PDA

View Full Version : Things That Ruin Suspension of Disbelief



Pages : [1] 2

The Vorpal Tribble
2009-06-16, 08:41 PM
I got dozens, but never remember to write them down, then I forget. Then I was watching a movie just now and noticed one of them that seems to be rather prevalent.

Reverse Coyote Effect
This is the effect that causes gravity to increase by several times because one was thrown upwards with great force, they fall with equal force.

Example #1:
Juggernaut throws Wolverine through the roof. All is good... until he falls back down through the floor?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3ddVbnQg_c

Example #2:
Dracula throws Blade and together fall off scaffolding... causing a crater in the stone floor? Blade weighs 175 lbs according to his poster. Dracula certainly no more than 250, tops. It was ONLY gravity pulling them down.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=df5D5TgMHao

There are others, but not searching for them. But anyways, gravity only pulls so hard on earth. Even falling at terminal velocity I'm not sure a body would actually make a crater in concrete. It'd be nothing different than a bag of water falling, which tends to explode, not dent.

H. Zee
2009-06-16, 08:48 PM
People acting in ways real people wouldn't, in order to advance the plot.

Terminator Salvation spoilers ahoy!

Like when the woman risks her life in order to rescue a man who she only met 2 days ago. A man who has been categorically proven to be one of the machines she's been fighting against all her life. A man who, all the evidence suggests, has been using her in order to get close enough to assassinate John Connor. A man whose capture could prove vitally useful to her Resistance.

So why does she help him escape from her own organisation? No reason given. :smallannoyed:

averagejoe
2009-06-16, 08:49 PM
Speaking of falling, whenever someone survives a fatal fall completely unharmed just because someone was there to catch them. Kind of the opposite effect to VT's.

Joran
2009-06-16, 08:49 PM
Bad science is a hit or miss for me. Some things bug me but don't undermine my enjoyment of the movie, while others completely smash my disbelief. A couple examples:

I watched Signs and was enjoying it up to the point that it was revealed the aliens are allergic or weak against water... WATER. They invade a freakin' planet covered with the stuff and it actually comes down from the sky and is in the air and come without any form of protection. Really annoyed me a lot.

Wall-E also annoyed me with the inconsistent technology levels. They destroyed the Earth, but somehow have anti-grav, artificial gravity, and something that looks like FTL...

Trizap
2009-06-16, 08:51 PM
keep posting in here, I need to take notes so that nothing I write ruins suspension of disbelief.

Blackjackg
2009-06-16, 08:57 PM
keep posting in here, I need to take notes so that nothing I write ruins suspension of disbelief.

Sincerely hope you're kidding. Unless you only write straight, real-world fiction which lacks any kind of action sequences. If you write anything else, you will screw up physics at some point, which will completely ruin it for someone.

And even if you do write straight, real-world fiction, you'll screw up the psychology for someone, because everyone has different ideas about what someone would really do.

No matter what you write, someone won't believe it.

Aaaaaanyway, I kept getting thrown out of Terminator: Salvation by how human the psychology and physiology of the robots was. I mean seriously... Why would they build so many two-legged, two-armed killbots whose sensory and cognitive functions are localized in the head, right where humans would expect them to be?

Worira
2009-06-16, 09:13 PM
It actually makes sense to have certain sensory functions in the head. In bipeds, it's not too important, but having eyes high off the ground does allow for a better vantage point. In quadrupeds, it's pretty much essential.

KnightDisciple
2009-06-16, 09:19 PM
Well...The T-600's and -800's were designed to fool humans. The 600s only seem to work farther off, but the 800s are designed to get fleshed over. Hence the bipedal, mostly human design.

As for cognitive function...hm. It might be a space thing.

Think about it. You really can only put the "brain" in two places: head or torso. And the torso seems to have a lot of power and motive systems. Shoot, with nuclear batteries, they might need a bit of space separation, even with shielding. Hence chip in the head.

Innis Cabal
2009-06-16, 09:22 PM
People acting in ways real people wouldn't, in order to advance the plot.

Terminator Salvation spoilers ahoy!

Like when the woman risks her life in order to rescue a man who she only met 2 days ago. A man who has been categorically proven to be one of the machines she's been fighting against all her life. A man who, all the evidence suggests, has been using her in order to get close enough to assassinate John Connor. A man whose capture could prove vitally useful to her Resistance.

So why does she help him escape from her own organisation? No reason given. :smallannoyed:


LOVE Duh! Come on, you know women in movies only know how to be smart, sassy and desperate for a man, or desperate for a man, hot and dumb

Icewalker
2009-06-16, 09:35 PM
I'd like to say that my favorite thing about your second example, the Blade one, is that not only does two people falling cause a crater in concrete, but they fall about 20 feet.

I know what you mean, although I can be less broken out by them, especially this kind in action scenes, where immersion often isn't great anyways, it's more 'haha, that's awesome'. Although, my biggest issue with the first one was that someone with superspeed to the extent shown would have been able to completely ruin everybody else there before that fight started.

Trizap
2009-06-16, 09:38 PM
Sincerely hope you're kidding. Unless you only write straight, real-world fiction which lacks any kind of action sequences. If you write anything else, you will screw up physics at some point, which will completely ruin it for someone.

And even if you do write straight, real-world fiction, you'll screw up the psychology for someone, because everyone has different ideas about what someone would really do.

No matter what you write, someone won't believe it.



...............aren't YOU cynical and literal? what a bad combination.

Rowsen
2009-06-16, 09:43 PM
The bad science in The Day After Tomorrow. Which was pretty much all the science. It's a pity they didn't play it as a comedy. It might have worked then.

13_CBS
2009-06-16, 09:44 PM
Whenever the Armor Is Useless trope is invoked, particularly in melee combat, my suspension of disbelief is ruined. Watching some poor shmuck get cut in half even though he's wearing a hauberk makes me go :smallannoyed:

Joran
2009-06-16, 09:48 PM
I guess I should probably put a couple I find annoying:

I don't have a snappy name for this but
When a gun or shotgun blast knocks someone back a couple of feet (usually through a pane of glass)

Mythbusters already showed that this was impossible and thinking about Newton's Third Law will also yield a similar result. Yet I see it often in gun fights and it annoys me.

Glass is sharp or why John McLane's feet hurt

Likewise, window glass is very sharp; razor sharp in fact. Yet many action heroes just smash through the glass with no ill effects. Also somewhat annoys me.

P.S. However, I'm usually fine with explosions for some reason. I know a pistol can't just explode a car, but I don't mind it when it happens in a movie ;)

Zaphrasz
2009-06-16, 10:16 PM
Improbably athletic/fighting ability. I can take humans in their prime. I can even take super human to some extent. I cannot take beings who are able to break the laws of physics to perform feats of strength, agility, or precision. For example, I don't care how sharp your sword is and how hard you swing it, some things are not getting cut by it. I don't care how strong you are, if you try and lift a mountain, you are going to burrow right through it. It's a fine line sometimes, though.

Rutskarn
2009-06-16, 10:18 PM
The Redshirt effect.

To self quote: (http://www.chocolatehammer.org/?p=795)


By slavishly obeying the rules of a fiction, one calls attention to it—the verisimilitude is needlessly spoiled.

Consider this: how shocking would it be for Mute McFarmboy to actually survive contact with the enemy? To come in, accomplish a few things as a background character, and leaves with little fanfare or bloodshed? Who is implied to become not a corpse, not even a hero—but a continuing, functional part of the movement, one who has an implied existence that goes beyond his role as a redshirt?

Sholos
2009-06-16, 10:44 PM
Reverse Coyote Effect
This is the effect that causes gravity to increase by several times because one was thrown upwards with great force, they fall with equal force.

Example #1:
Juggernaut throws Wolverine through the roof. All is good... until he falls back down through the floor?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3ddVbnQg_c
I didn't see him go through the floor, unless you're talking about him coming back down. To be fair, Wolverine is pretty dense, so it's not all that unbelievable.


There are others, but not searching for them. But anyways, gravity only pulls so hard on earth. Even falling at terminal velocity I'm not sure a body would actually make a crater in concrete. It'd be nothing different than a bag of water falling, which tends to explode, not dent.
Depends on the body. Normal human? Yeah, pretty much splat. Superhuman that's near-indestructable? Either the body or the concrete is going to give given enough force.

Xallace
2009-06-16, 11:09 PM
I didn't see him go through the floor, unless you're talking about him coming back down. To be fair, Wolverine is pretty dense, so it's not all that unbelievable.

Sholos is right, Adamantine is supposed to be freakin' heavy- but I still have to agree with Vorpal Tribble's point. Gravity shouldn't really be that mutable.



Depends on the body. Normal human? Yeah, pretty much splat. Superhuman that's near-indestructable? Either the body or the concrete is going to give given enough force.

20 feet. Fleshy humanoids. Even superhuman, I don't expect either to give way. Maybe a couple bruises at most.

So being reminded by mutable gravity, I'd like to add in the Platespinner's Elephant, something that's probably already got a name. Large object, such as a pole or fire escape gets kept almost perfectly upright while airborne by whatever force- usually something hacking away at it from the bottom. I've seen it at least twice and it's completely rediculous that I saw it once.

Dienekes
2009-06-16, 11:17 PM
pistol beats machine gun.

Check about every Bond movie (exaggeration of course)

What really triggered it was Taken. Liam Nessons character was awesome, being somewhat tactical in how he took down baddies left and right. Impossible of course, but never broke the disbelief for me. Then they're in the boat, and there's a man with a machine gun, err I guess more accurately an assault rifle but whatever, in a narrow corridor who opens fire at the hero.

Nothing hits.

He then precedes to jump through the glass close to him (which also wasn't hit by the gunfire, so this guys aim most have been worse than Stormtroopers) and defeats the man with his pistol.

I couldn't get over this and complained about it to my friend after the movie. He of course noticed nothing, so maybe it was just me.

Faulty
2009-06-16, 11:18 PM
Guns with infinite ammo

Works in Left 4 Dead, but in movies and TV shows drives me crazy. Guns only run out of ammo at absolutely crucial moments, up until then, every pistol has a clip equal to the amount of disposable goons encountered.

This came up in an episode of NCIS, and contains spoilers regarding Agent Lee in I believe the most recent season:
A thief/kidnapper/murderer all around bad guy has one of the characters, Agent Lee, in a bus at gun point. Agent Gibbs comes in and takes a bullet in the hand. Agent Lee then manages to grab the guys arm and point it up, causing him to discharge his gun harmlessly into the ceiling. Lee nods at Gibbs, and Gibbs shoots through Lee into the bad guy, killing them both. The thing that bugged me about this, is that the guy's gun had fired off more rounds than it plausibly could hold, and Agent Lee's death was essentially pointless. I guess they had to kill her off some how... but jeez.


Check about every Bond movie (exaggeration of course)

Yeah, but Bond is BOND. Part of the idea is that he's an agent of tremendous skill.

Jamin
2009-06-16, 11:22 PM
I happen to love bad science. Journey to the center of the Earth comes to mind.
The whole movie was on big spit in the eye of science. You can fall for three nd still be alive as you hit the water and now the sun is underground and T-Rexs can live on nothing but a random human every 20 years :smallbiggrin:

Rockphed
2009-06-16, 11:28 PM
Reverse Coyote Effect
This is the effect that causes gravity to increase by several times because one was thrown upwards with great force, they fall with equal force.

Typically, unless you hit something on the way, you will hit the ground with approximately the same speed with which you left it. In the case of wolverine, he shouldn't have come back through the ceiling based on appearant velocities.

TheThan
2009-06-16, 11:37 PM
Impossible backlfips:

Scenario:
The final battle has finally come; the hero and the BBEG have both exhausted all their ammunition, explosives, knives and other equipment. Now the two are slugging it out the old fashioned way. The two enemies are evenly matched, until suddenly one of them gets a surge of strength and speed and is able to overwhelm the other. Suddenly he performs a rising uppercut attack and knocks the other into the air, where he spins around in a seemingly impossible manner and then promptly falls onto his face.

You’ve just witnessed the impossible backlip. It makes no real sense, breaks the SOD in the resulting fight and generally just hurts the film. Sometimes the impossible backflip is a recovery move when the hero is thrown a great distance, other times is an attack to that turns the tide of the fight. Whatever the reason, its always for ill effect and makes the audience groan when it happens.


Unlimited ammunition:
You know the combat scene when the guy with the gun is firing at anything that moves… and doesn’t stop. You never see him stop to reload, never see him run out of ammunition or grab another gun, he just keeps firing and firing and firing until he is disarmed. Its also bad when they do reload only after firing an impossible amount of bullets out of their gun.


