Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Don't you hate it when.......


Recommended Posts

1. People say..."Oh, that's not realistic at all. That's so far fetched / would never happen / Oh brother."  Isn't Hollywood supposed to make the unbelievable believable?

 

2. Hollywood takes real historic events and embellishes them or just flat changes things. I mean if Hollywood can make anything happen and there's SO much imagination and magic, why can't they make historical events more interesting? The horrible Jesse James movie, "American Outlaws" leaps to mind.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, KidChaplin said:

1. People say..."Oh, that's not realistic at all. That's so far fetched / would never happen / Oh brother."  Isn't Hollywood supposed to make the unbelievable believable?

Every female movie review ever:
"That was the worst movie of all time!:  The heroine was so stupid!...I would never do that!!"  😆

Quote

2. Hollywood takes real historic events and embellishes them or just flat changes things. I mean if Hollywood can make anything happen and there's SO much imagination and magic, why can't they make historical events more interesting? The horrible Jesse James movie, "American Outlaws" leaps to mind.

Or even flat-out writes their scripts on traditional pop urban-legend source, like Ridley Scott's central thematic 1492: Conquest of Paradise idea that Columbus set out on his mission just to challenge the tyranny of the Church and the Spanish Inquisition...Despite the fact that the real Columbus never even met the latter, and that part was made up by an author three hundred years later.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, KidChaplin said:

1. People say..."Oh, that's not realistic at all. That's so far fetched / would never happen / Oh brother."  Isn't Hollywood supposed to make the unbelievable believable?

 

2. Hollywood takes real historic events and embellishes them or just flat changes things. I mean if Hollywood can make anything happen and there's SO much imagination and magic, why can't they make historical events more interesting? The horrible Jesse James movie, "American Outlaws" leaps to mind.

 

 

1. I think most people who can't stand the Golden Age films from Hollywood, go into them with a 21st century mindset, which is a mistake because you can't apply today's movie-making standards to the films of yesteryear where the filmmakers of the 30's and 40's had a different way of thinking when bringing the many classics of those eras onto the screen.

I have a lot of suspension of belief, but I also don't mind some realism. The classic era films appeal to me for their sense of fantasy, comedy and romanticism, but I also don't mind a lot of realism that a lot of modern films from the late 60's, 70's 80's 90's and 2000's go for. 

2. I kind of see your point. I hate it when filmmakers take a film and claim it's BASED ON A TRUE STORY and practically fictionalized the whole story (one of my biggest peeves about 1978's MIDNIGHT EXPRESS).

On the other hand I don't have a problem with filmmakers who claim the movie they're making on was inspired, rather than based exactly on, events of a certain type of story (INHERIT THE WIND, for example). Everyone knew that it was based on the Scopes case of the 1920's, but the filmmakers (as well as those who wrote the play) made it clear that INHERIT THE WIND was a fictionalized version of what happened in that case.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, KidChaplin said:

1. People say..."Oh, that's not realistic at all. That's so far fetched / would never happen / Oh brother."  Isn't Hollywood supposed to make the unbelievable believable?

 

2. Hollywood takes real historic events and embellishes them or just flat changes things. I mean if Hollywood can make anything happen and there's SO much imagination and magic, why can't they make historical events more interesting? The horrible Jesse James movie, "American Outlaws" leaps to mind.

 

 

 

"Interstellar"  (2014)  oh yeah a wormhole  just magically appear whom WE suppose to had place it there at some far flung galaxy in the future just to save our butt.

Star Trek transporter, the problems in doing that blows the mind.  What a JOKE, the Chinese teleported a photon which is already energy NOT a proton or neutron.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, KidChaplin said:

1. People say..."Oh, that's not realistic at all. That's so far fetched / would never happen / Oh brother."  Isn't Hollywood supposed to make the unbelievable believable?

 

2. Hollywood takes real historic events and embellishes them or just flat changes things. I mean if Hollywood can make anything happen and there's SO much imagination and magic, why can't they make historical events more interesting? The horrible Jesse James movie, "American Outlaws" leaps to mind.

 

 

https://collider.com/galleries/most-inaccurate-historical-movies/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I dunno. It seems some things have been a constant in movies over these many years, anyway. Take for instance how Harpo defies the laws of gravity at the 4:00  minute mark in this clip...

...and then compare this to all the instances of gravity defying feats one sees now days in so many movies!

;)

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, hamradio said:

Ie., we can accept that Shakespeare in Love was a "playful fantasy", and yet people today believe the premise that Shakespeare actually made up the plot of Romeo & Juliet, and wasn't intentionally modernizing a classic Greek-tragedy story.

