• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Do you find yourself analysing movies a lot?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Home theaters are more conducive to watching movies. Instead of analyzing the plot holes and bad writing, you sit back and get totally wasted on the intoxicant of your choice and exclaim- "Now that's entertainment!"
 
Zedtom said:
Home theaters are more conducive to watching movies. Instead of analyzing the plot holes and bad writing, you sit back and get totally wasted on the intoxicant of your choice and exclaim- "Now that's entertainment!"
Click to expand...

Eh, I don't specifically look for plot holes. Sometimes they just pop up, because ya know, I'm not a caveman.
 
Mr. Pedantic said:
It was absolutely horrible. We watched it in IGCSE Physics at the end of the year so that we could have a good time pointing out everything that was wrong with it. And there was a lot.


.
Click to expand...

Of course it was Scientifically ridiculous, no one would dispute that. Entertainment isn't about Accuracy.
 
how ignorant the screen writers in Hollywood are about..
Click to expand...
nearly everything.


With the 10's of millions they pay to actresses & actors, you'd think they could spend, say, $5k each to run the script past some people with half a brain.
 
Rubycon said:
Haha The Core was hideous. At least the hacker kid (Trident?! 😛) could've been playing Quake3 or UT instead of Pong after he shut down the NW grid when they were going to fire Destiny. 😛

The Day After Tomorrow is another. Oh and let's not forget 2012 just last November.

Oh and "laser" weapons used on spacecraft don't make those funny noises. :biggrin:
Click to expand...

Come on. Everyone knows that lasers make one of two noises. The continuous oscillating high pitch noise, as in set the phasers to stun on star trek, and "pew pew pew." The problem is that those little pen lasers that they sell in dollar stores - they're 10 cents worth of laser & 90 cents worth of sound suppressor.
 
DrPizza said:
Come on. Everyone knows that lasers make one of two noises. The continuous oscillating high pitch noise, as in set the phasers to stun on star trek, and "pew pew pew." The problem is that those little pen lasers that they sell in dollar stores - they're 10 cents worth of laser & 90 cents worth of sound suppressor.
Click to expand...

:biggrin:
 
fatpat268 said:
Haha, I can't stand military movies where an army base on american soil consists of a few barracks and everybody else driving around the base in humvees/jeeps with their weapons. Makes you wonder if the film director had ever been to a military base before...
Click to expand...

what makes you think the general populace has ever been on a military base to even know its wrong? I certainly haven't.
 
DrPizza said:
Come on. Everyone knows that lasers make one of two noises. The continuous oscillating high pitch noise, as in set the phasers to stun on star trek, and "pew pew pew." The problem is that those little pen lasers that they sell in dollar stores - they're 10 cents worth of laser & 90 cents worth of sound suppressor.
Click to expand...

Sound needs a medium to travel which does not exist in outer space. 😉
 
Rubycon said:
Sound needs a medium to travel which does not exist in outer space. 😉
Click to expand...

Which brings up an interesting point: the original episodes of Star Trek were true to many aspects of science, including this. However, it was noticed that the average viewer was expecting to hear sound, so the decision was made to add sound in later episodes. In other words, Hollywood is catering to average intelligence. As the average intelligence drops, movies become more annoying to many of us. 🙂
 
Rubycon said:
Yes Speed 2 was bad in many ways.
The biggest question is what was already brought up about shutting down the engines manually. With large diesels there are many ways to do this very easily. Also carrying around a device to wirelessly activate doors and other features is not going to happen.

Nor is a passenger just stumbling on the bridge! There is not just one door that leads to the bridge - at least on our ship there is not. All the senior officers' staterooms are accessible by a corridor that's secured by a digital combination lock. The door to the bridge is only accessible through this corridor. To gain access to the bridge you have to be buzzed in by an officer on the bridge after you are verified through a two way video intercom system. This is the post 9/11 requirement for passenger vessels.

Even worse in the movie is the ballast tank scene and bow thrusters. While it's true that ballast tanks are flooded and pumped out they are NOT accessible decks like shown in the movie!

