Davy Jones' Locker, and you see the Black Pearl being destroyed as it's dragged below the surface. But yet in the 3rd film, when the crew arrives to save him, the Pearl is intact, yet the ship they used to get to Jack is destroyed. MAKES NO SENSE! As far as Superman Returns, I never understood why Lex Luthor was so interested in growing his own continents with that crystal. As in the previous films (Superman I and II), he's been to Superman's "home" up north. Did it look like prime real estate property to him? The land was jagged and not an ounce of land was buildable, or moveable, or fertile. How does Luthor, who is supposed to be a "super genius", think he's going to have people lining up to buy this property. Oh yeah, I forgot, he's wiping out practically everyone on Earth, so where are these people coming from?
Originally Posted By cstephens I have a friend who doesn't do fantastical movies at all as they're not based in reality, and she can't get over that. For me, I'll accept pretty much anything as long as they've established the rules of that particular universe. It's when they break their own rules that it really irritates me. "Ghost" - There's a scene in the subway when they're fighting, and I think Tony Goldwyn's character kicks or punches or whatever Patrick Swayze's character. He's a ghost so he goes through train car after train car after train car - only to slam against the back of the very last train car. Why did he go through all of the other train cars but not go through the back of the train? Same movie, different scene. They've established that as a corporeal being, it takes great energy for them to move even a simple object. By the end of the movie, he's effortlessly throwing things left and right with no explanation of why it's so easy now. Absolutely most unrealistic moment in cinematic history - "Indecent Proposal" - Robert Redford who is sweet, charming and rich OR Woody Harrelson who's broke? Who on earth would have a hard time deciding? /cs
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Call me silly, but I think it is a stretch that the Cars actually talked.
Originally Posted By ctdsnark Movies are in the eye of the beholder.I didn't even notice Kevin Costner's questionable accent in "Robin Hoodrince Of Thieves"{which I greatly enjoyed,by the way} until the inevitable buffoonswhoobviouslyhavenothingbettertodowiththeirlives started grousing about it.When Cary Elwes made his "English accent" joke in Mel Brooks' Robin Hood movie,I just couldn't resist: {loud enough for everyone among the sparse audience in the dollar cinema to hear}"Yeah,but at least THAT Robin Hood had some genuine laughs!!!"
Originally Posted By cstephens It wasn't Costner's non-accent that bothered me. It was the fact that he had zero charisma, great for when you're playing Robin Hood, huh? Why would anyone follow you? Oh, and in fact, as I recall, they didn't. They proceeded because of Morgan Freeman's character. I loved Men in Tights. /cs
Originally Posted By JohnS1 I have no specific movie in mind - but I still shake my head when there is a gun battle in a movie and the heavies shoot like crazy but always miss the hero. Even when there are ten of them and one of him. Even when he runs right across their line of fire. Even when they are trained marksmen. Even when ... well, you get the picture.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss Back to Star Wars... ... I am sure this is explained on some SW geek site, but how does the Death Star manage to move around the galaxy so quickly? I mean, that galaxy must be awfully small if it can go from one planetary system to another. Or does it have some sort of light speed capability that is not quite as fast as the Millenium Falcon? Now, if it does have light speed capability, at the end of A New Hope, why does it take so long to circle the planet to destroy the moon that the Rebels are on? Heck, why wait to orbit at all? Just blow up the freakin' Planet, and the shockwave and so on would likely take out the moon too! Lastly, there is no "up" in space. I am always amused that spaceships always meet in space like they were sitting on a surface, i.e. right side up. Star Trek does it too.