Armored couches
Scenario:
The villain bursts in wielding a gun, he sees the hero, open and totally exposed, he opens fire. The hero desperate to get out of the path of the gun-wielding psycho dives behind the closest cover he can find, the sofa. The villain content to just keep blasting away, stands a few feet away from the couch the hero is hiding behind, and his bullets are not penetrating through the soft body of the couch.

This totally makes me groan. While bullets are indeed rather light, they travel at 850+mph. That still takes quite a tough object to take a hit from it (I’ve seen large caliber bullets penetrate steel). In the case of modern body armor, to defuse the bullet’s energy enough to cause no penetration. Household furniture is not up to the task.

I think a lot of these problems could be solved if filmmakers went out and actually fired the guns they use in movies.

Dienekes
2009-06-16, 11:43 PM
Guns with infinite ammo
Yeah, but Bond is BOND. Part of the idea is that he's an agent of tremendous skill.

And it sometimes works for him, sometimes doesn't. Depending on the Bond the situation and the camera.

going off TheThan's rant.

The backflip at the end of the Quick and the Dead, which just made me crack up.

MCerberus
2009-06-16, 11:47 PM
My least favorite is the whole "I'm alive again for no reason."


This is one I've hated since I was a kid. Remember the green Power Ranger? He was evil then he became not evil, and in doing so began to lose his power. So what do you do with the morally ambiguous and slightly unreliable guy that may still betray you if he could still do anything? Make him the most powerful person in your employ!

The object of loathing I point to now, however, is Jack Bower from 24. There is an episode in the first season where they kill him something like 3 times. The bad guys use their magical defibrillator to bring him back. A half an hour later, he's back doing the action movie hero stuff.

Recently, Fallout 3 did it in videogame land
One Col. Autumn hijacks the water purifier and tries to get the player's dad to give the password to it up. Your dad triggers a small explosion killing outright two heavily armored elite shocktroopers and the colonel. The leaking radiation combined with the explosion kills your father. You leave to escape with the bodies locked inside the deadly irradiated control room that HAS BEEN LOCKED FROM THE INSIDE with feet thick walls. Blah blah moving on. Hey Autumn's alive with nothing bad having happened.

Broken Steel stuff as follows in case you don't want that spoiled
When you activate the purifier (if you choose to do it), you are clearly shown being turned into goo by the apparent deadliness of the chamber. You wake up a week later perfectly fine. The NPC that you can send in your place, however, dies if you let her.

Joran
2009-06-17, 12:03 AM
Guns only run out of ammo at absolutely crucial moments, up until then, every pistol has a clip equal to the amount of disposable goons encountered.

Quite true, but modern semi-automatic pistols carry a surprising number of rounds in their magazines. The Glock 17 carries 17 rounds, the Beretta carries 15. Still doesn't excuse revolvers or automatic weapons firing many more rounds that they can plausibly hold.

Serpentine
2009-06-17, 12:04 AM
People acting in ways real people wouldn't, in order to advance the plot.

Terminator Salvation spoilers ahoy!

Like when the woman risks her life in order to rescue a man who she only met 2 days ago. A man who has been categorically proven to be one of the machines she's been fighting against all her life. A man who, all the evidence suggests, has been using her in order to get close enough to assassinate John Connor. A man whose capture could prove vitally useful to her Resistance.

So why does she help him escape from her own organisation? No reason given. :smallannoyed:That one actually didn't bother me so much.He rescued her and was nice'n'stuff. Also, she "saw a man". "Saw a man"! How can that not convince you?! :smalltongue:However, there are plenty of other bits from this movie. For example:

The Inefficient Efficient Killer
The heartless, soulless murder-machine (figurative or literal) designed/trained to kill in the most efficient, effective way possible, that... fails to do so. I think this is generic enough that I won't spoil it... Why does the Terminator keep picking people up and throwing them around, when it could simply crush their skulls with its fist/s? I mean, it can and does pick out a point of weakness (the human heart) and matter-of-factly employ it (punch it hard)yet most of the time, it just chucks 'em around like an orca toying with an emperor penguin.

The Entirely Unnecessary Sacrifice
The sacrifice that is all big and grand, but ultimately sets the cause back and makes no real sense. In the case of Terminator:Whatsisface's decision at the end to give up his heart to John Conner. Okay, John's a hero, knows a lot, is good at stuff, etc. Thingo is a freaking cyborg, with robot strength and immortality and all that jazz with the added bonus of humanity. Skynet said he "wouldn't get a second chance", but who knows what he could've done with his mechanical connection. How is he not more useful to the cause of humanity than that soft, squishy human? How would it not have been a greater sacrifice for him to decide not to do that for the good of the cause? And absolutely noone uttered even a word of dissent? Have they no souls?
And that's just leaving aside the logistics and mechanics of performing a heart transplant in post-apocalyptic wartime conditions...

Nevrmore
2009-06-17, 12:04 AM
Recently, Fallout 3 did it in videogame land
One Col. Autumn hijacks the water purifier and tries to get the player's dad to give the password to it up. Your dad triggers a small explosion killing outright two heavily armored elite shocktroopers and the colonel. The leaking radiation combined with the explosion kills your father. You leave to escape with the bodies locked inside the deadly irradiated control room that HAS BEEN LOCKED FROM THE INSIDE with feet thick walls. Blah blah moving on. Hey Autumn's alive with nothing bad having happened.

Broken Steel stuff as follows in case you don't want that spoiled
When you activate the purifier (if you choose to do it), you are clearly shown being turned into goo by the apparent deadliness of the chamber. You wake up a week later perfectly fine. The NPC that you can send in your place, however, dies if you let her.


The ending before Broken Steel came out was bullsh*t. With clothing that had even moderate rad resistance and a few Rad-Aways/RadXs, you could survive inside the Water Purifier for several minutes. It was total crap that you're killed immediately after punching in the code and I'm glad that the game retconned it with the DLC.

MCerberus
2009-06-17, 12:09 AM
The ending before Broken Steel came out was bullsh*t. With clothing that had even moderate rad resistance and a few Rad-Aways/RadXs, you could survive inside the Water Purifier for several minutes. It was total crap that you're killed immediately after punching in the code and I'm glad that the game retconned it with the DLC.

Except for the whole Lyons thing. One of the biggest badasses in the waste wearing protective power armor dies anyway if sent in. Even without RadX, you can have a tea party in radiation if you wear power armor

Haruki-kun
2009-06-17, 12:16 AM
I'm not sure where to classify this one, but... there was this one episode of Cowboy Bebop.

I get that Spike is a badass, and I'm willing to allow suspension of disbelief based on that for several scenarios. Rule of Cool and all that. Until I saw him hold his breath, open the cockpit of his pod, and jump out in space towards another ship.

Repeat after me: SPACE DOES NOT WOK THAT WAY!

Kyouhen
2009-06-17, 12:26 AM
I don't have a name for this one and I'm too lazy to think of one, but my big issue is when the BBEG decides to slaughter innocent civilians and inflicts nothing more than a flesh wound on any of them. If BBEG decides he's so hardcore he's going to fire a rocket launcher at a group of tied-up orphans, I want to see some corpses!

Stormthorn
2009-06-17, 12:28 AM
I too am botherd by by bulletproof furniture.


People acting in ways real people wouldn't, in order to advance the plot.

Terminator Salvation spoilers ahoy!

Like when the woman risks her life in order to rescue a man who she only met 2 days ago. A man who has been categorically proven to be one of the machines she's been fighting against all her life. A man who, all the evidence suggests, has been using her in order to get close enough to assassinate John Connor. A man whose capture could prove vitally useful to her Resistance.

So why does she help him escape from her own organisation? No reason given. :smallannoyed:

Its could be sympathy. Its why people act irrationaly to rescue a pet from a burning home. The pet cant give them anything. In rare cases this happens on a very large scale with other humans and dangerous individuals involved. I remember seeing a video of a guy beating up a pimp for hitting his prostitute. He didnt have any reason to intervene, but he did. What if the prostitute had defended the pimp or the pimp been heavily armed?
She may well have been unable to logicaly consider how much of a threat the man was because all she was was someone needing aid.


Glass is sharp or why John McLane's feet hurt

Likewise, window glass is very sharp; razor sharp in fact. Yet many action heroes just smash through the glass with no ill effects. Also somewhat annoys me.

P.S. However, I'm usually fine with explosions for some reason. I know a pistol can't just

Yea. For house windows. Although to be fair, a person can smash through a cars window barehanded with no ill effect. Believe me, i recently did it.

Worira
2009-06-17, 12:34 AM
I'm not sure where to classify this one, but... there was this one episode of Cowboy Bebop.

I get that Spike is a badass, and I'm willing to allow suspension of disbelief based on that for several scenarios. Rule of Cool and all that. Until I saw him hold his breath, open the cockpit of his pod, and jump out in space towards another ship.

Repeat after me: SPACE DOES NOT WOK THAT WAY!

Other than the fact that drawing a big breath and holding it is about the worst thing you can do in a vacuum, space pretty much does work that way.

revolver kobold
2009-06-17, 12:34 AM
Unlimited ammunition:
You know the combat scene when the guy with the gun is firing at anything that moves… and doesn’t stop. You never see him stop to reload, never see him run out of ammunition or grab another gun, he just keeps firing and firing and firing until he is disarmed. Its also bad when they do reload only after firing an impossible amount of bullets out of their gun.




Not to mention the heating problems firing that many rounds would cause.

A good offender for that one: Walking Tall, where two villains fire non-stop for what would be at least a few good minutes.

kpenguin
2009-06-17, 12:40 AM
I'm not sure where to classify this one, but... there was this one episode of Cowboy Bebop.

I get that Spike is a badass, and I'm willing to allow suspension of disbelief based on that for several scenarios. Rule of Cool and all that. Until I saw him hold his breath, open the cockpit of his pod, and jump out in space towards another ship.

Repeat after me: SPACE DOES NOT WOK THAT WAY!

Wait, why doesn't it work that way?

Avilan the Grey
2009-06-17, 01:03 AM
I got dozens, but never remember to write them down, then I forget. Then I was watching a movie just now and noticed one of them that seems to be rather prevalent.

Reverse Coyote Effect
This is the effect that causes gravity to increase by several times because one was thrown upwards with great force, they fall with equal force.

Example #1:
Juggernaut throws Wolverine through the roof. All is good... until he falls back down through the floor?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3ddVbnQg_c


Wolverine weights ALOT. His bones weights about the same as if they had been made with solid stainless steel. He is significantly heavier than a same-size normal person.

That said it is more strange that he doesn't have this problem when he jumps of ledges and stuff, it's only when writers (in comics and movies) "remember" it it becomes a problem.

In short, he should fall through the floor much more often.


Now what does ruin SODB for me? Not much, I am pretty easy-going. It's more the classic things (like all the stupid things teenagers do in splatter movies). I also am not too bothered with Bad Science (tm) unless it is supposed to be all-real-we-promise (compare say Day Of Tomorrow (Ruined SODB!) with Jurasic Park (No ruined SODB, But just as faulty).

Avilan the Grey
2009-06-17, 01:07 AM
Wall-E also annoyed me with the inconsistent technology levels. They destroyed the Earth, but somehow have anti-grav, artificial gravity, and something that looks like FTL...

Not a problem for me. It fits right in with the theme: Humans could have saved the earth, but it would have been expensive. It was not worth the money for the corporation(s) controlling things to do it.

Kekken
2009-06-17, 01:26 AM
The Entirely Unnecessary Sacrifice
The sacrifice that is all big and grand, but ultimately sets the cause back and makes no real sense. In the case of Terminator:Whatsisface's decision at the end to give up his heart to John Conner. Okay, John's a hero, knows a lot, is good at stuff, etc. Thingo is a freaking cyborg, with robot strength and immortality and all that jazz with the added bonus of humanity. Skynet said he "wouldn't get a second chance", but who knows what he could've done with his mechanical connection. How is he not more useful to the cause of humanity than that soft, squishy human? How would it not have been a greater sacrifice for him to decide not to do that for the good of the cause? And absolutely noone uttered even a word of dissent? Have they no souls?
And that's just leaving aside the logistics and mechanics of performing a heart transplant in post-apocalyptic wartime conditions...

I think a large factor in him making this decision was guilt. He still felt that he deserved to die for whatever it was that landed him the death sentence in the first place. I disagree (especially since I don't believe in the Death Penalty), but I'm not him.

Though, I do agree with the fact that no-one protesting disturbed me.

Even more disturbing was John Conner's knee jerk hatred of Marcus. Wasn't this the man who learnt that a terminator can become a force for protection? Three times? (Okay, twice, because we all know Terminator 3 doesn't exist). And now, all of a sudden he just forgets those lessons? Know all machines are evil, no matter what? Yeah...