Bow thrusters even on smaller ships - (the vessel in the movie is around 10,000 tons) are HUGE electric motors with hundreds, sometimes 1000s of hp! There's no way in hell the output of a man (never mind holding breath under water!) is going to make a difference in the heading of a ship. (never mind the ship is under way at over 12 knots!) Even standing still there would be no movement. Bow thrusters don't have any way to manually move them either.

One thing I can say that's true was them coming into port at St Maarten - the ragboaters yelling "Hey we have the right of way!". Yes they will do that but you would think common sense would tell them to get the hell out of the way! Would a ship come in that far ashore? It's hard to say as its never happened. It would really depend on a lot of factors. Let's just say Speed 2 was very expensive to make because they actually "rented" the ship from Seabourne for several weeks to make the movie and that costs a LOT of money. They apparently skimped on CG as they could not really run a ship into St Maarten. It's a good thing too because that is one of my favorite ports. :biggrin:


Oh and I definitely DO have pet peeves with the way things are done in movies. I mean come on it's 2010 - EVERYONE has a computer and EVERYONE knows when you do things with computers you don't hear all these stupid noises like they dub in!

Did you know in the movie Titanic the fittings shown in the engine room - specifically the bronze fittings and gauge used just did not exist in 1912? Ditto for the passageway lighting! Soft white, high diffusion coated incandescent bulbs simply did not exist then! Not only was that a dead giveaway but the attack and decay times of the lighting when the power was fading in and out in the latter part of the movie was just not presented accurately. I remember chuckling in this part of the movie and other people were wondering what I was laughing at! That made me chuckle even more! :biggrin:
Click to expand...

So you neither confirm nor deny that you guard the lower decks of big boats using your superior knowledge of cheese as a weapon?

Interesting.... :hmm:
 
DrPizza said:
Which brings up an interesting point: the original episodes of Star Trek were true to many aspects of science, including this. However, it was noticed that the average viewer was expecting to hear sound, so the decision was made to add sound in later episodes. In other words, Hollywood is catering to average intelligence. As the average intelligence drops, movies become more annoying to many of us. 🙂
Click to expand...

Haha that reminds me when I made this animation in high school. I wanted to make the space portion quiet to follow proper physics, other then the music (that and I was too lazy to make sound effects) but the rest of my group wanted sounds and did not really understand the whole "no sound travel in space" thing.
 
DrPizza said:
Which brings up an interesting point: the original episodes of Star Trek were true to many aspects of science, including this. However, it was noticed that the average viewer was expecting to hear sound, so the decision was made to add sound in later episodes. In other words, Hollywood is catering to average intelligence. As the average intelligence drops, movies become more annoying to many of us. 🙂
Click to expand...

I think it's added so you can tell what's going on when you're not looking at the screen.

Phasors ready, captain.
Fire!
<no sound at all>
Good shot!
 
Sea Moose said:
So you neither confirm nor deny that you guard the lower decks of big boats using your superior knowledge of cheese as a weapon?

Interesting.... :hmm:
Click to expand...

I don't really spend time on boats. Once they have a professional crew and carry their own boats they are ships. There is a difference between a hill and a mountain. Loose lips sink ships.

Have a pickle and smile. 🙂
 
Rubycon said:
I don't really spend time on boats. Once they have a professional crew and carry their own boats they are ships. There is a difference between a hill and a mountain. Loose lips sink ships.

Have a pickle and smile. 🙂
Click to expand...

i only call your boat a boat to stir you up 😀
 
Rubycon said:
Only Bob Marley is allowed to stir it up! 😛

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLnq_tZf3eQ

A ship is not a boat but I'm willing to tolerate the misnomer for 24 hours if the telling party is willing to take no less than 500 milliseconds of tank welder ignition spark to their scrotum. 😉
Click to expand...

no thanks, maybe next time.
MAYBE if it were no more than 500 milliseconds. I draw the line there.

