You must log in or register to comment.
Normalise removing your interest and presence from bullshit situations 👏🏻
I work in IT, don’t get me started on things that don’t make sense. I was genuinely shocked when I watched Mr. Robot and thought omg they actually tried!
I can relate to this. A movie asks for suspension of disbelief, and I am happy to grant that. But then it has to present a coherent world for which I suspended my disbelief. If it doesn’t then I wasted my suspended disbelief and that’s annoying.
What about a free and available parking spot in front of every location they’re driving to?
I don’t nitpick over really minor things, like the wrong snakes and such. I can understand unrealistic silly if it makes sense for the movie.
What I can’t stand are plots or situations that can only exist because the writers don’t know what the fuck they’re writing about, or lack any imagination in making plot reasons happen.
Battlefield Los Angeles is one of those movies I just can’t fucking stand because of this.
Tap for spoiler
- The aliens invade Earth because it’s the only planet in the solar system with liquid water, and that’s apparently very valuable.
Excuse me, but are you telling me an interstellar capable alien civilisation cannot melt ice? Do you have any idea how much water there is in the Kuiper Belt!? There are chunks of ice floating over there the size of countries.
Any alien could be mining the Kuiper Belt for a thousand years and we’d never notice. Nobody would have to commit so many resources to cunduct such a wasteful invasion of an inhabited planet with an amount of water that is a knee high puddle compared to everything that’s available in space!
- The alien technology is somehow… Modern and not very futuristic, and eventually get beaten after just a day or two of intense fighting.
So… The alien species can cross the stars. The alien species apparently has the technology to analyse Earth from light years away. They can not only detect liquid water on Earth from that distance, but also that there is a civilisation living there.
They have some pretty fucking granular information about Earth for observations made several light years away, and… that is the best they could do!? A two day failed invasion with a pitiful amount of troops and no orbital support?
They have the technology to fly through the depths of space and get mind bogglingly detailed information from so far away, and they invade land tiny force equipped with crap that functions almost worse than what we currently have!?
This species is written too stupid to have even made it to an interstellar level.
What kills me. The smart person, call them a leader in molecular biology. That can suddenly fly a space ship. Operate everything in said space ship. Write a computer program, in excel, to translate an alien species. Like come on dawg. I get it. You’re smart and make a fun movie. But the whole 1 person that is a fucking the expert in literally everything that happens is just getting old.
I feel like your calling out Project Hail Mary. Is this what you are referring to?
Yeah. That was the last movie I saw like this. Keep in mind, I love the book and movie. But watching the movie, I keep going “oh come on” how does he know how to program a translator in excel. Still a great movie.
I only saw the movie, but I thought the same stuff for the most part. It would have helped if they were training him, but from what I remember he was only teaching his specific area and then thrown into having to do it with like almost no time for training. Yeah definitely not going to happen lol.
The TV show 24 killed me with how he was able to do much in an hour when it could easily have taken 30-1.5 hr just in travel time around cities like LA.
For anyone who doesn’t know the show premise was each episode was 1 hr in a 24hr period where the main guy has to stop some kind of terrorist or otherwise crazy attack with dozens of sub plots and things he has to do per hour too. But somehow he travels across major cities in minutes.
Yeah, but you still remember what it sounds like when the phones ring and the sound the clock makes.
I’mma about to ruin medical shows/scenes for y’all. And once you see this, you cannot unsee it. the source for all this is the 15 years I spent riding in the back of the bus as a medic.
When you see a scene in the ER and a critical patient arrives, all the doctors go rushing into the exam room and start doing things and arguing about what to do. If we put this stupidity aside for a moment and roll back the scene to the beginning we will see the mistakes the show makes every time.
First, doctors don’t rush into the exam room the moment the patient arrives. The doctor, just one and not a whole squad of them, will wait for a moment or two to let the medics and nurses get the patient on to a bed and the triage nurse gets the medic’s report.
When the Medics and the cot leaves the room, the doctor will walk to the doorway and stop. Most of them will actually lean against the door jam and just look for a minute or so. They are making their first assessment of the patient from that distance and begin to formulate a treatment plan. Doctors are ACTUALLY TAUGHT to do this medical school. And they practice it because it’s hard to remember in an oh shit moment and hard to do. Even us medics are taught the same thing. If the TV doctor does NOT do this, this is your first warning that this a bullshit medical show no matter what the producers and actors claim about realism. This is basic and fundamental to ER medicine and would be soooo easy to do. This is the point where I’m out and ne’er to be seen again.