Nerd-o-rama
2009-06-17, 01:31 AM
I'm not sure where to classify this one, but... there was this one episode of Cowboy Bebop.

I get that Spike is a badass, and I'm willing to allow suspension of disbelief based on that for several scenarios. Rule of Cool and all that. Until I saw him hold his breath, open the cockpit of his pod, and jump out in space towards another ship.

Repeat after me: SPACE DOES NOT WOK THAT WAY!Uh, yeah, humans can survive in a vacuum for 30-60 seconds, although more than a few and you'll start to get fairly nasty damage to the extremities and/or brain, not to mention the risk of radiation poisoning (not as much of an issue when inside a big metal container like Spike was). The only problem here was, as mentioned, taking a deep breath will increase pressure on the inside of the lungs, potentially causing them to collapse due to the pressure differential. Better to make several deep inhalations/exhalations to oxygenate yourself, then exhale and head into the vacuum.

Honestly, Cowboy Bebop's one of the better sci fi shows around on physics, except when it comes to some of the fight scenes and Faye's clothes.

Stormthorn
2009-06-17, 01:39 AM
(overly cheery tone)
Before heading into space always remember to hyperventilate yourself for extra time before you black out. And dont hold your breath or it will hurt. Thats what i always do. And speaking of which...
(/tone)

Wow, Martha is really branching out these days.

Serpentine
2009-06-17, 01:40 AM
I think a large factor in him making this decision was guilt. He still felt that he deserved to die for whatever it was that landed him the death sentence in the first place. I disagree (especially since I don't believe in the Death Penalty), but I'm not him.I get why he suggested it, but I kept waiting for John to say "no Marcus, you'll do more good alive than me!"

Though, I do agree with the fact that no-one protesting disturbed me.Creepy, hey? Even his frigging girlfriend just smiled and nodded - literally, if I recall correctly.

Even more disturbing was John Conner's knee jerk hatred of Marcus. Wasn't this the man who learnt that a terminator can become a force for protection? Three times? (Okay, twice, because we all know Terminator 3 doesn't exist). And now, all of a sudden he just forgets those lessons? Know all machines are evil, no matter what? Yeah...Didn't think of that. And three times? Arnie in #s 2 and 3... Where's the 3rd?

Oh, to go away from sci-fi and action and the like, romcoms, romance and comedies in particular seem to constantly have a problem with stupid and/or excruciatingly self-absorbed people. Oh so very often, a minor miscommunication or error is blown completely and utterly out of proportion when it could have been simply, painlessly and quickly resolved with a simple apology or moment of explanation. While I'm on this, why is it that noone talking on the telephone (or in person) in movies ever say "hello", "goodbye" or "thank you"?

averagejoe
2009-06-17, 01:47 AM
I think a lot of these problems could be solved if filmmakers went out and actually fired the guns they use in movies didn't write themselves into situations that require really contrived solutions, or bother to think up non-contrived solutions.

Yeah.


Uh, yeah, humans can survive in a vacuum for 30-60 seconds, although more than a few and you'll start to get fairly nasty damage to the extremities and/or brain, not to mention the risk of radiation poisoning (not as much of an issue when inside a big metal container like Spike was). The only problem here was, as mentioned, taking a deep breath will increase pressure on the inside of the lungs, potentially causing them to collapse due to the pressure differential. Better to make several deep inhalations/exhalations to oxygenate yourself, then exhale and head into the vacuum.

Honestly, Cowboy Bebop's one of the better sci fi shows around on physics, except when it comes to some of the fight scenes and Faye's clothes.

The big problem with that scene was that Spike discharged his gun in order to propel himself where he needed to go. Even ignoring the fact that a bullet will have a fairly small effect on the trajectory of a human, it's unlikely that the force of the gun went through his center of mass. In fact, he was pretty much holding his arm straight out, so there should have been torque on his body. Even if the bullet was enough to propel him an appreciable amount, he should have been spinning wildly.

I love that show, but in general I have to force myself to ignore the generally bad zero gee physics. Sadly, it is one of the better sci fi shows around as far as that goes. And then, to rub it in, one watches House or something, and anyone with the slightest knowledge of medicine or hospital procedure will whine ad nauseum about every little inaccuracy, serving only to remind me of the vast gulf between the baseline competency in fictional science and medicine.

Kekken
2009-06-17, 01:47 AM
Didn't think of that. And three times? Arnie in #s 2 and 3... Where's the 3rd?


The third time is in the series, The Sarah Conner Chronicles. He had the protection of Cameron, a female terminator. He even defends her a lot when others doubt her, even against his mother.

This is what we call "not staying in character".

Avilan the Grey
2009-06-17, 02:18 AM
The third time is in the series, The Sarah Conner Chronicles. He had the protection of Cameron, a female terminator. He even defends her a lot when others doubt her, even against his mother.

This is what we call "not staying in character".

It helps that she is Summer Glau. Now that's a robot that needs to learn "what is that thing you call love" :smallwink:

LurkerInPlayground
2009-06-17, 02:20 AM
Wait, why doesn't it work that way?
You would go unconscious in a matter of seconds as oxygen leaves your bloodstream, simply because of a lack of any real air pressure.

Although I suppose if you moved out of it quickly enough, it's not an issue.

Nerd-o-rama
2009-06-17, 02:31 AM
The thing is, air just doesn't boil out of your bloodstream that fast. It takes somewhere on the order of tens of seconds - more than enough for a quick leap in slow motion.

And averagejoe, I don't know. Gunshots, especially from a large caliber like Spike's, do create a reasonable amount of momentum. Not enough to knock a man in gravity backwards through a window, but enough for an emergency course correction for a man who's already moving through zero-g vacuum. I'd have to rewatch the scene again to see whether angle relative to center of mass would be a problem, though.

Honestly, even something paying lip service to physics, which is all CB does, is far and away more realistic than the ridiculously soft standard of science fiction prevalent in world pop culture. Not that I care, I mean come on, I mostly watch Giant Robot anime.


And people whine about House because it's a detective show and people like guessing the answers on a detective show; if the evidence is presented incorrectly, they can't do that.

Serpentine
2009-06-17, 02:37 AM
The third time is in the series, The Sarah Conner Chronicles. He had the protection of Cameron, a female terminator. He even defends her a lot when others doubt her, even against his mother.

This is what we call "not staying in character".Ahh, of course. I mostly jumped on that because my Boy mentioned the other day that he was absolutely certain that the Hero in the first movie was also a robot.

averagejoe
2009-06-17, 03:08 AM
And averagejoe, I don't know. Gunshots, especially from a large caliber like Spike's, do create a reasonable amount of momentum. Not enough to knock a man in gravity backwards through a window, but enough for an emergency course correction for a man who's already moving through zero-g vacuum. I'd have to rewatch the scene again to see whether angle relative to center of mass would be a problem, though.

It would have roughly the same effect as a man firing the weapon in gravity and gaining a horizontal momentum; all he has is friction, and that doesn't help a lot since most pistols are properly fired with the gun at head level, producing a significant torque. This wasn't an "emergency course correction" either, this was Spike completely overshooting his target and having to switch direction multiple times with multiple rounds.

Here (http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3l.html) (near the top, at the beginning of the "slugthrowers" section" they discuss that somewhat. It isn't exactly the same situation, but the point is that bullets have less momentum than people tend to think they do. I find it very difficult to believe that he could not only counteract but completely reverse his momentum (which he gained by kicking off with his legs) with a gunshot.

On the center of gravity: he would pretty much have to be firing straight "up," which is to say, with his arm stuck straight past his head, to minimize the torque he experiences, and even then there would be a fair bit. Remember, ultimately the force from the shot is parallel to his arm, so firing straightarmed will always produce a torque because your arm is off center. One would have to fire with their elbow in their gut, or something awkward like that.


And people whine about House because it's a detective show and people like guessing the answers on a detective show; if the evidence is presented incorrectly, they can't do that.

Well, any medical drama. I mean, House is actually one of the better ones as far as that goes. Point is that one couldn't get away with the silly sorts of things they do in sci fi in medial dramas.

SnowballMan
2009-06-17, 03:40 AM
The Entirely Unnecessary Sacrifice
The sacrifice that is all big and grand, but ultimately sets the cause back and makes no real sense. In the case of Terminator:Whatsisface's decision at the end to give up his heart to John Conner. Okay, John's a hero, knows a lot, is good at stuff, etc. Thingo is a freaking cyborg, with robot strength and immortality and all that jazz with the added bonus of humanity. Skynet said he "wouldn't get a second chance", but who knows what he could've done with his mechanical connection. How is he not more useful to the cause of humanity than that soft, squishy human? How would it not have been a greater sacrifice for him to decide not to do that for the good of the cause? And absolutely noone uttered even a word of dissent? Have they no souls?
And that's just leaving aside the logistics and mechanics of performing a heart transplant in post-apocalyptic wartime conditions...
On that note:
That end seemed truncated do to time, but as to the sacrifice itself, you should also figure in the fact that John Conner is an icon and rallying point for the resistance. Morale has a great impact on warfare. What ruined it for me wasn't the reactions of the people, but the fact that they were going to do a heart transplant, in the middle of an open field, with scavenged medical equipment.

As long as we are talking about Schartzenager movies, Total Recall uses SOD as part of the movie:
On the escalator he uses one bad guy as a shield against the other bad guys guns. But then fires the same type of gun once and it cuts through three others (I could be wrong, but I think he even shot through the guy he was using as a shield.) In the chamber before the alien device, the girl uses the holographic watch to trick two bad guys to shoot at each other. But later the hero uses the watch in a similar situation with more bad guys and none of them hit each other. Both of these situations should have been obvious during filming and make no sense. Unless the answer to his question at the end is, "Yes this isn't real. And now you will wake up from your 'vacation'." (there is other evidence to indicate that this was the case)

Innis Cabal
2009-06-17, 03:45 AM
That Guy

Ya. You know him/her. The person that sits through out the movie talking about why something couldn't work and exactly why, even though he has no idea what he's talking about.

H. Zee
2009-06-17, 04:10 AM
Its could be sympathy. Its why people act irrationaly to rescue a pet from a burning home. The pet cant give them anything. In rare cases this happens on a very large scale with other humans and dangerous individuals involved. I remember seeing a video of a guy beating up a pimp for hitting his prostitute. He didnt have any reason to intervene, but he did. What if the prostitute had defended the pimp or the pimp been heavily armed?

There is a difference between the example you give and what happens in Terminator Salvation.

What if prostitutes had taken over the earth and killed most of humanity? What if the guy who beat up the pimp had been fighting against the prostitutes his entire life, struggling in a post-apocalyptic landscape as his friends die around him? What if the pimp was actually part of this same resistance and the guy had known, liked, and fought by the side of, the pimp for years?

Then, beating up the pimp for hitting the prostitute ceases to be "sympathy" and becomes "freaking stupidity."

(Also, I want to see a film where prostitutes take over the world now. :smallamused:)

Bouregard
2009-06-17, 04:15 AM
You would go unconscious in a matter of seconds as oxygen leaves your bloodstream, simply because of a lack of any real air pressure.

Although I suppose if you moved out of it quickly enough, it's not an issue.

Also you will probaly frozen/cooked alive without a suit.
Those spacesuits aren't that thick just to keep the oxygen in.
Always remember theres no atmosphere out there.

kamikasei
2009-06-17, 04:29 AM
(Also, I want to see a film where prostitutes take over the world now. :smallamused:)

Just send Frank Miller some money.

Also, people: I vote no one opine on the survivability of vacuum/space unless they can provide a link to some supporting reference. It's one of those topics that seems rife with misconceptions and prone to descending into unsupported contradictory assertions.

SnowballMan
2009-06-17, 04:53 AM
Just send Frank Miller some money.

Also, people: I vote no one opine on the survivability of vacuum/space unless they can provide a link to some supporting reference. It's one of those topics that seems rife with misconceptions and prone to descending into unsupported contradictory assertions.
Clearly this sounds like a job for... MYTHBUSTERS!

I wonder how many of us asking them to do this would it take for them to actually try. <heads over to the Mythbusters website>

bosssmiley
2009-06-17, 05:29 AM
Contemporary slang in period movies (unless they're already genre savvy - "Knight's Tale", "Shakespeare in Love", etc.)
Historical inaccuracy. "Gladiator", that is all.
Orlando Bloom. I hate that guy :smallmad:
Plot-induced stupidity. See: any slasher movie or zombie film.
Gaping plot holes. "X-Men 3"

Avilan the Grey
2009-06-17, 05:40 AM
Historical inaccuracy. "Gladiator", that is all.
Plot-induced stupidity. See: any slasher movie or zombie film.

