Things you're tired of seeing in movies

As a former soldier, I'm sick of soldiers being characterized as psychos and bloodthirsty. Really prevelant in sci-fi. Neill Blomkamp does this a lot and frankly, it's offensive to me to see career military types being portrayed this way so often in film.
Even worse when they're depicted as narrow-minded, incapable of independent thinking, inappropriately sadistic, openly homophobic, chauvinistic, cowardly (e.g. in the face of superior space alien force) and devoid of common sense. This was more prevalent in the 90's. I think of the one peace-loving ( = anti-gun) protagonist who saves the day with intelligence. He's usually opposed by hard-headed military who have no tactical sense other than violence and fall for every trap set by the monster(s)/aliens(s) despite warnings by the hippie protagonist (and usually his girlfriend).

hate that.
 
Even worse when they're depicted as narrow-minded, incapable of independent thinking, inappropriately sadistic, openly homophobic, chauvinistic, cowardly (e.g. in the face of superior space alien force) and devoid of common sense.
In all fairness, I was an Army officer and I saw all these things in real life. There were times I seriously wondered, "I'm gonna have to follow these people into combat?" My unit's mission was to be a radpid deployment force from the states to Korea if things turned how there. I once read our Brigade's war plan, which involved setting up after getting our pre-positioned equipment, setting up in fixed positions...
Then, dying in place while delaying the North Koreans long enough for more forces to arrive from the US and Pacific areas.
Not exactly good for your moralle to know that.
But ask anyone who's ever dealt with staff people in the military. There really is a serious lack of original thinking in the military today. I was very surprised to see some of the downright bone-headed things I saw people above me think up.
 
In all fairness, I was an Army officer and I saw all these things in real life. There were times I seriously wondered, "I'm gonna have to follow these people into combat?" My unit's mission was to be a radpid deployment force from the states to Korea if things turned how there. I once read our Brigade's war plan, which involved setting up after getting our pre-positioned equipment, setting up in fixed positions...
Then, dying in place while delaying the North Koreans long enough for more forces to arrive from the US and Pacific areas.
Not exactly good for your moralle to know that.
But ask anyone who's ever dealt with staff people in the military. There really is a serious lack of original thinking in the military today. I was very surprised to see some of the downright bone-headed things I saw people above me think up.
Do you think it's sometimes overplayed in movies? Often times it seems like the military is used as a convenient plot device to assume all negative human characteristics and in order to make the hero look better.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that, in a sci-fi film with monsters/zombies/aliens, it's as if law enforcement and military are entirely counterproductive in the face of crisis. I don't recall seeing the military involved in basic disaster relief or health services - only futile displays of violence. And, on an individual level, it's as if none of them have had any training or discipline whatsoever in the movies.

I really enjoyed Battle: Los Angeles which was refreshing in that it actually depicted military as human beings with sincere motives. Of course you have a much better sense of what's realistic than I would as a civilian. But I must say that my experience, as a doctor at Travis AFB for the past 3 years, I've met all kinds of folks - many (not all) of whom were upstanding, reliable and genuinely good-natured. And you almost never see them depicted on film.

I must add that my veteran (Vietnam, Korea, WW 2 ...) patients are of a wildly heterogeneous breed. But that's a whole different discussion.

What did you think of Battle LA?
 
Do you think it's sometimes overplayed in movies? Often times it seems like the military is used as a convenient plot device to assume all negative human characteristics and in order to make the hero look better.

What did you think of Battle LA?
I get your point and can't disagree with you. T
Battle LA was one of those movies where it's heart was in the right place and I loved the details that nobody else gets right in sci-fi. And yes, it showed the military is totally unable to initially prevail (which is a historical constant) but ultimately overcame and adapted. But it was still an unholy mess of film making with all the cliches I've ever seen in any 1940s WW2 movie.
That said, it was worth it to FINALLY see a movie where the aliens have an obvious command and control structure, aliens taking cover and the thing that really shocked me, was where aliens were beaking cover to pull their wounded buddies out of the line of fire. I don't think that had ever been done in a sci-fi movie before.
he earilier comment on Avatar made your point very well, but let's face it, they took the script from "Dances with Wolves," scratched out the word, "Indian" and put "Alien" in its place,and changed the ending. I still think Michael Blake the writer of "Dances with Wolves" deserves royalites for having his script stolen by James Cameron.
 
