Things you're tired of seeing in movies

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.


Sluis Van Shipyards

Legendary Member
My favorite is when someone shoots a gun and they zoom to a shot of the entire cartridge, bullet and shell, flying towards the target. I was watching Mythbusters today and they did that too. They fire guns almost every episode! I'm guessing that was the animation peoples' faults though.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Riceball

Master Member
Okay, here's one that always gets me...

Whenever some movie has a scene on the moon which depicts any one of the original Apollo landing sites, it shows the entire lunar module completely intact.

There are no lunar modules (uh, the top half) on the moon! The ascent stages all went back up to their command modules, and then were jettisoned into space before the Apollo spacecrafts splashed down in the ocean.

I was watching Men in Black 3, and this is noticeably a huge error when Boris The Animal escapes from his lunar prison.

Either Hollywood writers are dumber than rocks, or they actually think there are lunar modules on the moon. (I tend to think it's more the former than the latter).
While it's not accurate, I can see why filmmakers do it. It's so that people can recognize what they're looking at right away. The average movie watcher probably wouldn't recognize just the engine module(?) of the landing module. But you put the whole thing along with the American flag and people will instantly recognize it as one of the Apollo landing sites.
 

Iskelderon

Sr Member
Don't forget sequels trapped in a circle of pointless one-upmanship that leads to invisible Bond cars and the latest Fast&Furious with a jet engine duct-taped to a Pontiac Fiero to shoot it into space.
1625600902077.png
 

The Goon

New Member
Don't forget sequels trapped in a circle of pointless one-upmanship that leads to invisible Bond cars and the latest Fast&Furious with a jet engine duct-taped to a Pontiac Fiero to shoot it into space. View attachment 1473884
That is one of the most stupid things I've ever seen. I'm not at all surprised it's in one of the Fast & Furious movies, but I'm a little surprised they didn't just use CGI.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Laspector

Master Member
Movies where they only have five or ten minutes to avert the disaster, yet then it shows them in like three or four different locations trying to figure out how to avert said disaster. Does it not take any time to actually get to these places?
 

userd1402

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
One recurring idea for multiple-story films and tv shows. (especially the ones which always involve some expensive vehicle.

Fast and Furious - someone is being forced to do something and only a multi-car road chase can save the day, again.
The A-Team - someone is in danger and only a team of people who can build a tank out of a tractor can save the day, again.
McGyver - someone is in danger and only a man with a swiss army knife can put together something to save the day, again.
Airwolf - the country is in danger and only someone with a high powered helicopter can save the day, again.
Knight Rider - the country is in danger and only someone with a self-aware car can save the day, again.
 

Lightning

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
One recurring idea for multiple-story films and tv shows. (especially the ones which always involve some expensive vehicle.

Fast and Furious - someone is being forced to do something and only a multi-car road chase can save the day, again.
The A-Team - someone is in danger and only a team of people who can build a tank out of a tractor can save the day, again.
McGyver - someone is in danger and only a man with a swiss army knife can put together something to save the day, again.
Airwolf - the country is in danger and only someone with a high powered helicopter can save the day, again.
Knight Rider - the country is in danger and only someone with a self-aware car can save the day, again.

Knight Rider was usually much smaller scale than that, but your point is taken.
 

Montagar

Legendary Member
Community Staff
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
The live action inside the tumbling vehicle shot. You know, the one where you can see the actual actors being buffeted about with their arms and hair going up and down as they tumble.

Not sure the first time I saw it but now I see it constantly... even when it does nothing to advance the plot of the movie, almost like "hey look, we can do that shot too".
 

Dsimdude

Active Member
The live action inside the tumbling vehicle shot. You know, the one where you can see the actual actors being buffeted about with their arms and hair going up and down as they tumble.

Not sure the first time I saw it but now I see it constantly... even when it does nothing to advance the plot of the movie, almost like "hey look, we can do that shot too".
It's almost always like "hey look, we can do that shot too." Don't you remember after The Matrix came out, how every movie had that 360° slo-mo shot in it? Hollywood is an industry that feeds on itself.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Bigdaddy

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
The live action inside the tumbling vehicle shot. You know, the one where you can see the actual actors being buffeted about with their arms and hair going up and down as they tumble.

Not sure the first time I saw it but now I see it constantly... even when it does nothing to advance the plot of the movie, almost like "hey look, we can do that shot too".
First time I remember seeing it was "Let Me In", it worked well in that scene but every time I've seen it since it seems like eye candy.
 

Treadwell

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Every sci-fi movie in the 50s and 60s that involved a rocket launch just HAD to have shots of the actors' faces being distorted by the G-forces (usually done by blasting them with compressed air). Not a good look, and after the tenth time, one is quite over it!
 

Sluis Van Shipyards

Legendary Member
If you cast a former wrestler in your show/movie, you aren't required to have them perform a wrestling move in the fight scene. (The Rock in anything, Batista in Bladerunner, etc.).