1) does not bother me unless it is specifically pointed out as "true story!". I did not mind the inaccuracies in Gladiator because I never saw it as anything more than an adventure film. I had more problems with Braveheart, but once I managed to file it under "cool movie with swords" instead of "historical drama" in my mind, I enjoyed it.
I have not yet watched 300, because of well... Frank Miller.

2) PIS is funny. Sometimes. But most of the time it is just so damn obvious, especially when it pops up (glaringly obvious) in otherwise good movies. When you can really tell that the writer got stuck trying to find a real reason why X would happen or Y would do that, so they just have the female reporter / heroes girlfriend / whoever who should know better do something incredible stupid.

Now a movie that I even refused to watch was the one with the Americans catching that encryption machine on the sub... whatwasitcalled? It still irritates me to no end that whoever wrote the script felt that America didn't have enough heroes in WWII already, we must steal other people's heroes and pretend they are our own! Argh!!

Fin
2009-06-17, 05:56 AM
On the Cowboy Beebop space/gun/move issue. You can't fire a gun in space. I don't watch the show so I don't know the specifics of Spikes's gun but a gun when fires propels the bullet using a small contain explosion in the chamber.

There is no oxygen in space.

Explosion/Fire needs oxgen to ignite.

Spike would have been screwed by the sounds of things. He would also have been blinded due to the fact that his eyes would have ruptured almost immediately. A good example of what would happen to someone in a similar situation watch Event Horizon, that film is mostly nonsense but that is 'apparently' (according to a learned friend) a fairly good example of what happens to a person in a vacuum.

Lord of the Helms
2009-06-17, 06:05 AM
And then, to rub it in, one watches House or something, and anyone with the slightest knowledge of medicine or hospital procedure will whine ad nauseum about every little inaccuracy, serving only to remind me of the vast gulf between the baseline competency in fictional science and medicine.

One of my roommates was a freshling MD. She loved House, precisely because the she found the idea of a patient-hating Jerk Doctor of House's Buttholian proportions inherently awesome and funny. I was actually shocked to be told that the bizarre mystery diseases and conditions featured actually weren't completely made up, but merely so rare that only a small fraction of MDs would ever encounter even one of them in their entire career.


On the Cowboy Beebop space/gun/move issue. You can't fire a gun in space. I don't watch the show so I don't know the specifics of Spikes's gun but a gun when fires propels the bullet using a small contain explosion in the chamber.

There is no oxygen in space.

Explosion/Fire needs oxgen to ignite.

Gun propellants do not require air to function, nor would other dedicated explosives; they already contain the necessary oxidation and reduction agent and their exothermic, gasifying reaction only needs to be set off with sufficient activation energy. The same with explosives. It goes all the way back even to basic gunpowder. If they required external Oxygen for their reaction, they wouldn't be nearly as powerful or effective as they are, since only their surface layer would gassify and they'd need constant influx of extra oxygen (difficult because of huge density difference between solids and gases).

But yeah, Cowboy Bebop's space physics, while not outright horrifyingly terrible, are still pretty damn bad. What really broke my Willing Suspension of Disbelief was that episode where the bounty of the week were pirates that disabled enemy ships via a computer virus transmitted by shooting metallic cables into them. Not only is this a mind-numbingly idiotic idea in the first place, the heroes fall for it twice. You're in space, you dolts! Their cables by necessity have absurdly limited range! Your ship's guns don't! Why do you keep closing in on them?

Megatron46
2009-06-17, 06:07 AM
That Guy

Ya. You know him/her. The person that sits through out the movie talking about why something couldn't work and exactly why, even though he has no idea what he's talking about.

Ahh yes, THOSE people! I'd like to add the person who can't follow basic plot and needs a running commentary explaining what is going on because they are too dense/not conentrating/there just to annoy the hell out of me!!!!! Thereby ruining not only the suspension of disbelief but the whole film generally....pause for breath... I supose I should also mention my wife's BIG gripe which is Trinity bringing Neo back from the dead through the power of love!

Fin
2009-06-17, 06:14 AM
Trinity bringing Neo back from the dead through the power of love!

I'd also like to second the whole 'Power of Love' thing. I would actually prefer this sort of thing:-

Neo: I'm alive... How?
Trinity: I dunno, magic probably?

Thats just seems much more organic to me! :smallbiggrin: Mostly due to the fact that the Power of Love is pretty much exclusively used when the writers really want to kill someone but not permanantly. It just always seems ccontrived I suppose.

Avilan the Grey
2009-06-17, 06:16 AM
Ahh yes, THOSE people! I'd like to add the person who can't follow basic plot and needs a running commentary explaining what is going on because they are too dense/not conentrating/there just to annoy the hell out of me!!!!! Thereby ruining not only the suspension of disbelief but the whole film generally....pause for breath...

I agree.
A particular bad version of this is the Movie "Critic" / Reviewer which misses the plot completely (happens a lot when a paper only have one critic, which does everything from Bergman to Transformers...). I once started to read a review of the first Matrix by one of these; it was glaringly obvious about 1/3 into the (long) text that the person in question did not get the plot. At all. Along the lines of "Why they didn't eat in fancy restaurants all the time I do not understand".
They don't ruin the Suspension of Disbelief for me, but they ruin my faith in other people in general. Which is worse.

Dispozition
2009-06-17, 06:25 AM
Neo: I'm alive... How?
Trinity: A wizard did it

Fixed for you :P

Haarkla
2009-06-17, 07:02 AM
Also you will probaly frozen/cooked alive without a suit.
Those spacesuits aren't that thick just to keep the oxygen in.
Always remember theres no atmosphere out there.

Eventually. Heat transfer is slow in a vacuum.

Hunter Noventa
2009-06-17, 07:12 AM
But yeah, Cowboy Bebop's space physics, while not outright horrifyingly terrible, are still pretty damn bad. What really broke my Willing Suspension of Disbelief was that episode where the bounty of the week were pirates that disabled enemy ships via a computer virus transmitted by shooting metallic cables into them. Not only is this a mind-numbingly idiotic idea in the first place, the heroes fall for it twice. You're in space, you dolts! Their cables by necessity have absurdly limited range! Your ship's guns don't! Why do you keep closing in on them?

I'm pretty sure the Bebop itself (The big ship the crew has) doesn't have it's own guns. If it does it never fires them. I can't recall if they use their fighters or not in that episode (it's been a while since I watched it.) BUT they have a super genius hacker on board, and it never occurred to them to, I dunno, counter-hack the other guys?

WhiteHarness
2009-06-17, 07:18 AM
One that bothers me a lot is the Armor is Useless trope.

In countless series and movies over the years, characters wear armour that is pierced by anything and everything as if it weren't even there! Stormtroopers, everyone in the Troy movie, etc. It's like Hollywood thinks of armour as just another costume choice. It's infuriating. Why would anyone wear it if it didn't work?

Avilan the Grey
2009-06-17, 07:25 AM
One that bothers me a lot is the Armor is Useless trope.

In countless series and movies over the years, characters wear armour that is pierced by anything and everything as if it weren't even there! Stormtroopers, everyone in the Troy movie, etc. It's like Hollywood thinks of armour as just another costume choice. It's infuriating. Why would anyone wear it if it didn't work?

To be fair, I understand perfectly well that armor designed to protect against "blaster" weapons fail miserably against thrown rocks. However since the armor in question does nothing against blaster guns either...

ImmortalAer
2009-06-17, 07:43 AM
I'd also like to second the whole 'Power of Love' thing. I would actually prefer this sort of thing:-

Neo: I'm alive... How?
Trinity: I dunno, magic probably?

Thats just seems much more organic to me! :smallbiggrin: Mostly due to the fact that the Power of Love is pretty much exclusively used when the writers really want to kill someone but not permanantly. It just always seems ccontrived I suppose.

Well, the 'Power of Love' is sort of... incorrect for that example. It's more along the lines of ;

"You can't be dead because..."
*mandatory melodramatic pause*
"I'm supposed to love The One, and I love you."
*PLOT*
"Ohmigawd, I'm the One. I can't die. ...wait, you love me?"

DamnedIrishman
2009-06-17, 07:51 AM
How about every space combat sequence ever involving ships or giant robots?

Efficient space combat would be firing missiles from several hundred thousand miles away.

Flame of Anor
2009-06-17, 08:15 AM
The problem with firing missiles from hundreds of thousands of miles away is:

Sensor Officer: Captain, missile attack detected!
Captain: Alright. Look, I was just about to go to bed, so we'll just shoot them down when I wake up.
Sensor Officer: Aye, Captain.

Energy weapons would be more practical, though they could be thwarted by, oh, I don't know, maybe mirrors.

Anyway, I'm sure by the time we're killing each other in space we'll have figured out efficient ways to do it. :smallamused:

Jahkaivah
2009-06-17, 09:04 AM
The Matrix...

It depressing the number of people who do not realise that you cannot use the human race as a permanent energy source.....

Of course the real kicker is when they manage to rise above the clouds in the final film.

Trinity: It's beautiful..... why did the machines need us again?
Neo: You're assuming the plot makes sense.


I didn't see him go through the floor, unless you're talking about him coming back down. To be fair, Wolverine is pretty dense, so it's not all that unbelievable.



The scene in question doesn't leave much time for Wolverine to rise above the upper floor and return to make him breaking the floor on return justifiable.

Looking at the the video, he's thrown at 0:52, breaks the ceiling at 0:53, and breaks the floor on his way down at 0:54.

Therefore he cannot have risen more than half the height of the ground floor as he's required to travel up and down in the same amount of time.

That, coupled with the fact that hitting the floor reduced his velocity considerably, it seems likely to be half of even that distance, someone that heavy would have trouble leaving the ground floor of most buildings.

Stormthorn
2009-06-17, 09:41 AM
There is no oxygen in space.

Explosion/Fire needs oxgen to ignite.

If the gun didnt have its oxygen source already contained in it it wouldnt fire on earth either since the propellant is sealed off. Guns (unless its like a flintlock) should be able to fire in space.

Flame of Anor
2009-06-17, 09:48 AM
Wow, does this mean Firefly made a blatant science error?

I refer, of course, to the scene with Vera in Our Mrs. Reynolds.

Kyouhen
2009-06-17, 10:11 AM
One that bothers me a lot is the Armor is Useless trope.

In countless series and movies over the years, characters wear armour that is pierced by anything and everything as if it weren't even there! Stormtroopers, everyone in the Troy movie, etc. It's like Hollywood thinks of armour as just another costume choice. It's infuriating. Why would anyone wear it if it didn't work?

What about the Armour Is Awesome situation? (Not sure if it's a trope, but this is what I'm calling it)

In these situations one type of armour protects against just about everything, even things that style shouldn't be able to protect against. Frodo vs The Troll anyone?

Jack Squat
2009-06-17, 10:35 AM
Wow, does this mean Firefly made a blatant science error?

I refer, of course, to the scene with Vera in Our Mrs. Reynolds.

Yes. IIRC, Joss said the advisor during the TV show was mistaken. It was corrected in Serenity when the crew uses the AA gun on the Reavers.

Mr. Mud
2009-06-17, 10:41 AM
When I died in a Rougelike, while wearing an Amulet of Life Saving...


The Vampire Lord Hits you... You age suddenly. You see the Reaper before you, calling you're old bones to him... You're Amulet glows in a flash of silvery light!

...

In vain. You die.

:smallannoyed:.

Joran
2009-06-17, 11:02 AM
The Matrix...

It depressing the number of people who do not realise that you cannot use the human race as a permanent energy source.....

Of course the real kicker is when they manage to rise above the clouds in the final film.

Trinity: It's beautiful..... why did the machines need us again?
Neo: You're assuming the plot makes sense.


http://machall.com/view.php?date=2003-05-12
http://machall.com/view.php?date=2003-05-14

It didn't kill my suspension of disbelief though; I really enjoyed the Matrix.

Connington
2009-06-17, 11:16 AM
The W Brothers originally wanted to say that the Matrix was using human's brains for storage capacity (Which at least doesn't violate the laws of physics) but the studio said the audience would never get it, so instead we got "Human Duracells".

Tengu_temp
2009-06-17, 11:19 AM
How about every space combat sequence ever involving ships or giant robots?

Efficient space combat would be firing missiles from several hundred thousand miles away.

The funny thing is, the most famous Mecha In Space! show, Gundam, actually has a very good and consistent explanation for why are they fighting at such low ranges.

Kcalehc
2009-06-17, 11:23 AM
Energy weapons would be more practical, though they could be thwarted by, oh, I don't know, maybe mirrors.