The second mistake that gets made is that the doctors themselves do very little of the actual treatment of the patient. They stand off to the side and tell the nurses what they want them to do. The nurses do most of the work. The doctor observes and directs. Only if a procedure that requires a doctors skill and knowledge to do, do they get hands on. So that’s the second bullshit thing in these shows.
And finally, doctors do not consult in the patient’s room unless it absolutely can’t be avoided. Which is very rare. They have a room, generally behind the nurses station where they go for that. I have been in there with doctors on occasions when I asked for a teaching moment to further my skills as a medic from one of them. And no matter what hospital, that’s where we would go.
Speaking of medical dramas:
I was amazed how Stargate Atlantis got one medical procedure right over so many medical dramas I’ve seen.
Patient is in defib, so they get the defibrillator. Doesn’t work, patient’s heart stops. They take away the defibrillator and start doing chest compressions.
I was just… Woaw. This series plays so fast and loose with science. Didn’t expect that.
That’s pretty close, but no cigar. You never remove the defib. Then you do 2 minutes more of compressions and then you re-analyze again. Wash rinse and repeat until you are relieved or someone with the authority to decide tells you to stop.
Now, if one of the characters is a medical doctor or the idiot script writer in this case, they were quasi military right, then those people can make a decision to stop CPR. But it would have been a more accurate scene if they just shown them starting CPR, doing a cut scene to everyone being exhausted and done. Or checking the body and seeing an obvious sign of death like lividity and not even starting. So still pretty poor writing.
The worst part is that it’s so easy to get this stuff right. It’s just simple things. not rocket surgery.
But they will share all the details with any random supporter waiting for the procedure to be finished in the otherwise empty waiting room, right?
Oh yeah, that is so totally true. HIPPA doesn’t apply to strangers in the hallway.
Is he going to make it, doc?
cries
I don’t know. Damn it Jim! I’m a piano player, not a Doctor!
And isn’t CPR deliberately depicted wrongly in movies and shows because the proper IRL CPR procedure risks breaking a person’s ribs?
Oh, you break ribs when done right.
Whenever evil antagonist broadcasts his evil message on every major advertisement screen and TV in the world (and PC/mobile device), with full audio.
stupid rant
-
Ad screens don’t have speakers you dolt
-
No one in times square looks at the ad acreens except the tourists when taking a picture
-
Not all ad screens can handle a live stream connection and you’d need to hack into each one to play your message.
-
It is literally impossible for everyone to be conveniently watching the TV at the same time as everyone else across the globe
-
Overriding every TV broadcast channel with your message requires an RF array an order of magnitude more powerful than Russia’s massive Murmansk-BN electronic warfare system.
-
No one watches broadcast TV anymore in most developed countries
-
The internet cannot handle a simultaneous stream of video to every digital device in the world without the use of multicast or broadcast, which means evil antangonist is either rolling in with hacking the entire internet backbone to enable multicast traffic or magically broadcasting a signal to devices that don’t support receiving a broadcast signal.
-
Evil antagonist has to use multiple zero day CVEs just to force stream his evil message on PC/mobile devices for a whopping 30 seconds.
-
It didn’t stop me from finishing Prometheus, but what grinds my gears is when the supposedly biologist was trying to pet the alien and it attacked him. Any trained biologist would know not to try to pet animals which you don’t know if it’s timid or not.
Ah, but you’re forgetting - that only happened because the trained cartographer with the 3D mapping drones… got them lost.
I find it unrealistic for any movie involving contact with aliens to not even consider how our and their microbial life would interact with each other. There should be a default rule of “oh you touched the alien? Ok, you will be the quarantine subject that we will monitor to make sure you haven’t caught some slow developing disease that will inevitably kill any earth life in your vicinity because we haven’t developed any kind of resistance to it”.
Except instead of “touched the alien” it would really have to be “entered their atmosphere with your ship” because the ship itself could bring back contaminants that would eventually destroy all life on our planet. And maybe even entering the atmosphere isn’t needed if microbial life occasionally gets swept into space by extreme weather, meteor interactions with the atmosphere, maybe solar ones also. Including this because it’s plausible that earth life originated elsewhere and was just seeded here by some event that allowed life to escape some other location and survive to come here. We’ve also had ships return to earth with life detectable on their outside–because someone on earth sneezed on it before it was launched and the microbial life wasn’t destroyed by being in space.
Similar line of thought when they go on the alien planet and just breathe the atmosphere because they detect oxygen.
I don’t know why people forget even the first moon missions had a quarentine trailer/chamber used by the astronauts for this exact reason.