A long time pet peeve of mine has been monsters that don't eat anything they kill, they just kill, seemingly, for the sheer hell of it. I think the worst offender was the recent Godzilla movie where they said that Godzilla preyed on the Mutos but when they showed the big G actually kill one he just left it without so much as taking a single bite of its corpse. Second place goes to the Alien franchise where they show xenos constantly killing people for no other reason than just to kill them and they never, not in 4 movies, did they ever explain what they actually ate or if they even ate at all.
 
A long time pet peeve of mine has been monsters that don't eat anything they kill, they just kill, seemingly, for the sheer hell of it. I think the worst offender was the recent Godzilla movie where they said that Godzilla preyed on the Mutos but when they showed the big G actually kill one he just left it without so much as taking a single bite of its corpse. Second place goes to the Alien franchise where they show xenos constantly killing people for no other reason than just to kill them and they never, not in 4 movies, did they ever explain what they actually ate or if they even ate at all.
I thought the first movie addressed it, in that Ash talked about the alien's 'nutritional requirements'. But that was an assumption.
That's actually a good point, something I should have thought of considering how much time I've spent outdoors and seen critters eating other critters.
That said, there are plenty of animals here on Earth that kills with no intention of eating their prey, like any mamma animal jumped by something else, or cats to various degrees...
 
This is something that's really been getting to me lately. It's what I call the "doorway confession".

- A suspect is being interrogated in a room, they don't respond, or only respond a bit then stop, then the cop/interrogator gets up to leave the room. Just as they open the door and are ready to leave, the suspect shouts "wait/hold on, etc" and the officer sits back down while the suspect proceed to spill there guts. I have gotten extremely fed up with this ploy.

This seems to happen mostly in police/law enforcement shows, NCIS uses this schtick in nearly every episode, and it's really gotten aggrevating.
 
OK... this may or may not have been covered...

I CANNOT STAND when watching TV or a movie people Skyping/VTC slightly turn, lift or lower their heads to talk to someone off center of the screen as if depth, perspective, angles and 3 dimensions exist. Heck, why not just stand up and look behind the monitor as well? ;)
 
A long time pet peeve of mine has been monsters that don't eat anything they kill, they just kill, seemingly, for the sheer hell of it. I think the worst offender was the recent Godzilla movie where they said that Godzilla preyed on the Mutos but when they showed the big G actually kill one he just left it without so much as taking a single bite of its corpse. Second place goes to the Alien franchise where they show xenos constantly killing people for no other reason than just to kill them and they never, not in 4 movies, did they ever explain what they actually ate or if they even ate at all.

Maybe what they eat is your FEAR. MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!!!
 
OK... this may or may not have been covered...

I CANNOT STAND when watching TV or a movie people Skyping/VTC slightly turn, lift or lower their heads to talk to someone off center of the screen as if depth, perspective, angles and 3 dimensions exist. Heck, why not just stand up and look behind the monitor as well? ;)
Star Trek did this all the time. You'd see an oblique view of the view screen, and the person at the other end was looking away from the camera. Like a giant aline head is mounted in the front of the bridge, looking away from the camera, as you're looking at the side of their head, something you couldn't see in a 2D image no matter how clear it is when the alien is talking with the Enterprise crew head-on!
 
To be fair, that effect was very much intentional. The screens, such as in TNG and onward, we're supposed to be vague sort of 3D imagery. So when the camera was on the side of the set, we (as the audience) saw the side of the person's face. They filmed it that way on purpose, and when you consider it, it's a neat idea that they tried to make it so consistent without exposition.

I agree about the cop interview thing. On TV the cops yell at the suspect, get in their face, and basically tell everything they know about the case in the hope that the suspect will spill the beans after being so dumbfounded by the cops' extraordinary grasp of the information. Law and Order: Criminal Intent does this with such egregious regularity that I can't stand to watch it!