Anyway, I'm sure by the time we're killing each other in space we'll have figured out efficient ways to do it. :smallamused:

Mirrors, probably not, mirrors aren't really that efficient at deflecting heat (being made of metal partly...); although some mirrors are so it is possible. Plus unless you have some super efficient focussing device, an energy weapon at such extreme range would dissipate so much as to do nothing more than give the target a light sun tan. ;)

Near lightspeed solid slugs, from gauss or railgun type weapons might be better, but then aiming will be a bugger to pull off.

Space combat at any range is just unlikely; I mean, space is big. Really, really big. Why bother fighting when you can just skip by or hide behind the nearest planet.

HealthKit
2009-06-17, 11:39 AM
I watched Signs and was enjoying it up to the point that it was revealed the aliens are allergic or weak against water... WATER. They invade a freakin' planet covered with the stuff and it actually comes down from the sky and is in the air and come without any form of protection. Really annoyed me a lot.


Watch that movie again.
Pay careful attention to the scene at the army recruitment office in which the Army Sergeant think that tactics the aliens were using suggested they were scouting the planet before the impending attack.

mangosta71
2009-06-17, 11:40 AM
I got dozens, but never remember to write them down, then I forget. Then I was watching a movie just now and noticed one of them that seems to be rather prevalent.

Reverse Coyote Effect
This is the effect that causes gravity to increase by several times because one was thrown upwards with great force, they fall with equal force.

Example #1:
Juggernaut throws Wolverine through the roof. All is good... until he falls back down through the floor?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3ddVbnQg_c


Thing here is, the way gravity works, an object will be falling at the same speed when it hits the ground that it had when it began its ascent because the acceleration is constant. The vertical velocity is merely inverted at the opposite points of its path.

Joran
2009-06-17, 11:43 AM
Watch that movie again.
Pay careful attention to the scene at the army recruitment office in which the Army Sergeant think that tactics the aliens were using suggested they were scouting the planet before the impending attack.

So... The aliens scouted a world without even looking at the world with a telescope? Or trying to determine what the planet is made of with a spectrometer? Or sending a probe down to test the world?

I understand that the aliens aren't supposed to be the main part of the movie, but still, it was stupid beyond belief and totally killed whatever disbelief I had.

Jack Squat
2009-06-17, 12:07 PM
Thing here is, the way gravity works, an object will be falling at the same speed when it hits the ground that it had when it began its ascent because the acceleration is constant. The vertical velocity is merely inverted at the opposite points of its path.

In an open area, while neglecting air resistance, yes.

In the example given, when Wolverine goes up through the floor, he's imparting a lot of energy from the throw in order to break through the ceiling (drywall and a couple layers of subfloor at the least, maybe pipes, cable, ducting, studs). If he didn't leave the house, there's no way to get the energy to punch back through the same in 8-10 feet. If he flew higher, he'd have to punch through more dry wall, perhaps more subflooring (attic?), plywood, sheeting, and shingles. That's a lot of energy imparted, and judging by the throw earlier (Wolverine into the house), I'd say that even if the Juggernaut was able to throw Wolverine through the roof, there's no way he'd have enough energy to toss Wolverine high enough that he'd be able to punch through the same.

Sholos
2009-06-17, 01:14 PM
To be fair, I understand perfectly well that armor designed to protect against "blaster" weapons fail miserably against thrown rocks. However since the armor in question does nothing against blaster guns either...

It gets more interesting when you know that stormtrooper armor is actually designed more to protect against indigenous people's weapons (the better to subjugate them) then anything modern. In fact, modern blasters pretty much go right through it. The Empire just doesn't care.

SnowballMan
2009-06-17, 01:26 PM
One that bothers me a lot is the Armor is Useless trope.

In countless series and movies over the years, characters wear armour that is pierced by anything and everything as if it weren't even there! Stormtroopers, everyone in the Troy movie, etc. It's like Hollywood thinks of armour as just another costume choice. It's infuriating. Why would anyone wear it if it didn't work?
"Why else would we wear 'em?" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ym-xHehd4NI)


Wow, does this mean Firefly made a blatant science error?

I refer, of course, to the scene with Vera in Our Mrs. Reynolds.
If you listen to the commentary, they didn't do the research and had it pointed out to them afterward.

Avilan the Grey
2009-06-17, 01:48 PM
The Matrix...

It depressing the number of people who do not realise that you cannot use the human race as a permanent energy source.....

To be fair, the original plot (which I do not remember nor have a link to... :smallredface:) did make much more sense than the emergency rewrite.


...Oh someone already said this. Sorry.

Set
2009-06-17, 01:51 PM
Plot-induced stupidity. See: any slasher movie or zombie film.

With the classic being the girl from Scream criticizing 'dumb bimbos who run around when they should be doing something smart' and then promptly dies doing the exact thing she just harshed on.


Gaping plot holes. "X-Men 3"

The only thing that could have saved that movie would have been Wolverine doing his 'Khaaaannnn' scream after gutting Jean only to cut to the Beast standing behind him with one of the hundreds of little 'takes your powers away' syringes that had been fired all over the place.

"Dude, I could have cured her, but you were standing in my way. Why'd you kill her anyway?"

Avilan the Grey
2009-06-17, 01:51 PM
What about the Armour Is Awesome situation? (Not sure if it's a trope, but this is what I'm calling it)

In these situations one type of armour protects against just about everything, even things that style shouldn't be able to protect against. Frodo vs The Troll anyone?

Magic armor does not count.
Besides, in Tolkienverse, all ancient things are automatically awesome!!!

...In fact, in high magic fantasy settings (like D&D, not LOTR) even the chainmail bikini makes sense. In fact it's the only setting it does makes sense: Only the poor would have to wear heavy full-body non-magical armor, while rich people could wear something light that protects just as much...

Avilan the Grey
2009-06-17, 01:58 PM
It gets more interesting when you know that stormtrooper armor is actually designed more to protect against indigenous people's weapons (the better to subjugate them) then anything modern. In fact, modern blasters pretty much go right through it. The Empire just doesn't care.

Well they should care enough to actually make them work against what it is supposed to protect against.

(Besides, unless someone was completely moronic, the original armor must have been optimized against blasters, since that's what the droid army used).

Faulty
2009-06-17, 01:59 PM
Quite true, but modern semi-automatic pistols carry a surprising number of rounds in their magazines. The Glock 17 carries 17 rounds, the Beretta carries 15. Still doesn't excuse revolvers or automatic weapons firing many more rounds that they can plausibly hold.

Wow, I had no idea there were side arms that carried 17 rounds. Still though, it often gets ridiculous. In the NCIS example I gave, I'm pretty sure the guy was using a six chamber revolver, too. :smallconfused:

Haruki-kun
2009-06-17, 02:04 PM
Uh, yeah, humans can survive in a vacuum for 30-60 seconds, although more than a few and you'll start to get fairly nasty damage to the extremities and/or brain, not to mention the risk of radiation poisoning (not as much of an issue when inside a big metal container like Spike was). The only problem here was, as mentioned, taking a deep breath will increase pressure on the inside of the lungs, potentially causing them to collapse due to the pressure differential. Better to make several deep inhalations/exhalations to oxygenate yourself, then exhale and head into the vacuum.

Honestly, Cowboy Bebop's one of the better sci fi shows around on physics, except when it comes to some of the fight scenes and Faye's clothes.

The gases in your body would immediately try to escape. Your blood would boil. Thousands of years of evolution have not taught our bodies to survive in space.

Morty
2009-06-17, 02:20 PM
People flying around is something that bugs me and that I can remember off the top of my head. In some movies, no matter what happens, it sends someone several feet backwards, preferably through a window. The most hilarious example is from Die Hard IV, when a guy was sent through a window by a fire extinguisher.

kamikasei
2009-06-17, 02:22 PM
Some references re: exposure to vacuum.

The Straight Dope. (http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/711/if-you-were-thrown-into-the-vacuum-of-space-with-no-space-suit-would-you-explode)
Bad Astronomy (http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/movies/m2mreview.html) (search within the page for 'distorted' to see the relevant section).
NASA. (http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970603.html)

From the last link:

If you don't try to hold your breath, exposure to space for half a minute or so is unlikely to produce permanent injury. Holding your breath is likely to damage your lungs, something scuba divers have to watch out for when ascending, and you'll have eardrum trouble if your Eustachian tubes are badly plugged up, but theory predicts -- and animal experiments confirm -- that otherwise, exposure to vacuum causes no immediate injury. You do not explode. Your blood does not boil. You do not freeze. You do not instantly lose consciousness.

Nerd-o-rama
2009-06-17, 02:26 PM
EDIT: Kamininja

Eventually, your blood will "boil" enough to give you a fatal case of the bends, but not immediately, and it's not going to cause you to instantaneously explode. You'll probably die of oxygen deprivation first, and that takes more than 30 seconds (10-15 to lose consciousness).

Some brief google searching has turned up

A NASA physicist's answer to the question (http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970603.html)
A page citing a specific NASA animal study on the subject (http://www.geoffreylandis.com/vacuum.html)

So yes, I do know somewhat what I'm talking about.

And like the first link says, burning or freezing to death isn't really an issue, as the vacuum of space is a terrible conductor of heat, and the human body can hold it in fairly well.

EDIT: Thousands of years of evolution?

FoE
2009-06-17, 02:29 PM
When the hero "spares" the villain on the grounds of "You're Not Worth Killing" or "You'll Be As Bad As Him," especially if said hero has just plowed through a small army of mooks or the villain was a particularly vicious bastard. This happens in Wolverine X-Men Origins when one character spares another character (I won't get into specifics) even though the second character is a Complete Monster.

The_Snark
2009-06-17, 02:31 PM
Well they should care enough to actually make them work against what it is supposed to protect against.

(Besides, unless someone was completely moronic, the original armor must have been optimized against blasters, since that's what the droid army used).

I think the idea is that a blaster is actually a fairly powerful hand weapon, and a suit of armor that could actually deflect it would either be too thick and heavy to really move in, or too expensive for the Empire to mass-produce. Remember, this is the same Empire that gives its pilots space suits rather than spend the money to make their fighters vacuum-sealed.

So instead, they go with a cheaper armor that can protect against grazes, and maybe turn a killing shot into an extremely nasty wound.

... at least, that's the post-movie justification theory. In practice, stormtroopers always seem to promptly fall down when shot, no matter where they were shot, and they don't move again. And Leia is shot in the shoulder while unarmored, and it doesn't seem to be too threatening.

One is forced to conclude that either the armor is killing the stormtroopers by turning wounding shots into instantly fatal ones, or that they're smart enough to know the heroes won't bother shooting them again if they play dead.

rankrath
2009-06-17, 02:34 PM
One that bothers me a lot is the Armor is Useless trope.

In countless series and movies over the years, characters wear armour that is pierced by anything and everything as if it weren't even there! Stormtroopers, everyone in the Troy movie, etc. It's like Hollywood thinks of armour as just another costume choice. It's infuriating. Why would anyone wear it if it didn't work?

There is some justification to this, as until about the 14th century, armour capable of stopping a direct blow or stab was extremely rare. Historically, most of the soldiers at troy were wearing either leather or linen(IIRC), which offers limited protection. As far as the stormtroopers go, I remember some hand wave that explained that their armour was more of a flak jacket variety, not bullet proof.

kamikasei
2009-06-17, 02:36 PM
Remember, this is the same Empire that gives its pilots space suits rather than spend the money to make their fighters vacuum-sealed.

That just seems sensible to me, though. You want the pilot in a suit anyway for safety, so why waste resources on making the ship airtight? Presumably it allows tradeoffs in design that make the fighter faster or more efficient, and probably any number of other benefits.

rubakhin
2009-06-17, 02:42 PM
I would also like to see this prostitutes-take-over-the-world movie.

The one thing that really gets me is when characters react to one another in ways no sane person would. Especially when it comes to romance. Like, take Office Space. There's one scene in it that's unbelievably creepy to me. You know the scene where the guy takes Jennifer Aniston out on a date? And he stares at her with dead-eyed sociopathy and says, in a monotone, that he doesn't want to go to work again, and so he just won't. She asks him what he'll do about bills, and he says he doesn't think he's going to be paying those either.

We know he's a good guy under the influence of hypnotism, but she doesn't. If you went on a date with a guy you didn't know and he stared straight at you while announcing in a grave deadpan his intentions to start acting completely anti-social, you'd get freaked out. (At least, I hope you would.) But Jennifer Aniston is acting her ass off giggling like a loon and trying to react to him as if he's funny and outgoing and interesting, which makes her character look completely delusional since the lines are being delivered with deadly seriousness. It would have been better if the actor was playing it like the guy was joking around with her, but half-serious, and in a way that shows her he'd be charismatic and strong enough to pull it off. That would be genuinely intriguing. Instead it just looks like something from Taxi Driver.