And let's not even start on the rash of franchise-horror 00's-10's horror films "Based on a true story", the "true" part being either the name, location, or that an exorcist/parapsychologist was called in at some point.  All of which started from The Amityville Horror (1979)'s "true" story, whose deep personally neurotic baldfaced lies have also been the subject of documentaries.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate when you get people that do to movies and TV what they also do to wrestling. A great example is "The Dukes of Hazzard." Notice how you see them jump the car and KNOW the car would come out with a bent up bumper or bottomed out, etc. But it comes out in perfect shape and roars off and you have that person that says... "Now you KNOW that car couldnt make that jump and just keep driving!"  Did I ask you?! 🙄

Things like that. 

And, as I referred to, the movie "American Outlaws." When they had Zee James, Jesse's wife, all six gunned and in on the holdups / robberies. PLUS, Jesse and Frank's mother dying in the movie. They, the movie companies, dont really zero in on the railroads bullying the folks and upending their homesteads among of things. They try to pull the drama out of something that DIDNT happen. As in...Jesse and Frank's mother dying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/13/2020 at 4:57 PM, KidChaplin said:

1. People say..."Oh, that's not realistic at all. That's so far fetched / would never happen / Oh brother."  Isn't Hollywood supposed to make the unbelievable believable?

 

I've mentioned these before here some time ago.

Back in '78 when the first CHRISTOPHER REEVE "Superman" movie came out, it was often the topic of conversation damn near everywhere you went.  Even where I worked, we got into some discussions and debates about it when suddenly, one guy pipes up and says....

"I liked it up to the part where Superman flies in the opposite direction of the Earth's rotation and causes the Earth to reverse it's spin and then suddenly TIME reverses and everything goes backward in time. THAT'S when it lost all sense of reality for me!"  :o

We all laughed and one guy asked him, "THAT'S the only unrealistic part you could see?" 

Years later, another co-worker said he didn't like the movie FORREST GUMP because.....  "No way all that sh*t happened to one guy!:D 

Seems some people just don't get what movies are about.  :rolleyes:

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

I've mentioned these before here some time ago.

Back in '78 when the first CHRISTOPHER REEVE "Superman" movie came out, it was often the topic of conversation damn near everywhere you went.  Even where I worked, we got into some discussions and debates about it when suddenly, one guy pipes up and says....

"I liked it up to the part where Superman flies in the opposite direction of the Earth's rotation and causes the Earth to reverse it's spin and then suddenly TIME reverses and everything goes backward in time. THAT'S when it lost all sense of reality for me!"  :o

We all laughed and one guy asked him, "THAT'S the only unrealistic part you could see?" 

Years later, another co-worker said he didn't like the movie FORREST GUMP because.....  "No way all that sh*t happened to one guy!:D 

Seems some people just don't get what movies are about.  :rolleyes:

Sepiatone

That scene did had people confused.  The Earth actually wasn't spinning backward in rotation, Superman with his adrenaline going was flying  beyond the speed of light therefore was traveling back in time. The Earth's reversal spin was an illusion.

But according to Einstein physics no one, or thing can go past the speed of light so in that sense the scene was unrealistic.  At or near the speed of light, time will actually slow down for Superman and would had found himself further in the future. The direction he traveled around the Earth makes no difference.  (Venus has an opposite rotation)

main-qimg-972a7b399345b8791db87acbc084aa

Link to post
Share on other sites

But using the same laws of physics how does Superman fly?  Where is the force coming from to cause forward momentum?

Newton's Third Law...For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.  Anything in flight requires some sort of thrust.

Funny he mentioned his molecular density was greater, well one have to be VERY dense to be impervious  to things made of normal matter here but then  be so heavy, will sink to the center of the Earth instead of floating / flying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

Don't you hate it

 

Yes.

Yes! Yes, I DO hate it when some of my favorite posters around here go missing for long periods of time!

(...and guess who I'm talkin' about here, LAWRENCE!!!)

;)

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, hamradio said:

That scene did had people confused.  The Earth actually wasn't spinning backward in rotation, Superman with his adrenaline going was flying  beyond the speed of light therefore was traveling back in time. The Earth's reversal spin was an illusion.

But according to Einstein physics no one, or thing can go past the speed of light so in that sense the scene was unrealistic.  At or near the speed of light, time will actually slow down for Superman and would had found himself further in the future. The direction he traveled around the Earth makes no difference.  (Venus has an opposite rotation)

main-qimg-972a7b399345b8791db87acbc084aa

!!

REALLY?   Things going in reverse of their original movement didn't strike you as equally unrealistic?  :o  Anyway, that scene never did HAD me confused.( :rolleyes:)  as I, by that time, was already aware that not only was the Earth's reversal spin was an illusion, but the WHOLE DAMN MOVIE was an illusion!  ;)  Something that went unnoticed by the guy I was mentioning.  :D 

Sepiatone

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't you hate it when.......

your lazy butler washes your sock garters, and they're still covered with schmutz?


 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...