Things you're tired of seeing in movies

[Sluis Van Shipyards]

Sadly it didn't get smashed. It makes me think of when I would tell my dad that he shouldn't leave tools on the patio (when he was building their deck or whatever) and he would just point to all the rocks he had in the landscaping and say "If someone wants in, they can just smash a window with any of these rocks!"

 

[ScourgiousJinx]

A person is lost in the desert dying of thirst and they finally get a glass or bottle of water. They pour it down their throat inevitably spilling much of it all over themselves to show dramatically how thirsty they are. I wouldn't waste a drop if I was that parched.

 

[joberg]

A person is lost in the desert dying of thirst and they finally get a glass or bottle of water. They pour it down their throat inevitably spilling much of it all over themselves to show dramatically how thirsty they are. I wouldn't waste a drop if I was that parched.

...and I would drink very sloooowly

 

[pengbuzz]

A person is lost in the desert dying of thirst and they finally get a glass or bottle of water. They pour it down their throat inevitably spilling much of it all over themselves to show dramatically how thirsty they are. I wouldn't waste a drop if I was that parched.

MacGuyver gets a Rolex watch, smashes out the crystal and uses it to make a sundial...

 

[p51]

Any aviation movie since 1977 has to have a mission that requires flying inside a canyon.

 

[Cephus]

Any aviation movie since 1977 has to have a mission that requires flying inside a canyon.

Even Maverick, as good as it was, half the movie was just that.

 

[batguy]

The canyon thing is understandable. Canyons provide visible barriers. Obstacles.

It's hard to even convey aircraft movement when there is nothing but blue sky behind them.

Howard Hughes made a 1930s dogfighting epic call "Hell's Angels". It was filmed over the course of 3 years. One of the reasons it took so long was that Hughes kept waiting for clouds in the sky. That backdrop made the planes' movements easier to follow/understand.

 

[p51]

The canyon thing is understandable. Canyons provide visible barriers. Obstacles.

It's hard to even convey aircraft movement when there is nothing but blue sky behind them.

Howard Hughes made a 1930s dogfighting epic call "Hell's Angels". It was filmed over the course of 3 years. One of the reasons it took so long was that Hughes kept waiting for clouds in the sky. That backdrop made the planes' movements easier to follow/understand.

Yeah, but ask any pilot, they'll tell you very few ever go down into canyons, even wide ones. "Flying into terrain" is just not the way any pilot wants to go out.

Even Maverick, as good as it was, half the movie was just that.

Yeah, I saw that in the previews and though, seriously???

 

[batguy]

Yeah, but ask any pilot, they'll tell you very few ever go down into canyons, even wide ones. "Flying into terrain" is just not the way any pilot wants to go out.

Real pilots also don't try to shake off pursuers by yanking the R & L ailerons in opposite directions and barrel-rolling the plane in place. But hey, it looks cool.

 

[Yorkie Fett]

Something significant takes place but you can’t go public since ‘there’s an election in two weeks time’.

 

[Treadwell]

Real pilots also don't try to shake off pursuers by yanking the R & L ailerons in opposite directions and barrel-rolling the plane in place. But hey, it looks cool.

Spinning. That's a good trick!

 

[jkno]

Spinning. That's a good trick!

 

[Riceball]

Yeah, but ask any pilot, they'll tell you very few ever go down into canyons, even wide ones. "Flying into terrain" is just not the way any pilot wants to go out.


Yeah, I saw that in the previews and though, seriously???

To be fair, pretty much every time you see somebody fly down into a canyon it's for a very specific reason and not just because they can. Typically, it's in a dogfight sort of situation and they're outnumbered/can't shake the enemy so they fly down into the canyon in the hopes of them crashing into the canyon walls. That or they're trying to be sneaky, like in Top Gun: Maverick, and are flying in a canyon in an attempt to avoid detection.

What I never understood is in the dogfight/pursuit scenario is why the bad guy feels that it's absolutely necessary to chase the good guy in the canyon. Why not just fly above them outside the canyon and pursue them? Get a decent built of altitude and you can see them flying in the canyon and once close enough, attack them from above. This also brings a pet peeve of mine from the trench run of the original Star Wars; when they were being chased and shot down by the TIEs in the trench, why did nobody think to simply pull up, slow down a touch, and drop in behind the pursuing TIEs? Why simply fly in what amounted to a straight line and let yourself be shot by the TIEs?

 

[Treadwell]

the trench run of the original Star Wars; when they were being chased and shot down by the TIEs in the trench, why did nobody think to simply pull up, slow down a touch, and drop in behind the pursuing TIEs? Why simply fly in what amounted to a straight line and let yourself be shot by the TIEs?