Piedmon_Sama
2009-06-17, 02:55 PM
Protagonists being ridiculously young for their professions. Whether they're heads of a department of research, starship captains, corporate executives, police detectives, college professors, or whatever, the heroes must always be someone in their 20's or at most early 30's. And if they're not, expect a whole bunch of griping about being a geezer (see Die Hard IV, any of the later Lethal Weapons). This is especially true if the hero in question is female. I know the movie Fantastic Four had worse problems than this, but when they put glasses on Jessica Alba and ask me to believe she is a "scientist" (did they even specify a discipline?) and she looks like she's barely old enough to be a grad student I plotz, I tell you.

The_Snark
2009-06-17, 03:01 PM
That just seems sensible to me, though. You want the pilot in a suit anyway for safety, so why waste resources on making the ship airtight? Presumably it allows tradeoffs in design that make the fighter faster or more efficient, and probably any number of other benefits.

True, as long as it's a short-range fighter; the spacesuit probably only has a few hours of air.

Of course, the fighter shouldn't be able to hold that much more air, but presumably whatever magic air-recycling technology they use wouldn't fit in something as small as a spacesuit.

You know, it's odd how suspension of disbelief is rarely broken by things like spacecraft which don't have to worry how much air they're carrying, faster-than-light communications and travel, et cetera... Generally, the only justification a movie or show will provide for those is "it's technology", with no effort to even hint at how it might work.

I suppose it's either because that sort of technology is so common in fiction that we don't think of it as strange anymore, or because most people are willing to give the authors a little slack when it comes to (not) describing the advanced technology of whatever future they're writing in.

paddyfool
2009-06-17, 03:06 PM
The scene in question doesn't leave much time for Wolverine to rise above the upper floor and return to make him breaking the floor on return justifiable.

Looking at the the video, he's thrown at 0:52, breaks the ceiling at 0:53, and breaks the floor on his way down at 0:54.

Therefore he cannot have risen more than half the height of the ground floor as he's required to travel up and down in the same amount of time.

That, coupled with the fact that hitting the floor reduced his velocity considerably, it seems likely to be half of even that distance, someone that heavy would have trouble leaving the ground floor of most buildings.

Perhaps he hit something really bouncy and just bounced back through the floor? Some very strange gymnast might have stuck a trampoline to the ceiling of the next floor up, for instance. :smallwink:

Seriously, though, my biggest SODs are these:
Bad science (Armageddon, I'm looking at you)
Bad history (Braveheart)
Action heroes taking unfeasible amounts of damage
Blatant insertion of sheer unadulterated b******t propaganda of a religious (Phenomenon) or political nature.

I've got so used to bad characterisation that it's become like water off a duck's back. Kind of sad, but there you have it.

Zencao
2009-06-17, 03:46 PM
I can buy pretty much anything from a movie as long as it's consistent. As soon as a movie starts breaking the rules it laid down itself with NO explanation, I get annoyed.

And 'power of love/bravery' doesn't count as an explanation!

LurkerInPlayground
2009-06-17, 04:03 PM
I think the idea is that a blaster is actually a fairly powerful hand weapon, and a suit of armor that could actually deflect it would either be too thick and heavy to really move in, or too expensive for the Empire to mass-produce. Remember, this is the same Empire that gives its pilots space suits rather than spend the money to make their fighters vacuum-sealed.

So instead, they go with a cheaper armor that can protect against grazes, and maybe turn a killing shot into an extremely nasty wound.

... at least, that's the post-movie justification theory. In practice, stormtroopers always seem to promptly fall down when shot, no matter where they were shot, and they don't move again. And Leia is shot in the shoulder while unarmored, and it doesn't seem to be too threatening.

One is forced to conclude that either the armor is killing the stormtroopers by turning wounding shots into instantly fatal ones, or that they're smart enough to know the heroes won't bother shooting them again if they play dead.
If the armor is that weak then there's little point having that vision-limiting helmet or all those stiff joints.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-06-17, 04:05 PM
EDIT: Kamininja

Eventually, your blood will "boil" enough to give you a fatal case of the bends, but not immediately, and it's not going to cause you to instantaneously explode. You'll probably die of oxygen deprivation first, and that takes more than 30 seconds (10-15 to lose consciousness).

Some brief google searching has turned up

A NASA physicist's answer to the question (http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970603.html)
A page citing a specific NASA animal study on the subject (http://www.geoffreylandis.com/vacuum.html)

So yes, I do know somewhat what I'm talking about.

And like the first link says, burning or freezing to death isn't really an issue, as the vacuum of space is a terrible conductor of heat, and the human body can hold it in fairly well.

EDIT: Thousands of years of evolution?
Blackbody radiation. EM waves don't need a conductor to transmit energy.

So you can freeze or burn anyway simply because your body shines its heat off as infrared waves or because something like the sun will toast you alive. Apollo 11's module froze when they had to conserve energy.

Yes, you'll probably die of oxygen deprivation long before it ever becomes an issue.

To the others:
Nerd-or-Rama is otherwise mostly correct. Because there is no air pressure in the lungs to keep oxygen dissolved in the blood, oxygen leaves the bloodstream to "equalize" the difference. That is to say, it's more than simply drowning, the oxygen you do have is leaving your body. And your brain constantly needs oxygen.

So basically, it's a very elegant way of killing a human.

averagejoe
2009-06-17, 04:21 PM
You know what else bugs me? Anyone who ***** the hammer of a modern handgun. It seems to happen all the freaking time, and every time it does it just destroys the scene.


How about every space combat sequence ever involving ships or giant robots?

Efficient space combat would be firing missiles from several hundred thousand miles away.

Well, an even bigger problem is just the fact that the spaceships in movies don't move like spaceships move with similar kinds of thrusters.


What about the Armour Is Awesome situation? (Not sure if it's a trope, but this is what I'm calling it)

Even if it isn't a TV trope from the website, a trope (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trope_(literature)) is just a theme or figure of speech in which words are used differently from their literal meaning.


From the last link:

Interestingly enough, the quote references blocked ears as bad, and Spike put earplugs in before going out. I didn't know that was bad at the time, though.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-06-17, 04:37 PM
You know what else bugs me? Anyone who ***** the hammer of a modern handgun. It seems to happen all the freaking time, and every time it does it just destroys the scene.
Uhhh . . . some handguns have dual single-action/double-action functionalities. Double-action means that pulling the trigger will pull back the hammer then release it. Single action only allows for release of the hammer by pulling the trigger.

Combining the functions means that you have the option of pulling the hammer manually, which reduces the number of tasks that a single trigger pull has to accomplish. The benefit to doing this is that manually cocking the hammer gives you a lighter trigger pull -- and enhanced accuracy. It's also a dramatic way of making a threat.

Sliders have a firing pin (as opposed to a hammer) which needs to be cocked whenever you first load the weapon. Many firearms of this ilk utilize the blowback exhaust from each successive cartridge that is fired to reset the firing pin. If memory serves, some sliders need to have their firing pins reset whenever they are loaded with a fresh magazine.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Joran
2009-06-17, 04:49 PM
You know what else bugs me? Anyone who ***** the hammer of a modern handgun. It seems to happen all the freaking time, and every time it does it just destroys the scene.

It's also unnecessary since most modern handguns have safeties and clicking them off will still have a nice sound effect and will show that you're really ready to fire.

Don't forget the close brother: Unnecessarily Pumping a Pump Action Shotgun or Pulling the Slide on a Semi-Automatic Handgun. I would certainly hope any self-respecting agent, operative, gangster, officer, or anyone who has a gun will have made sure a round is already in the chamber before going into a location where shooting is imminent.

Very rarely do I see a shell or cartridge fly out when someone does it for emphasis, which should happen if they made sure the gun was loaded and ready to fire before going into a dangerous area. Although I did see a pretty cool moment where the person grabs a shotgun, keeps on racking the shotgun and ejecting the shells (scaring the living bejesus out of the guy it was pointed at), and then whacking him in the face with the now unloaded gun.

chiasaur11
2009-06-17, 04:52 PM
Actually, this debate emphasizes another point.

Sometimes, suspension of disbelief is broken on things you got TOTALLY RIGHT.

You can't ever avoid it totally, just because some people will need not just perfect accuracy, but perfect accuracy to how they view the world, which isn't necessarily 100 percent accurate. Just tell the story and fix any errors that can be fixed without hurting the story you want to tell.

Not perfect, but good enough now is usually better than perfect a few weeks from now.

Ravens_cry
2009-06-17, 05:56 PM
Having a classy character use slangy terms and forms of speech. For example, reading a Star Trek novel where Captain Picard said "Yeah, Yeah." It just completely threw me out of the book. I think it was the second Genesis Wave novel.

averagejoe
2009-06-17, 06:08 PM
It's also a dramatic way of making a threat.

It really isn't. If it was I probably wouldn't have such a big problem with this. Maybe at one point it was a little dramatic, but it's become quite cliche.

I realize the existence of duel single action/double action functionality. It ruins my suspension of disbelief because it's kind of a stupid thing to do, not because it's impossible.

Kris Strife
2009-06-17, 06:37 PM
Perhaps he hit something really bouncy and just bounced back through the floor? Some very strange gymnast might have stuck a trampoline to the ceiling of the next floor up, for instance. :smallwink:

Sorry, but my neighbor forgot to return the ladder so I couldn't get it back down...



Blatant insertion of sheer unadulterated b******t propaganda of a religious (Phenomenon) or political nature.

I totally agree. I hate when they do it in music as well (Green Day, I'm looking at you...)

Vorpal Soda
2009-06-17, 07:09 PM
I'm going to also voice my dislike of a story that breaks it's own rules. Even if the breaking of the rules makes a scene more realistic, if it's going against the established rules of the setting, then it annoys me.

What I also really dislike (but can tolerate it if need be) is settings where the way the world functions is fundamentally reliant on concepts that are based on how people describe the world.
In other words, settings that treat things like good/law/technology as a form of energy or substance, rather than a way of describing things.
Of course, many magical effects are likely to have been "programmed" to act that way, and if they therefore use the definition of the person who made the spell, then that makes sense.

Subsequently, because of the above, I don't like the idea that technology causes magic to cease functions, and vice versa.

Okay, so I'm not that good at describing it, but I hope you understand.

Dervag
2009-06-17, 07:18 PM
The gases in your body would immediately try to escape. Your blood would boil. Thousands of years of evolution have not taught our bodies to survive in space.It really isn't that simple.

Vacuum will kill you, very surely. But it's not instant; almost nothing is. There's a fair amount of information on the effects of decompression, and it just isn't a "five seconds kills you" thing. Your body isn't a fragile balloon that pops the instant low pressure is applied.
_________


I think the idea is that a blaster is actually a fairly powerful hand weapon, and a suit of armor that could actually deflect it would either be too thick and heavy to really move in, or too expensive for the Empire to mass-produce. Remember, this is the same Empire that gives its pilots space suits rather than spend the money to make their fighters vacuum-sealed.

So instead, they go with a cheaper armor that can protect against grazes, and maybe turn a killing shot into an extremely nasty wound.

... at least, that's the post-movie justification theory. In practice, stormtroopers always seem to promptly fall down when shot, no matter where they were shot, and they don't move again. And Leia is shot in the shoulder while unarmored, and it doesn't seem to be too threatening.

One is forced to conclude that either the armor is killing the stormtroopers by turning wounding shots into instantly fatal ones, or that they're smart enough to know the heroes won't bother shooting them again if they play dead.My guess is that they fall down when shot because being shot hurts, even with armor. We don't know that everyone who falls down dies, after all.

Think about American soldiers in Iraq. They are well armored against bullets and shrapnel (at least on the torso), so a lot fewer of them die than would happen if they went out in shirtsleeves. But they don't just stand there ignoring bullets like so many raindrops; body armor light enough to wear doesn't work like that. You have to make compromises between the armor's ability to protect you and your ability to carry it, and the result is usually a compromise that stops enemy fire from killing you but won't stop it from hurting you enough for shock to make you fall over.
______


Blackbody radiation. EM waves don't need a conductor to transmit energy.

So you can freeze or burn anyway simply because your body shines its heat off as infrared waves or because something like the sun will toast you alive. Apollo 11's module froze when they had to conserve energy.

Yes, you'll probably die of oxygen deprivation long before it ever becomes an issue.Thing is, the rate of cooling is vastly decreased relative to what you'd get in a normal situation. It's like "no wind chill" only more so; it makes a low outside temperature far less dangerous than it would be otherwise.

So space remains a terrible conductor of heat- it's just not infinitely terrible.

Flame of Anor
2009-06-17, 07:34 PM
You have to make compromises between the armor's ability to protect you and your ability to carry it, and the result is usually a compromise that stops enemy fire from killing you but won't stop it from hurting you enough for shock to make you fall over.