They were pretty sure they weren’t gonna find microbial life on the moon but they sure as hell weren’t gonna take the risk in case there actually was.
Ironically it’s canon in even Alien (1979) and even a truck driver / pilot knows it. “Oh you got in contact with an alien organism? Sorry can’t let you on the ship.”
For some reason the cowboy style of the Prometheus. The sad thing is they could have written around these bad tropes but chose not to.
The original script (ironically written by the screenwriter who did the Catwoman script) was a much better movie. You can blame this on Executive Fuckery.
I stopped watching Stranger Things because in a show about demons from a parallel universe invading a small town, I couldn’t get over a soccer mom breaking her friend out of a Russian prison camp.
That broke the realism for me.
Season 1 is goat level of good. Goes off the rails from there. The whole 11 going wild thing and then the Russian thing were just not needed.
Not to mention the 76 years or whatever it took them to film it all. Those kids in the last season all looked like mid 20 year olds with a shit corpo job. Not high school age kids.
I stopped before that, I think around the time the guy in the cool car banged some soccer mom. It was just a sign that we weren’t exploring the human condition wither otherworldly tropes, but just throwing shit at the plot wall.
I mean, he doesn’t actually bang her. But those scenes always grossed me out. I don’t want to see adults even almost fucking high school kids in my kids-on-bikes sci-fi show. Maybe the Duffer brothers would say they were lampshading an older sexist trope by gender-flipping it, but that doesn’t make it less repulsive.
I count bullets. If someone with a revolver fires off 20 rounds in a row without a pause, the show/movie lost credibility and I’m taken out of it. Extra bad if they later try to use ammo as a plot device to raise drama, ugh.
The most egregious example of this that I can think of is in the final shootout of Commando, where Schwarzenegger’s character fires hundreds of rounds without ever reloading once
That’s a subtle one. If a revolver fires 7 or 9, unforgivable. If it fires 20, they knew damn well what they were doing and it’s a Machete Kills style comedy, we’re back to acceptable.
Honestly it depends on the revolver. Different revolvers do hold different amounts of ammo. I have seen heavier revolvers like .357 or .44 that hold anywhere from 5 to 6 shots. I have also seen light caliber revolvers like a .38 or .32 that holds 8 to even 12 shots. Of course, a 12 shot revolver is typically only a very light weight like the .32, and they tend to be very small guns. Thay being said, most movies don’t show that. They show a guy with a huge ass gun that probably only hold 5 to 6 shots at best. Then again, very few shows or movies ever show guns accurately. The sound from shooting even a light caliber gun can deafening in an open space. The sound of a .357 is so loud its unbelievable.
This makes me want to see a fully automatic revolver. If you’re going to be absurd, lean into it.
Mini guns?
It’s just bad prop decisions. There are guns that better fit. In a cheap movie, I can forgive it. A budget over 200k? I’m upset
I don’t know enough about the division of duties to know whose fault it is, but I blame the director. It’s just lazy, and easy.
Do any modern movies use revolvers? The only reason i can see for using a revolver is if the movie is set in the past or if there’s a plot reason to be using an old gun like e.g. it was his grandfather’s
They still make revolvers today. They’re supposedly more reliable and easier to maintain.
That was true until about the late 90’s. There are quite a few modern pistols that are equally reliable, and require little maintenance. I’ve fired thousands of rounds through my Glock 21 and although I clean it after every time, I certainly don’t have to. And I’ve never had a malfunction of any kind. Not one. Some guys I know clean theirs two or three times a year.
Now there are some rather unreliable brands out there still, so I imagine that’s why the cliche still exists.
What? Revolvers are really common. They’re incredibly reliable, in a way that a semi auto mag fed pistol isn’t.
A revolver rotates the cylinder and the hammer falls on each individual round. If the ammo is bad (incredibly rare but it happens) then nothing happens, but just pull the trigger again and you’re not jammed or anything.
A mag-fed semi auto, while higher capacity, has WAY more complicated moving parts. There’s tons of ways it can jam up or malfunction, and since all the ammo is stacked in the same spring-tensioned magazine, if there’s a problem you have to clear the jam in order to fire anything else.
If you’re in a position where you are actually pulling the trigger your fine motor skills are gone because of adrenaline. Clearing a jam like that isn’t something you’ll be able to do effectively without a ton of training, and most people don’t have that kind of training.
So a lot of people prefer a revolver. It’s only 6 shots instead of 11, 17, whatever, but you KNOW you’ll get six shots, and the thinking is if that’s not enough then 17 probably isn’t either. It’s personal preference.