:awe:

And btw, Miss "no sound in space" Rubycon, can you watch any television show or movie that features this, ahem, feature?

How about gravity on an obviously non-centrifugal spacecraft? Accept that it's simply something to provide a way to "connect" to this otherwordly adventure, accept that maybe they went above and beyond our understanding of physics and created artificial gravity through another means, or just end up calling it oversight, a plothole if you will... ?

I am intrigued though. Because I absolutely loved Battlestar Galactica, and with the same space issues, Farscape. Either the creators were blatantly ignorant of this issue, or I think they simply forgo the true realism in order to provide something familiar to everyone, in a sense creating an alternate realism. I don't think these other people create artificial gravity at all, nor is it an error in the show, but rather, just something acknowledged and ignored for the sake of entertainment.

I don't mind that. I doubt I could watch a tv show or movie about a battle-capable spacecraft that obviously couldn't be comprised of a spinning hull, where all the people were floating about randomly... and then when they managed to finally engage in combat, completely ignore my senses as I must merely watch bright flashing lights and shockwaves and things crumpling, all as if on mute. I'd be bored to tears in all honesty, even though that is complete realism.
Then again, real life bores me since it is absolutely devoid of fantastical otherwordly adventures. 😀
 
destrekor said:
define bad...

Is a movie bad if it relishes breaking realism? Realize most movies are not realistic, even the thinking types. 😛

Take Crank and Crank 2, for instance. I have yet to see the Transporter movies, but I hear Crank was essentially Statham playing the Transporter role in a Transporter-on-crack movie.
The Crank movies were just exhileratingly terribad. They aren't "bad", they just take relishing in "wtf no way?!" to a whole new extreme. 😀 They absolutely require a suspension of disbelief to enjoy the movie, as without that you won't get past the premise of the movies. If you laugh at the premise and think "this could be entertaining", you'd be in for a real treat because the action and characters are just plain fun.
Realistic? Hell no and everyone knows it. And they have fun with it.

I enjoy a wide range of action movies. From the "we know this is stupid and we're going to run with it", to the "you might think it's stupid, but we play like it's all for real", to the "this isn't stupid, this is serious stuff, as real as it gets, minus that one bit which we'll now ignore, and if you disagree I might disregard your comments"
Click to expand...

Crank = good & entertaining b/c they are intentionally over-the-top. relishing in the ridiculousness of it.

With Transporter 1, you can tell that the ridiculousness and stupidy of the flick were unintentional. That, and the premise of the character (I'm the driver), is just too fucking stupid. He is meant to be taken seriously, while his character is essentially absurd. after that, the series tries to become the stupid/absurdity that it never meant to be. seems false and wasteful. but you know, the studio can make money doing it, b/c the people that watch these things are generally oblivious to how they are being treated by fools. You can say you don't care about that, but the truth is you simply don't realize that you are basically considered a mush-brained automaton. good for you, but this isn't my thing.


but yeah, Crank shouldn't be confused with Transporter. reminds me...I need to add Crank 2 to the queue.
😀
 
destrekor said:
no thanks, maybe next time.
MAYBE if it were no more than 500 milliseconds. I draw the line there.

:awe:

And btw, Miss "no sound in space" Rubycon, can you watch any television show or movie that features this, ahem, feature?
Click to expand...

Of course, it just happens and the TV cares no less at eye rolling. :biggrin:

Speaking of vacuum that is exactly what I have. I have pretty much abandoned TV watching for the past 15 years or so. I find that most TV programming just dulls one's mind. 😉

Don't even get me started on so called reality garbage.

Oh and having gravity makes it much easier to shoot and keeps the audience from going to sleep watching everyone and everything float around.
 
Last edited:
ShawnD1 said:
I think it's added so you can tell what's going on when you're not looking at the screen.

Phasors ready, captain.
Fire!
<no sound at all>
Good shot!
Click to expand...

it would be pretty boring to watch a huge space battle with no sound too. I think it has less to do with intelligence and everything to do with entertainment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top