Originally Posted By NYthrillseeker trek - great point, I actually never thought about that! Shall I attempt to attack Independence Day? Here are a few things I don't get with that movie. First of all, we have a gigantic spaceship coming towards Earth, this thing is so massive, it's a quarter the size of the moon apparently. Let me ask you how astronomers can locate a mile wide astroid on a possible colision course with Earth when it's still 30 YEARS away, but in this movie, something the size of that magnitude goes completely missed until it's within moon distance??? Alright, I accepted it, reluctantly. So the thind is slowing down as it approaches Earth and splits apart covering all the major cities and everyone starts evacuating. As unreal that may seem, it's a movie, and who knows what's out there, so I'll accept it. The thing I won't accept is this: I was in New York for 9-11, on that horrific day it was IMPOSSIBLE to move around New York. Bridges were closed, people had to move on foot. Now I'm not beginning to compare an actual national trajedy to a movie, but I'm just mentioning it to make my point. In the movie, Jeff Goldblum's character takes his father and they drive from Brooklyn (which is east of manhattan by the way where all the chaos is focused) to Washington DC in a few short hours!!! When that can't be done on a regular Saturday!! Ok, they show that the highway is totally clear on one side. Do you really think in an emergency of that nature, people (especially in NY) would sit calmly in traffic on one side of the highway while the other remains empty?? It's just ridiculous. Driving up to the lawn of the White House also seems like it's not problem at all. I'm just getting started with this movie. But I'll leave it there for now. Believe it or not, I STILL enjoyed the movie, regardless of how unbelievable most of it was (and I'm treating aliens invading Earth in giant ships as believable too!).
Originally Posted By Autopia Deb Here's the thing that gets me about ID4. Will Smith crashes his jet at the edge of the Grand Canyon and drags an Alien all the way to the Bonneville Salt Flats. I have driven from Arizona to the flats before, it's a full day's DRIVE. No way someone is walking that distance. BTW, back when this flick was made, the production crew left a HECK of a big mess on the salt, including scaffolding. The BLM, the BNI and the SCTA were NOT happy with them (no complaints for the production crew of Pirates 3 that I've heard).
Originally Posted By hightp trekkeruss, the Death Star did have Hyperdrive capability that's why it could move quickly between solar systems. Once it got to the Yavin system, it could no longer use the Hyperdrive (it would overshoot the target) and had to resort to standard thrusters for manuvering. (Yes, I am a Star Wars Geek.) What bugs me in movies are the way firearms are handled. Most times, you hear the distinctive 'click' of a safety coming off, or a hammer being cocked, even when the guns have no safety or hammer (like Glocks). Another issue is how many times guns are fired in a scene. Revolvers generally have only 6 shots, but are often fired 8-10 times without reloading. In Terminator 2, the T1000 fires his Glock pistol 22 times before it empties. It only has a 17 shot clip. (I tend to count shots. I'm a gun geek, too.)
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Several months ago, I watched a quiet little indie movie called "Bubble". It features unknowns that were pulled from their daily lives and given only the basics of lines and the plot, and left to ad lib in a very conversational style. They don't look like movie stars -- they look like anyone you'd run into at the grocery store. They don't talk at all like movie stars -- their lines aren't clever. Thhere are no dramatic camera angles, or long tracking shots. The result feels very unscripted, very realistic compared to any other movie I've ever seen. Watching it, you suddenly realize how bizarre what we accept as "realistic" in movies is. And then watching the next few movies after that, I was very aware of how much slickness there is -- every movie seemmed overrehearsed and unnatural.