But yeah, they’re not just “grandfather” guns.
And if you don’t get 6 shots you advance the chamber and get the others.
With a mag you gotta swap mags and unjam and ya dead.
While I disagree with guns for self defense if you were gonna get a pistol: get a shotgun.
You’re buying the wrong pistols then. You can throw a Glock in mid then run 800 rounds through it without cleaning, without jamming. And reloading a pistol is much easier than reloading a revolver. They also don’t kick nearly as much as a revolver, making them far more accurate.
I shoot an average of 4000 rounds a month. I would bet a whole lot of money that I’m far more familiar with “pistols” in all types than you are.
Revolvers are pistols.
Their recoil is often less than a semi auto. It depends on so many factors that saying they have more or less recoil is a nonsense claim; it depends on your ammo and the mass of the gun, primarily.
Accuracy is the same. Sights matter. Build quality matters. Length of your barrel matters. It all matters.
You can throw a Ruger GP100 in the mud and I’d trust it any day over a Glock covered in mud. It’s foolish to claim otherwise.
Glocks are great handguns. But they have malfunctions just the same, especially when you have mags with worn out springs like a lot of daily carry guns do because people pack the mags full and then leave them that way for years on end.
I’m not saying revolvers are better, I’m saying they have pros and cons and it’s personal preference. Many people who obviously know more than you do think they’re the best guns to carry when you need them most. I won’t say I agree or disagree, just that I acknowledge the points, and I’m sharing them here because firearm knowledge is generally abysmal, even in countries where they’re readily available.
Guns are absurd in almost all movies anyway. Zero reaction to firing in enclosed spaces, powering through a gunshot wound by using muscles that basically no longer exist because a bullet ripped through them, etc. And it’s not even just action movies, it happens all the time.
My pet peeve is the reactionless guns with unlimited kinetic energy bullets. The shooter’s hand barely twitches but the target flies as if they were hit by a cannonball. Newton would be spinning in his grave.
I think Newton would be the first to say that being appalled by things doesn’t cause a torque force on corpses. Well, he would be if he wasn’t dead. I guess it’s really just me saying that but trying to add Newton’s weight to it.
I hate when an actor clearly doesn’t even understand how to hold and aim a gun and their character is supposed to be competent at it.
Cate Blanchet’s character in Borderlands is a recent and particularly obvious example. In the movie’s trailer she is shown holding and aiming a rifle like someone who clearly never held a gun before and my understanding is that her character was supposed to be a highly competent gunslinger.
Someone coach those actors for crying out loud.
Or when people in a gunfight clearly aren’t hearing the apocalyptically loud sound gunshots would make in their situation - like in a small room or in a car.
I love the scene in (a movie, just realized I can talk about it without spoiling if I don’t say what movie, those who have seen it will know), where there’s an attempt to do a romance scam where they rob you when you get naked to have sex with the bait woman. He takes the other guy’s gun, at which point the guy laughs and says it’s only loaded with blanks. MC pauses for a second then shoots him in the face point blank anyways because blanks still release a ton of energy, they just don’t put half of it in to a small projectile, and the guy ends up rolling on the floor in agony, blinded.
Though that shot is fired inside and I don’t recall if they even acknowledge that aspect of it.
Archer definitely does, though!
I find it kind of cool that they portrayed blanks correctly, or at least more accurately than usual. The public has a misconception that shooting blanks is like shooting a cap gun.
Yeah, with bad luck blanks may kill even from distance, so it’s really better not to push your luck pointing a loaded gun
I think the problem is that Cate Blanchett has too big an ego to be taught/learn anything, including how to act. But that’s just my humble opinion.
I don’t know enough to notice bad gunplay but anachronistic makeup/hair styling can bother me. Costumes I give some slack because it could be a budget issue.
When it’s supposed to be a post-apocalyptic/survival genre but everyone looks clean-cut, shaven, and recently showered with a day-old haircut 🙄
Oh God yes and women with no body hair in times when only sex workers would shave pits&crotch
Yeah I saw a still frame from what appeared to be some sort of post-apocalyptic movie with a grungy super-spy/bounty-hunter type woman as the protagonist. Dirty torn clothes, nappy dreadlocks, the whole works. Clearly hadn’t showered in months. And her pits were clean-shaven. I was like “wat.”
To be fair, armpits are pretty quick to shave and I could see some people sticking with some personal hygiene habits in times like that just to feel a bit more normal. Also, if they don’t have time for showering, shaving armpits might be one of the most effective ways to keep the smells lower, like the difference between needing to scrub a lot with a sponge or just give it a wipe.
