Things you're tired of seeing in movies

Or better yet, two people sharing the same keyboard to hack into another computer as was done once on NCIS.
I am positive the dog password comment was also NCIS. But it may have been a movie but NCIS is the one famous for stupid phrases like "Can you enhance that bottom corner. Yes, right there. Now zoom. Do you see the reflection in the puddle showing the license plate?"
 
I am positive the dog password comment was also NCIS. But it may have been a movie but NCIS is the one famous for stupid phrases like "Can you enhance that bottom corner. Yes, right there. Now zoom. Do you see the reflection in the puddle showing the license plate?"
Which would be enhancing say, I dunno...four pixels?

The tech they supposedly have for that alone in that series would have been used by folks to unscramble cable signals back when everyone had those boxes in the 80's and 90's.
 
I am positive the dog password comment was also NCIS. But it may have been a movie but NCIS is the one famous for stupid phrases like "Can you enhance that bottom corner. Yes, right there. Now zoom. Do you see the reflection in the puddle showing the license plate?"
That's not NCIS; it's Blade Runner's Esper machine that does that:lol:
 
I am positive the dog password comment was also NCIS. But it may have been a movie but NCIS is the one famous for stupid phrases like "Can you enhance that bottom corner. Yes, right there. Now zoom. Do you see the reflection in the puddle showing the license plate?"
And this is with crappy low-res security cam footage that's 720p, at best.
 
True, NCIS is the one where stuff gets done faster because two people type on the same keyboard!

In the same vein...


Scotty using an operating system for the first time, that is HUNDREDS of years old to him, operating an ANCIENT GUI designed to use a mouse. Yet here he is, flingers flying across the keyboard like a retro-computing savant (yet he doesn't recognize a computer mouse), on a software program he has no knowledge of, to create an advanced atomic design for transparent aluminum within seconds.

Yes, I know he's Scotty. The Miracle Worker.
And no, not even he could do that... at least, in that way.
 
My peeve is military movies in recent years that obviously don't have an expert on the subject on the production. I watched that movie Devotion and the scene where they attack the bridge has all the Corsairs flying in a tight formation like they are in an airshow. They'd be spread out so one good AAA burst didn't wipe out four or five at a time. Same thing with infantry in other movies. It's also possible the director or someone on the production just thinks something looks better and they ignore the expert.
 
In the same vein...


Scotty using an operating system for the first time, that is HUNDREDS of years old to him, operating an ANCIENT GUI designed to use a mouse. Yet here he is, flingers flying across the keyboard like a retro-computing savant (yet he doesn't recognize a computer mouse), on a software program he has no knowledge of, to create an advanced atomic design for transparent aluminum within seconds.

Yes, I know he's Scotty. The Miracle Worker.
And no, not even he could do that... at least, in that way.
For the longest time this scene bothered me and then it struck me that most of the best known transparent gemstones are aluminum compounds. I still wholly agree that his working of an ancient bit of software he had never used is fantasy from any viewpoint.
 
My peeve is military movies in recent years that obviously don't have an expert on the subject on the production. I watched that movie Devotion and the scene where they attack the bridge has all the Corsairs flying in a tight formation like they are in an airshow. They'd be spread out so one good AAA burst didn't wipe out four or five at a time. Same thing with infantry in other movies. It's also possible the director or someone on the production just thinks something looks better and they ignore the expert.
I hear you; this is not the depiction of a Napoleonic/Civil War battle field:rolleyes: But it looks good on camera:whistle::whistle::p:p
 
In the same vein...


Scotty using an operating system for the first time, that is HUNDREDS of years old to him, operating an ANCIENT GUI designed to use a mouse. Yet here he is, flingers flying across the keyboard like a retro-computing savant (yet he doesn't recognize a computer mouse), on a software program he has no knowledge of, to create an advanced atomic design for transparent aluminum within seconds.

Yes, I know he's Scotty. The Miracle Worker.
And no, not even he could do that... at least, in that way.
That one has always bothered me. The truth is, even the best mechanics and engineers, if faced with a machine from 200 years ago, would look like a drunk chimp trying to work it for the first time.
 
My peeve is military movies in recent years that obviously don't have an expert on the subject on the production. I watched that movie Devotion and the scene where they attack the bridge has all the Corsairs flying in a tight formation like they are in an airshow. They'd be spread out so one good AAA burst didn't wipe out four or five at a time. Same thing with infantry in other movies. It's also possible the director or someone on the production just thinks something looks better and they ignore the expert.
Yeah, this bugs me some too, but I always give it a pass because it's just the nature of the beast, so to speak. Things are always shown too close in military films and shows because the director wants to be able to show everything clearly and fairly close up. If they were to do realistic spacing, then most everything would appear as specks if you wanted to get more than 1 or 2 men, planes, ships, or tanks in frame at the same time. It doesn't look nearly as good on screen that way as it does when everything is much closer together and much more visible. They even do this in real life, just look at Navy publicity photos of carrier battle groups, Navy PR is not above having a carrier's escorts ridiculously close to the carrier just so that you can see at least some of them in the same frame as the carrier when in reality most of her escorts would just be specks on the horizon.
 
My peeve is military movies in recent years that obviously don't have an expert on the subject on the production. I watched that movie Devotion and the scene where they attack the bridge has all the Corsairs flying in a tight formation like they are in an airshow. They'd be spread out so one good AAA burst didn't wipe out four or five at a time. Same thing with infantry in other movies. It's also possible the director or someone on the production just thinks something looks better and they ignore the expert.
They do often hire experts and most often, their advice is ignored because whatever they suggest "wouldn't look good" or doesn't photograph well.
I worked on two small-budget movies, one of which for military matters (I'm a former Army O3). I quit in disgust from that film after the second meeting we had. It was clear the director was going to film whatever he wanted and just wanted a vet's name in the credits to check a block. I got up, told them all to go choke themselves, and walked out.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top