Originally Posted By NYthrillseeker Autopia - I noticed that too, another one of my many points about that movie. Then he meets the hundreds of RV's driving through the flats, and within minutes they are entering Area 51, which is, oh yeah, hours back in the direction he came from! I am very knowledgable with geography and therefore I tend to notice location errors in movies and television that the everyday viewer might not catch. For example in the TV show Las Vegas. This has been pointed out by others as well and is even noted on websites, the fictional hotel that's featured on the show is supposed to be located across from the Luxor. Many times when showing exterior views of the location, the hotel switches from having the entrance face the strip, and face away from the strip. Also any indoor shots (like in Ed's office) show a view out the window taken from mid-strip, over 2 miles away! As a Vegas regular, this is very obvious, and poor location shooting. A movie featuring Las Vegas does the same thing. In National Lampoon's Vegas Vacation, when the Griswald family arrives on the Strip for the first time, you see famous hotels and landmarks as they pass them looking out of the limosine. These hotels are COMPLETELY out of order as they appear on the strip. They could have very easily shot the same scene with them in order, and gained more credibility. Not that that movie has any anyway. Another Vegas film, ConAir, towards the end as the airplane is trying to land on the Strip. They pass hotels completely out of sequence. Why do they do this?? Do they think people will not notice? Or do they simply not care if we do. Oh, Kar2oon Man, no worries, typos are common here.
Originally Posted By cstephens When we were in Downtown L.A. a lot for the Star Wars convention recently, we drove by a courtyard in between a bunch of buildings, and the courtyard has this reddish-orange structure. Many of us noticed that it was from the season finale of "Heroes", which was supposed to have taken place in New York. Jaws 4 The Revenge - Ummm, yeah, other than the whole revenge-by-a-shark thing, I'm also supposed to believe the shark is supersonic, psychic and can divine familial relationships? ID4 - Best drinking game movie ever. Volcano - Did you know you can stop the flow of molten lava with those highway concrete barrier things? /cs
Originally Posted By Dabob2 NYthrillseeker, I live in Brooklyn, work in the city. I'm sure I don't have to tell you how many films set in New York feature someone pulling RIGHT up to their destination and finding a parking spot right there on the street directly in front. Any New Yorker can tell you that the chances of that happening are infinitesimal. (In the real city, you have to drive around and around and around just to find ANY spot on the street anywhere reasonably close to your destination, then probably giving up and putting it in a lot.) In the business, apparently, this is called a "Kojak." Because Kojak was always able to do this - pull right up to city hall, or wherever he was supposed to be, tires squealing, pull into this fictitious spot, and go inside. I also always notice if someone is supposed to be driving in New York, and you see something like Columbus Circle in the background, then 5 minutes later they're on Wall Street. Ain't gonna happen.
Originally Posted By ToonKirby >I have no specific movie in mind - but I still shake my head when there is a gun battle in a movie and the heavies shoot like crazy but always miss the hero.< On a related note, I love it when someone gets stabbed in a movie and falls down cold dead when in fact they would bleed to death which would take time. Surprised nobody has said anything about the biggest "huh?" moment in ID4 when Jeff Goldblum's computer was compatible with the alien ship's.
Originally Posted By NYthrillseeker Dabob - Yes, I know EXACTLY what you mean. As a frequent driver in Manhattan, I am perfectly aware of the impossibility to find a spot. Also the spots designated with signs that say "No Parking Anytime", apparently 90% of New Yorkers have some pass to ignore these, because they're always filled up too! Another thing with ID4, the mythical shot of the Empire State Building stradling a street. Any New Yorker knows the only building that does this in NY is the Metlife Building on Park Avenue. < Surprised nobody has said anything about the biggest "huh?" moment in ID4 when Jeff Goldblum's computer was compatible with the alien ship's> Yes, this was one of my MANY points with the movie, too many to write about. Let's just accept that it was compatible, but the aliens fly millions of lightyears with technology so far advanced beyond our comprehension but yet they don't have a virus protection program? Oh yeah, and Will Smith's character learned to fly that thing awfully fast. It's funny how they had it all rigged with Oxygen and everything already, when they couldn't do anything with the ship until just a day prior. >I have no specific movie in mind - but I still shake my head when there is a gun battle in a movie and the heavies shoot like crazy but always miss the hero.< That also happens in insane regularity on 24 with Kiefer Sutherland. It seems all these bad guys never went had any weapons training at all. Jack Bauer can just stand still and smile and they'll miss, but Jack, he only needs 2 shots max to hit anyone, with a lethal shot no less!