Personally, I shave my face because once it gets to a certain length, it annoys me. Same with my head. Now I do use an electric razor for both of those and don’t go down to the skin for either, so whether I kept up with that or went all mountain man would depend on access to electricity, but if I had that access, I would absolutely spend a bit of time managing that because it starts to be a distraction if I don’t.
Sure, if you can find enough razor cartridges. Armpits are too concave to use a straight razor on I would think.
Granted it is possible she did IPL or electrolysis before the downfall of society, so that is a potentially reasonable explanation
I think the problem is that Cate Blanchett has too big an ego to be taught/learn anything,
Where do you base this on? Have you got any experience shooting with her?
You learn a great deal about certain people by working high-end retail…
anachronistic makeup/hair styling
I don’t know if this is exactly “anachronistic” since the movie is set 20,000 years in the future and who knows, but there’s a scene in the second installment of the new Dune where the emperor is surrounded by his Sardaukar soldiers and they all have LA hipster haircuts.
Yes I think anything that is specifically recognizable like that counts. 80s permed hair is especially noticeable.
I also sometimes notice “old lady hairstyles” in the old movies that those old ladies watched in their teens, copied their style, and kept doing it for several decades, but that’s different.
Take your finger off the trigger!
The butt of the stock goes against your shoulder, not in your armpit!
What if there’s a cut where they could have conceivably reloaded?
I’m OK with it, if you show me at least one reload before you run out of bullets at the most dramatic opportunity.
This unironically looks pretty cool. It looks like an ESP8266 dev board at the top with a few DIP ICs below that
Looks like an Adafruit Feather nRF52
You guys are just making up words atp.
Underworld was always the one that annoyed me with their guns. Main character fires this automatic handgun for minutes and doesn’t reload.
That’s a bad script supervisor. A script supervisor is responsible for scene continuity between takes. Guaranteed the shooting schedule had a dozen days of frequent high intensity filming and the script supervisor was tired from making sure really busy scenes lined up within the time allowed.
Was watching the latest season of slow horses. Great show, I fully recommend. However… a couple of assassins that kept firing their pistols while chasing someone annoyed me. Sure, there was time to reload and it’s plausible that they simply didn’t show that. But what are the odds that they were carrying 3-4 spare clips with them? Especially since they weren’t wearing tactical gear anything of the sort.
The one that gets me is people flying backwards when hit by a bullet / shotgun blast.
I can accept it in movies that aren’t going for realism, even though it annoys me. But, I’ve seen it in movies that are trying for a gritty realism aesthetic, and after that I just can’t enjoy the movie. Add to that movies where silencers go “pfft”, or someone uses a pillow as a silencer, or people shoot guns without ear protection or hearing damage.
Physics wasn’t my best science, but wouldn’t the recoil have to be equivalent? So if the bad guy gets thrown back 3 feet, the protagonist would also get thrown back about that amount?
Yeah, exactly. Newton’s third law. If the person who was hit goes flying, an equivalent force had to be acting on the shooter. If that shooter is shooting a handgun, imagine just how much force is acting on their wrist.
If you’re wearing plate armor, you sure do. Especially if it’s got cheaper plates.
You sure do what?
I’m very forgiving in this regard, as long as the movie is entertaining, I’ll go along for the ride.
I did have a related weird thing happen once, though. I don’t remember what movie I was watching, but about halfway through I suddenly realized everyone in the movie was acting and I couldn’t watch anymore. It was a weird feeling, like they were all just lying to me, which of course they always are, but I was suddenly offended--“WTF? This is all bullshit!”
Maybe it was terrible chemistry. Maybe I subconsciously noticed all the subtle clues that the actors hated each other, but were pretending to be friends.
I suppose the one thing I can’t forgive is a complete lack of chemistry between the actors, and that killing their performances.
What I enjoy is watching poorly directed/acted shows or movies and stopping right after a cut. Pay attention, if they’re not the best actors, you can see them starting their lines or getting the gears going. This is especially apparent when there’s no sound. It’s ruined syndicated shows for me.
Mission Impossible, the first remake with Tom Cruise. The final scene ruined the whole thing for me. He’s hanging on the outside of a helicopter flying through a train tunnel chasing a train - which apparently wasn’t improbable enough because he then blows up the helicopter and the explosion sends him flying safely onto the train.
I’m sorry, but that helicopter was made of metal and glass. Anything that blew it up is going to turn him into a fine mist. In another, cheesier action movie, fine! But the movie took itself so seriously otherwise that I just couldn’t anymore.