Yes, exactly. In one of the X-Wing books, our heroes are on a base planetside, and, IIRC, stormtroopers attack stealthily (!) in the night, planting charges and stabbing people. One of our guys (it might be Corran Horn) wakes up, kills a stormie, and takes his armor. Then he goes out to fight them, but gets shot. Falls on a crate of Corellian whiskey, too, as I recall. Later we hear that the stormie armor "ablated the shot", weakening it enough to let him survive it.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-06-17, 07:38 PM
What I also really dislike (but can tolerate it if need be) is settings where the way the world functions is fundamentally reliant on concepts that are based on how people describe the world.
In other words, settings that treat things like good/law/technology as a form of energy or substance, rather than a way of describing things.
Of course, many magical effects are likely to have been "programmed" to act that way, and if they therefore use the definition of the person who made the spell, then that makes sense.
Lawful Good.


Subsequently, because of the above, I don't like the idea that technology causes magic to cease functions, and vice versa.
Yes. I hate this as well.

The Old Kingdom series by Garth Nix. Particularly any novel after Sabriel. Swords apparently don't count as technology? Even "magical" gizmos of that series are really just technology by another name.

Mewtarthio
2009-06-17, 07:38 PM
Re: Stormtroopers: They're actually really effective outside of Return of the Jedi. I can't recall them ever losing a battle on-screen except against the Ewoks, and in Revenge of the Sith the original clone troopers take down freaking Jedi.


Subsequently, because of the above, I don't like the idea that technology causes magic to cease functions, and vice versa.

Never bothered me. If magic is presented as suitably chaotic (or whimsical, or just plain logic-defying) in nature, it makes sense that the presence of magic could interfere with the delicate processes used in advanced technology. Of course, that also brings up the question of why it doesn't interfere with similar processes in the human body, but if we worried about that we'd have to start asking question like "How come possessed people act differently even though they still have the same brains?"

Me, I generally keep my disbelief willingly suspended unless the movie commits the unforgivable sin of boring me. I watch movies to be entertained, so I'll try my best to be entertained, even if it means swallowing blatant physics errors and cheezy dialogue. Of course, if the movie is so dull that I get less enjoyment out of watching it than I would out of mentally drawing mustaches and glasses on the characters,* then I'll do the latter instead.

That's not to say I'm never critical. If I run into a horrible misconception of physics or the like, I'll still angrily fume "GENETICS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY!"; I'll just be able to put it aside into the big mental folder labeled "magic" and continue watching the rest of the film. I'll have time to lament the inadequacies later.

To date, the only movie that has violated the above rule is Die Another Day. I put up with the twentieth-century gene therapy, the orbital death rays, the invisible cars, the villain moving from "no legal identity" to "international multimillionaire media darling" in two years, the endless innuendos, and even everyone thinking that putting a "second sun" in Earth's orbit would be a good idea. When they had 007 windsurfing on a piece of a broken car, though, I snapped. A sort of straw that broke the camel's back, if you will.

*I mean, uh, metaphorically. Yeah. :smallredface:

chiasaur11
2009-06-17, 07:46 PM
Re: Stormtroopers: They're actually really effective outside of Return of the Jedi. I can't recall them ever losing a battle on-screen except against the Ewoks, and in Revenge of the Sith the original clone troopers take down freaking Jedi.



Never bothered me. If magic is presented as suitably chaotic (or whimsical, or just plain logic-defying) in nature, it makes sense that the presence of magic could interfere with the delicate processes used in advanced technology. Of course, that also brings up the question of why it doesn't interfere with similar processes in the human body, but if we worried about that we'd have to start asking question like "How come possessed people act differently even though they still have the same brains?"

Me, I generally keep my disbelief willingly suspended unless the movie commits the unforgivable sin of boring me. I watch movies to be entertained, so I'll try my best to be entertained, even if it means swallowing blatant physics errors and cheezy dialogue. Of course, if the movie is so dull that I get less enjoyment out of watching it than I would out of mentally drawing mustaches and glasses on the characters,* then I'll do the latter instead.

That's not to say I'm never critical. If I run into a horrible misconception of physics or the like, I'll still angrily fume "GENETICS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY!"; I'll just be able to put it aside into the big mental folder labeled "magic" and continue watching the rest of the film. I'll have time to lament the inadequacies later.

To date, the only movie that has violated the above rule is Die Another Day. I put up with the twentieth-century gene therapy, the orbital death rays, the invisible cars, the villain moving from "no legal identity" to "international multimillionaire media darling" in two years, the endless innuendos, and even everyone thinking that putting a "second sun" in Earth's orbit would be a good idea. When they had 007 windsurfing on a piece of a broken car, though, I snapped. A sort of straw that broke the camel's back, if you will.

*I mean, uh, metaphorically. Yeah. :smallredface:

Drawing mustaches and glasses on characters in a movie mentally?

For shame, good sir!

Monocles are much more amusing than glasses.

Thane of Fife
2009-06-17, 07:53 PM
On the subject of space combat, this (http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3x.html) is a pretty good web-site (as far as I can tell). Just don't look into it too much if you value thinking of most sci-fi as only lightly unrealistic.

Things that ruin SoD for me?

The Startling (But Obvious) Revelation

This happens mostly in books, but it's when such a big deal is made about a character's identity being obscured that it's obvious that something is up. Sort of like a badly-done "Samus is a Girl!" The most egregious example I've seen recently was in The Gods of Mars.

Variable Levels of Fiction

When the general level of fantasy in a work suddenly and dramatically shifts from the average for said work. A good example might be the construction site chase scene in Casino Royale. It just comes out of nowhere, for no real reason.

Ravens_cry
2009-06-17, 07:55 PM
This is just niggling me. It was Apollo 13 that had the accident, not Apollo 11.

The_Snark
2009-06-17, 07:57 PM
My guess is that they fall down when shot because being shot hurts, even with armor. We don't know that everyone who falls down dies, after all.

Think about American soldiers in Iraq. They are well armored against bullets and shrapnel (at least on the torso), so a lot fewer of them die than would happen if they went out in shirtsleeves. But they don't just stand there ignoring bullets like so many raindrops; body armor light enough to wear doesn't work like that. You have to make compromises between the armor's ability to protect you and your ability to carry it, and the result is usually a compromise that stops enemy fire from killing you but won't stop it from hurting you enough for shock to make you fall over.

Yep- like I said earlier, the justification does actually make sense. It's just that it seems to be an explanation concocted after the fact—we never see it born out much in the movies. I could be wrong, but I don't think we ever see a stormtrooper get shot without falling over instantly, or a downed stormtrooper moving at all. Whereas Leia is perfectly fine taking a shot to the shoulder in the last movie—sure, she falls backwards (into a sitting position) and says it's painful, but she goes on to shoot several people right afterwards, and I don't think it comes up again.

Of course, the real purpose of giving the stormtroopers armor is to conceal their faces and dehumanize them, but that's neither here nor there.

TheThan
2009-06-17, 08:27 PM
Don't forget the close brother: Unnecessarily Pumping a Pump Action Shotgun or Pulling the Slide on a Semi-Automatic Handgun. I would certainly hope any self-respecting agent, operative, gangster, officer, or anyone who has a gun will have made sure a round is already in the chamber before going into a location where shooting is imminent.

Very rarely do I see a shell or cartridge fly out when someone does it for emphasis, which should happen if they made sure the gun was loaded and ready to fire before going into a dangerous area. Although I did see a pretty cool moment where the person grabs a shotgun, keeps on racking the shotgun and ejecting the shells (scaring the living bejesus out of the guy it was pointed at), and then whacking him in the face with the now unloaded gun.

A lot of police, government and military agencies are actually training their personnel to NOT carry a round in the chamber of their side arm. There has been enough precedence in the recent past of people grabbing the agent’s gun and shooting them with it to warrant the practice. So yeah that’s actually ok.

What gets me is when they **** their weapon unnecessarily. Usually the scene goes something like this;

The good guys are loading up with their firearms, because they are about to storm the BBEG’s stronghold, probably kill him, save the girl and rescue the day. The plucky side kick make some unusually dire (considering its coming from the plucky sidekick, mind you) statement, to which the hero responds with a pithy and appropriately badass comment, followed immediately by him working the action on whatever firearm he happens to be holding.

Then five minutes before they group of heroes storm the stronghold, someone says something to the tune of “lock’n’load!” and the hero and his henchmen allies cycle a round through the chamber of their weapons. Thusly loosing that one round the hero already cycled when he delivered his obligatory badass line.

WhiteHarness
2009-06-17, 08:29 PM
There is some justification to this, as until about the 14th century, armour capable of stopping a direct blow or stab was extremely rare.
Kindly submit primary source evidence for this assertion, because I don't think that's true at all. I can think of several instances in history prior to the 14th century in which someone's life was saved from a "direct blow or stab" by whatever armour was in common use at that time.

So, really--why do you believe that? What can you support your position with, beyond your own opinion?

Oslecamo
2009-06-17, 08:33 PM
I could be wrong, but I don't think we ever see a stormtrooper get shot without falling over instantly, or a downed stormtrooper moving at all.


Wich reminds me, I simply HAATTEEE RRAAGGEEE when there's some super advanced race wich comes to conquer earth with all their fancy tech, but their soldiers seem to have the training of a monkey.

For example, you say that Leya taking blasts whitout going down while stormtroopers drop in one hit is bad? In a X-man book I saw recently, Tony Starck(aka iron man) curb stomps dozens of elite kree troopers, armorless, weaponless, naked and at the brinck of a fatal hearth attack! Inside their own base.

rankrath
2009-06-17, 10:38 PM
Kindly submit primary source evidence for this assertion, because I don't think that's true at all. I can think of several instances in history prior to the 14th century in which someone's life was saved from a "direct blow or stab" by whatever armour was in common use at that time.

So, really--why do you believe that? What can you support your position with, beyond your own opinion?

Mostly my own experiences with armour, and some general knowledge off the internet. Full suits of plate were the norm by the 14th century, prior to that, maille was the norm. While useful at stopping a slashing blow, it has a tendency to split when stabbed (granted, I've only seen this done to non-riveted maille, period stuff may be more resilient). In additon to that, even if armour stops a cutting edge, the kinetic force can still be transfered through the armour and break a bone or two.

Avilan the Grey
2009-06-18, 01:16 AM
Mostly my own experiences with armour, and some general knowledge off the internet. Full suits of plate were the norm by the 14th century, prior to that, maille was the norm. While useful at stopping a slashing blow, it has a tendency to split when stabbed (granted, I've only seen this done to non-riveted maille, period stuff may be more resilient). In additon to that, even if armour stops a cutting edge, the kinetic force can still be transfered through the armour and break a bone or two.

That does not sound right. A Full plate armor was
A) Designed with angles to make a perfect 90 degree stab impossible (if you didn't hit a gap, like the armpit)
B) designed with heavy padding, just to stop what you describe.

There is a reason the best weapons against armor was Huge Bludgening Tools and Pickaxes, not swords or spears or arrows.

HealthKit
2009-06-18, 01:55 AM
So... The aliens scouted a world without even looking at the world with a telescope? Or trying to determine what the planet is made of with a spectrometer? Or sending a probe down to test the world?


Well... yeah.

I for one considered the possibility that they did not know how harmful Earth's water actually was. Think about it- if something like the water we have on Earth is that harmful to the aliens, it probably didn't exist in such large quantities wherever they came from... otherwise it would have wiped them out a long time ago. The discovery at the end that seemed to have ruined the movie for most people was really an "Oh s%#t, I didn't know this was going to happen!!! :smalleek:" moment for the aliens.


Maybe the aliens we saw were the probes sent down to test the world. Who knows, maybe the ones we saw exploring the surface were our equivalent to lab rats.


Again, keep in mind the aliens were scouting the planet to see what it was like.

Oslecamo
2009-06-18, 03:17 AM
Maybe the aliens we saw were the probes sent down to test the world. Who knows, maybe the ones we saw exploring the surface were our equivalent to lab rats.


That would be an interesting explanation. In some far away galaxy, some aliens are faced with either the death penalty for their crimes, or to try to colonyze the dangerous death-world called "Earth", wich ironically is mostly covered in toxic water.

Avilan the Grey
2009-06-18, 03:37 AM
That would be an interesting explanation. In some far away galaxy, some aliens are faced with either the death penalty for their crimes, or to try to colonyze the dangerous death-world called "Earth", wich ironically is mostly covered in toxic water.

Or "to bravely go where no /("#)Qzzz!¤"34 has gone before..."?


Related topic: Sometimes there are moments or scenes in movies that just are horrible, for some reason or another and that you end up talking about much more than the good parts.