Well I do know in video games, if you try that you get cut to pieces by the laser towers.

 

[p51]

What I never understood is in the dogfight/pursuit scenario is why the bad guy feels that it's absolutely necessary to chase the good guy in the canyon. Why not just fly above them outside the canyon and pursue them? Get a decent built of altitude and you can see them flying in the canyon and once close enough, attack them from above. This also brings a pet peeve of mine from the trench run of the original Star Wars; when they were being chased and shot down by the TIEs in the trench, why did nobody think to simply pull up, slow down a touch, and drop in behind the pursuing TIEs? Why simply fly in what amounted to a straight line and let yourself be shot by the TIEs?

Good point, but in Star Wars, I never noticed good combined arms coordination, except for the surface attack on Hoth (and they even explained why a bombardment from orbit wouldn't work).
I can't think of any good sci-fi example of well-executed combined arms other than the Hoth attack (and even then it was done with a "WW1 Western Front" mindset as they only attacked from one direction and no indirect fires from the surface as a rolling barrage).
To put it simply to those who don't understand that doctrine as we do, Riceball; I wouldn't trust the gunners on the Death Star not to shoot at anything popping out of the trench as the Empire always seemed to consider fighter pilots as expendable, so therefore a "shoot them all down (well, not that odd shaped fighter that Vader is flying) and nobody will ask questions later" doctrine might have been in effect.

 

[blewis17]

At the moment the main character is about to finally spill his guts, take the risk and lay it all out there to the woman he secretly loves, at the moment of mouthing the words... a subordinate comes in with, "Sir, you really need to see this..." or "The general needs to see you, now" or "...everyone's ready, what are our new orders?"

 

[Treadwell]

At the moment the main character is about to finally spill his guts, take the risk and lay it all out there to the woman he secretly loves, at the moment of mouthing the words... a subordinate comes in with, "Sir, you really need to see this..." or "The general needs to see you, now" or "...everyone's ready, what are our new orders?"

"Shh. Tell me when you get back."
He leaves, she cries, he dies.

 

[Riceball]

Good point, but in Star Wars, I never noticed good combined arms coordination, except for the surface attack on Hoth (and they even explained why a bombardment from orbit wouldn't work).
I can't think of any good sci-fi example of well-executed combined arms other than the Hoth attack (and even then it was done with a "WW1 Western Front" mindset as they only attacked from one direction and no indirect fires from the surface as a rolling barrage).
To put it simply to those who don't understand that doctrine as we do, Riceball; I wouldn't trust the gunners on the Death Star not to shoot at anything popping out of the trench as the Empire always seemed to consider fighter pilots as expendable, so therefore a "shoot them all down (well, not that odd shaped fighter that Vader is flying) and nobody will ask questions later" doctrine might have been in effect.

The ground assault was because the Rebel base was shielded, so they needed a ground assault to take out the shields. How the AT-ATs can take out the shield generator when a Star Destroyer couldn't I'm not too sure except that maybe the shields can only stop energy and not physical objects. If that's the case, then I wonder why the Empire couldn't find some nice big rocks to drop on Hoth instead.

As for combined arms, I'd argue that the Imperial attack on Hoth wasn't true combined arms, it was a pure armored assault until the Imperial broke through the trench line. We saw no signs of supporting infantry until they got to the base proper.. There was no supporting artillery unless you count the AT-ATs. And there definitely was no air cover. That is unless you're referring to the Rebels who did use combined arms tactics except that they had no armor, but otherwise they had all of the other elements of combined arms.

 

[pengbuzz]

The ground assault was because the Rebel base was shielded, so they needed a ground assault to take out the shields. How the AT-ATs can take out the shield generator when a Star Destroyer couldn't I'm not too sure except that maybe the shields can only stop energy and not physical objects. If that's the case, then I wonder why the Empire couldn't find some nice big rocks to drop on Hoth instead.

Because the Rebels could probably pick those up on scanners and blow them to bits. AT-AT's are considerably harder and they shoot back.

 

[bwayne64]

I was watching Wargames the other day and the General at NORAD tells a base to scramble two F16s, and they cut to two F15s flying out. One designation number short and one vertical stab too many. I know most people don't know the difference, but come on. The only way the planes could look any different is if they showed two B52s flying by, ; )

Another one is when someone is standing on the edge of a cliff. Their "soul mate/ lover" sees them about to jump and they start running towards them. The person on the edge turns to look back, and the runner stops. The jumper falls backwards off the cliff , just as the they start running again. If they hadn't stopped running they might have saved them. Maybe not, but they sure as hell won't if they stop. Just another example of people doing totally unrealistic stuff. I guess the answer is , it's in the script, lol.