Attaching a suppressor to your gun, while already in enemy territory, right before your intend to shoot someone. Now I'm not a Navy SEAL or anything, but I'm pretty sure they have that done before they are anywhere near bad guys. Maybe I'm wrong though.
 

DarkHelmet

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Has someone mentioned "glichy footage"? Soooooooooo tired of that effect. Vintage videotape doesn't do it and digital especially doesn't do it. My wife just watched some low budget movie about a Mummy made using the found footage, documentary style and I had to leave the room.

I want to smack any director who does it thinking it's cool or worse, authentic.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

p51

Sr Member
Attaching a suppressor to your gun, while already in enemy territory, right before your intend to shoot someone. Now I'm not a Navy SEAL or anything, but I'm pretty sure they have that done before they are anywhere near bad guys. Maybe I'm wrong though.
You generally don't just screw one of them on anyway. Most are very specifically secured or in some cases (like SOCOM suppressors for M4s I shot on active duty), they're held in place with set screws.
But even if they were used like that, yeah, why would you bother not having in place when you left the plane/boat/truck to get there? That's just one more thing you might lose on the way there that could easily find it's way out of your pockets or vest/ruck.
Also, the sound is hilarious in movie, they make it seem like you won't hear anything. In real life, you can hear one an appreciable distance away. It just won't deafen you when you shoot the thing and won't being bad guys from hundreds of yards away as a normal firearm discharge would. I've heard suppressors being fired from well over a hundred of yards away, while outside, when I wasn't listening for the sound.
 

Riceball

Master Member
You generally don't just screw one of them on anyway. Most are very specifically secured or in some cases (like SOCOM suppressors for M4s I shot on active duty), they're held in place with set screws.
But even if they were used like that, yeah, why would you bother not having in place when you left the plane/boat/truck to get there? That's just one more thing you might lose on the way there that could easily find it's way out of your pockets or vest/ruck.
Also, the sound is hilarious in movie, they make it seem like you won't hear anything. In real life, you can hear one an appreciable distance away. It just won't deafen you when you shoot the thing and won't being bad guys from hundreds of yards away as a normal firearm discharge would. I've heard suppressors being fired from well over a hundred of yards away, while outside, when I wasn't listening for the sound.
From what I've seen, the way suppressors attach to weapons depends on the weapon. A lot of weapons have threaded barrels specifically for attaching suppressors, one of the reasons why threaded barrels are illegal in CA. Others, like the MP5, have lugs behind the muzzle for attaching suppressors, so it all depends.

As far as attaching and when to do it, I'd imagine that they're normally attached prior to and kept on during an op since the extra length doesn't matter as much on a rifle or SMG since they're kept either in hand or slung. But on a pistol, I can see them being kept separate until needed because the added length of the suppressor makes it a bit awkward to holster and would require a custom holster.
 

AJK001

Master Member
I'm sure by now some of you are sick of me mentioning the Mythbusters but they tested how close the sound made by a real suppressed pistol compared to what you heard in movies. In the tests they did, at a police shooting range with pistols and suppressers supposed by the police, the level and sounds were actually very close and made a big difference from the normal shots. They did not do any tests with M4's or MP5's.
 

Riceball

Master Member
I'm sure by now some of you are sick of me mentioning the Mythbusters but they tested how close the sound made by a real suppressed pistol compared to what you heard in movies. In the tests they did, at a police shooting range with pistols and suppressers supposed by the police, the level and sounds were actually very close and made a big difference from the normal shots. They did not do any tests with M4's or MP5's.
The point wasn't that suppressors don't quiet a gunshot, it's just that they don't quiet them down to the extent that you see in movies and on TV.. A good suppressor will reduce the noise so that instead of a gunshot being heard across your entire neighborhood and surrounding neighborhoods for hundreds of yards around, the sound might only be heard in your immediate neighborhood. It's still not safe to fire a suppressed weapon using conventional supersonic ammo without hearing protection and it definitely does not make that pew pew sound that Hollywood likes to use.
 

The Goon

New Member
...It's still not safe to fire a suppressed weapon using conventional supersonic ammo without hearing protection and it definitely does not make that pew pew sound that Hollywood likes to use.
I can't remember which movie it was in, but as part of the plot a "hit man" used a two-liter soda bottle as a silencer/suppressor and I was surprised when the sound effect they used was pretty much what you'd expect a soda bottle silencer to sound like--not much quieter than a normal gunshot, and certainly louder than the "traditional" hiss/whistle silencer sound effect.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. Your new thread title is very short, and likely is unhelpful.
  2. Your reply is very short and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  3. Your reply is very long and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  4. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
  5. Your message is mostly quotes or spoilers.
  6. Your reply has occurred very quickly after a previous reply and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  7. This thread is locked.

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Top