Andy
 
Another thing I hate, in particular to modern films: the lead characters driving cool classic cars or expensive cars. Seriously, it's like "we've got to have a cool/expensive car for our lead to drive, or the audience won't believe our character is cool without one." Where's the lead character driving a 1986 Mercury Lynx station wagon? Or a second-hand Kia coup that's been handed down? What about the couples driving mini-vans? Or what about a junker that they've been working on restoring for five years? Or what about that pick-up truck that looks like its barely holding on at the seams.
 
Last edited:
OK... this may or may not have been covered...

I CANNOT STAND when watching TV or a movie people Skyping/VTC slightly turn, lift or lower their heads to talk to someone off center of the screen as if depth, perspective, angles and 3 dimensions exist. Heck, why not just stand up and look behind the monitor as well? ;)

THIS!!!
Okay, maybe Star Trek gets a pass due to future video conferencing tech or whatev. But when it's done in a contemporary setting...

Along those lines, it always bugged me when the director forgot to shoot "video conferencing camera POV" footage of the exchange, so the characters end up seeing on their monitors the EXACT SAME ANGLES we see when "we" are in the room with them. The first time I noticed this kind of thing was way back in The 6 Million Dollar Man, and it bugged me even as a wee lad. What was worse is they cut from "our" view of Party A, to the exact same footage on the monitor being viewed by Party B. What, so Party B is watching The 6 Million Dollar Man on ABC, too? :lol

Even Trek vet Leonard Nimoy forgot this when he shot Body Wars for Epcot Center. Same problem. It was an identical ride to Star Tours just with new theming, but the execution paled. I was impressed when Star Tours got it right---remember the video monitor on the right that shows you whoever is talking to you from another ship (or Artoo)? They spoke directly to camera, and on video (not film) to boot. That was exactly right.

Which brings me to another related thing--shooting stuff on film that is supposed to be video. Not as big a deal nowadays with HD, but...
 
Another thing I hate, in particular to modern films: the lead characters driving cool classic cars or expensive cars. Seriously, it's like "we've got to have a cool/expensive car for our lead to drive, or the audience won't believe our character is cool without one." Where's the lead character driving a 1986 Mercury Lynx station wagon? Or a second-hand Kia coup that's been handed down? What about the couples driving mini-vans? Or what about a junker that they've been working on restoring for five years? Or what about that pick-up truck that looks like its barely holding on at the seams.

On TV at least.those aren't the cars that the car companies that are sponsoring the show want to push, of course. That's why everyone in the show drives a Chevy or whatever. They are cars provided to the show by the sponsors. In film, a lot of the time, the director wants a cool car so they go out and borrow or rent one. Who the hell wants to rent a 1986 Mercury Lynx station wagon?
 
Another thing I hate, in particular to modern films: the lead characters driving cool classic cars or expensive cars. Seriously, it's like "we've got to have a cool/expensive car for our lead to drive, or the audience won't believe our character is cool without one."
Unless, of course, the lead character's car is used for comedic effect like the 1970 Chevy Nova Eddie Murphy's character drove in Beverly Hills Cop.
 
On TV at least.those aren't the cars that the car companies that are sponsoring the show want to push, of course. That's why everyone in the show drives a Chevy or whatever. They are cars provided to the show by the sponsors. In film, a lot of the time, the director wants a cool car so they go out and borrow or rent one. Who the hell wants to rent a 1986 Mercury Lynx station wagon?

I know, but most of the sponsored cars are the high-end luxury style vehicles. Barely any of their middle-class can only afford vehicles are ever shown.

Unless, of course, the lead character's car is used for comedic effect like the 1970 Chevy Nova Eddie Murphy's character drove in Beverly Hills Cop.

A pretty cool car and a classic nowadays. But I get that.
 
Two things about cars:

1. Product placement. I swear that the only good episodes of the walking dead are the one's without a Hyundai.

2. Average characters driving vintage cars. No one really does that unless they are into cars. Skyler white wouldn't have that old jeep wagon. She would have a dodge caravan.
 

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top