First thing that comes to mind for me (despite not really caring for the rest of the movie, the rest of the movie had at least great special effects, and I enjoy my popcorn flicks as much as the next guy): The "Badly rendered werewolves" in The Day after Tomorrow:

I don't know if it was the people doing the special effects that had no experiences with living animals, or if the software they used was optimized towards weather and landscape effects (that would make sense in that movie), but the digital wolves on the ship simply looks so fake they hurt my brain.

_Zoot_
2009-06-18, 05:25 AM
About the Stormtroopers, the armor was shown to be at least some what effective in the battle of Utapau (in the third movie) when a clone trooper is shot and then is seen to be writhing on the ground wile a medic is called (yes I know that it was a clone, not a Stormtrooper).

The armor would also be helpful ageist shrapnel, none blaster weapons (god-damn ewok's) and most importantly chemical and Biological weapons......

mangosta71
2009-06-18, 10:08 AM
Oh, to go away from sci-fi and action and the like, romcoms, romance and comedies in particular seem to constantly have a problem with stupid and/or excruciatingly self-absorbed people. Oh so very often, a minor miscommunication or error is blown completely and utterly out of proportion when it could have been simply, painlessly and quickly resolved with a simple apology or moment of explanation.

Seen that happen too many times IRL for it to throw me.


But yeah, Cowboy Bebop's space physics, while not outright horrifyingly terrible, are still pretty damn bad. What really broke my Willing Suspension of Disbelief was that episode where the bounty of the week were pirates that disabled enemy ships via a computer virus transmitted by shooting metallic cables into them. Not only is this a mind-numbingly idiotic idea in the first place, the heroes fall for it twice. You're in space, you dolts! Their cables by necessity have absurdly limited range! Your ship's guns don't! Why do you keep closing in on them?

They only get paid if they bring the targets back alive. Granted, I would expect targeting mechanisms/software to be able to pull the kind of precision to disable the pirates' ship's offensive abilities without blowing it up and killing them all...


I'm pretty sure the Bebop itself (The big ship the crew has) doesn't have it's own guns. If it does it never fires them. I can't recall if they use their fighters or not in that episode (it's been a while since I watched it.) BUT they have a super genius hacker on board, and it never occurred to them to, I dunno, counter-hack the other guys?

The Bebop itself does not. But yes, Faye and Spike both go out in their fighters. And, in point of fact, at the end they did beat them by having Ed hit them with a counter-virus.

RE: Stormtroopers - Yeah, a graze from the most common type of sidearm in existence at the time their armor was designed will kill any of the faceless mooks, but it's sufficient to save a good guy (of course, the good guys aren't in any danger even unarmored, as has been pointed out). We call that plot armor. And I hate it in all its forms.

RE: Signs and water: CHEMISTRY DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY! GOOD NIGHT!
Seriously, the elements behave in certain, predictable ways. The interaction between hydrogen and oxygen that forms water is necessary for the various chemical processes that make life possible.

Erloas
2009-06-18, 11:18 AM
One thing I dislike (among a lot of others mentioned here) that also happens fairly regularly in games is the "instant expert." The good guys pick up something they have never seen or used before and are suddenly much better with it then everyone else around. The person that has never picked up a gun before but now is deadly accurate and killing everyone. The 14 year old kid that picks up a sword for the first time and lays waste to several well trained and seasoned guards. The alien ship that they have never seen before, and hadn't even flown any ship before, and they are up and dog fighting it in after a few seconds.


One other thing is hacking. Be it a close to real life high tech security system or some alien control system, someone can figure it out and hack into it in a matter of seconds, maybe a few minutes if the plot demands it, even if they have little to no experience in that sort of thing. Eddy Izard (sp?) also had a bit about this, and specifically guessing passwords.

chiasaur11
2009-06-18, 12:28 PM
One thing I dislike (among a lot of others mentioned here) that also happens fairly regularly in games is the "instant expert." The good guys pick up something they have never seen or used before and are suddenly much better with it then everyone else around. The person that has never picked up a gun before but now is deadly accurate and killing everyone. The 14 year old kid that picks up a sword for the first time and lays waste to several well trained and seasoned guards. The alien ship that they have never seen before, and hadn't even flown any ship before, and they are up and dog fighting it in after a few seconds.


One other thing is hacking. Be it a close to real life high tech security system or some alien control system, someone can figure it out and hack into it in a matter of seconds, maybe a few minutes if the plot demands it, even if they have little to no experience in that sort of thing. Eddy Izard (sp?) also had a bit about this, and specifically guessing passwords.

Maybe they all read "Night Watch"? Makes password guessing a lot easier.

Also, the System Shock games are fairly good about that. First one, you're an expert hacker already, and you got a neural implant to deal with the firing and aiming of weapons. 2 goes further, requiring years of military service for initial skills, and cyborg bits for the rest.

Avilan the Grey
2009-06-18, 12:31 PM
One other thing is hacking. Be it a close to real life high tech security system or some alien control system, someone can figure it out and hack into it in a matter of seconds, maybe a few minutes if the plot demands it, even if they have little to no experience in that sort of thing. Eddy Izard (sp?) also had a bit about this, and specifically guessing passwords.

Izzard. :smallsmile:

Anyway, Yeah... Sometimes there is a shadow of explanation (like in Intependence Day where it is concluded that all computers are reverse-enginered from the spaceship. So of course a modern Macbook can connect to a mothership's computer system... :smallsigh:

Dervag
2009-06-18, 01:48 PM
About the Stormtroopers, the armor was shown to be at least some what effective in the battle of Utapau (in the third movie) when a clone trooper is shot and then is seen to be writhing on the ground wile a medic is called (yes I know that it was a clone, not a Stormtrooper).

The armor would also be helpful ageist shrapnel, non-blaster weapons (god-damn ewok's) and most importantly chemical and Biological weapons......Let's think about this.

In the first scene where we see stormtroopers, they're having a shootout with unarmored Rebel troops on Leia's ship. When a blaster bolt even goes near the rebels, they go down, implying some kind of shrapnel effect from the blaster hitting the wall. By contrast, stormtroopers only go down on a direct hit, and we see stormtroopers still standing moving towards their fallen comrades- which suggests that an armored trooper who takes a blaster shot is not necessarily beyond help.

Likewise, on Endor we see stormtroopers fall, but in many cases they're still thrashing around while Ewoks pile in and start trying to club them to death. Even when someone just hit them over the head with a large rock. I'll grant that their performance in close combat is pathetic, but the armor does seem to offer significant protection.


Izzard. :smallsmile:

Anyway, Yeah... Sometimes there is a shadow of explanation (like in Intependence Day where it is concluded that all computers are reverse-enginered from the spaceship. So of course a modern Macbook can connect to a mothership's computer system... :smallsigh:Nonono. First of all, the Macbook only has to get the files into the alien fighter's computer. Secondly, it doesn't have to read those files, just store them. I mean, I could use my Mac to upload a virus to a Windows machine, but the virus would be an .exe file that my Mac could not run.

All you really need to make this work is a USB-to-AIP* cable adapter and a computer with bad security on the other end of the line, in my opinion.

*Alien Interface Port

kamikasei
2009-06-18, 01:54 PM
*Alien Interface Port

Hurr hurr.

Also, ramblings on the subject (http://qntm.org/?id4).

Surfing HalfOrc
2009-06-18, 02:08 PM
For me, it's the blataint safety violations in cop or military movies... You know, the hotshot rookie or soldier who run ahead of the rest of the squad at the firing range while everybody is shooting. Do that on MY range, and you'll spend the rest of the day sitting on the bus!

Also uniform violations. When in uniform, and outdoors, you wear a cover (hat). Again, the "hotshot" coming up to talk to a General/Colonel/Sergeant Major without his hat on, give me a break, right after you give me 20.

One more that got me was in a movie I actually quite liked. In Starship Troopers, they marched out across the desert, dusty, dirty, sandy, but their uniforms looked fresh from the cleaners!

mercurymaline
2009-06-18, 02:10 PM
@^: Anytime you see an EMT run, this is incorrect.

Oslecamo
2009-06-18, 02:19 PM
One more that got me was in a movie I actually quite liked. In Starship Troopers, they marched out across the desert, dusty, dirty, sandy, but their uniforms looked fresh from the cleaners!

Wait, aren't recruits suposed to keep their equipment in perfect cleaning conditions all the time? :smalltongue:

Nerd-o-rama
2009-06-18, 02:31 PM
Variable Levels of Fiction

When the general level of fantasy in a work suddenly and dramatically shifts from the average for said work. A good example might be the construction site chase scene in Casino Royale. It just comes out of nowhere, for no real reason.You know, people actually can do that kind of athletics. There's a whole "sport" of, effectively, running over/under/through things instead of around them called Parkour. I say "sport" because it's still just a modified jog. The stunts were realistic (as opposed to fantastic), though the convenient layouts and timing that made them possible in the movie probably weren't. I also liked it for showing that Bond's quarry was a lot more athletic than him, and managed to combine a "Bond chases the bad guy" scene with a "Bond fights an expert martial artist" scene by making the "martial artist" an athlete specialized in running the hell away.

WalkingTarget
2009-06-18, 02:46 PM
You know, people actually can do that kind of athletics. There's a whole "sport" of, effectively, running over/under/through things instead of around them called Parkour. I say "sport" because it's still just a modified jog. The stunts were realistic (as opposed to fantastic), though the convenient layouts and timing that made them possible in the movie probably weren't. I also liked it for showing that Bond's quarry was a lot more athletic than him, and managed to combine a "Bond chases the bad guy" scene with a "Bond fights an expert martial artist" scene by making the "martial artist" an athlete specialized in running the hell away.

In fact, the guy Bond was chasing was played by Sébastien Foucan, one of the founders of the "sport".

Zencao
2009-06-18, 05:53 PM
In fact, the guy Bond was chasing was played by Sébastien Foucan, one of the founders of the "sport".

I personally loved that scene for the main reason that Bond chases him in a much more 'realistic' way, tell me you didn't want to laugh when the guy flipped through a tiny hole, follwed by Bond simply running through the plaster wall and I'll show you a purple dog.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-06-18, 05:54 PM
Never bothered me. If magic is presented as suitably chaotic (or whimsical, or just plain logic-defying) in nature, it makes sense that the presence of magic could interfere with the delicate processes used in advanced technology. Of course, that also brings up the question of why it doesn't interfere with similar processes in the human body, but if we worried about that we'd have to start asking question like "How come possessed people act differently even though they still have the same brains?"
The thing is that if you have any sort of creature or scholar in the setting who can make use of magic with some degree of reliability or can utilize it as a skill, then it is still a science, however inexact.

If magic is used to solve problems, then it's still by technology

It's usually not so bad as long as long as magic is portrayed as "interfering with the delicate processes in advanced technology." But in practice, what you get is the token "skeptic" who can't appreciate the "truth" of a magical world or a failure by the author in defining what makes one form of technology so different from another.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-06-18, 06:01 PM
Well... yeah.

I for one considered the possibility that they did not know how harmful Earth's water actually was. Think about it- if something like the water we have on Earth is that harmful to the aliens, it probably didn't exist in such large quantities wherever they came from... otherwise it would have wiped them out a long time ago. The discovery at the end that seemed to have ruined the movie for most people was really an "Oh s%#t, I didn't know this was going to happen!!! :smalleek:" moment for the aliens.


Maybe the aliens we saw were the probes sent down to test the world. Who knows, maybe the ones we saw exploring the surface were our equivalent to lab rats.


Again, keep in mind the aliens were scouting the planet to see what it was like.
Water is the most common compound in the universe, made of the two most common elements in the universe. And this is a civilization that can conquer problems of space travel but don't even know how common water is?

We're told that these aliens are smart but they can't think of something as simple as putting protective suits on their advance scouts? You know, the advance scouts that can't kick down doors and have nothing better to do then pester farmers?

Cue an ending where the protagonist gets his faith back and puts the collar back on because we've proven that there's a loving God who will design aliens who are specifically vulnerable to water.

UltraDude
2009-06-18, 06:05 PM
Water is the most common compounds in the universe, made of the two most common elements in the universe. This is a civilization that can conquer problems of space travel but don't even know enough about water to put on a suit?

We're told that these aliens are smart but they can't think of something as simple as putting protective suits on their advance scouts? You know, the advance scouts that can't kick down doors and have nothing better to do then pester farmers?

Cue an ending where the protagonist gets his faith back and puts the collar back on because we've proven that there's a loving God who will design aliens that are specifically vulnerable to water.

...maybe the aliens just really hated the couple guys they sent to Earth.

"Haha, we're sending you to a planet covered in poison! NAKED!"

Mewtarthio
2009-06-18, 06:20 PM
The thing is that if you have any sort of creature or scholar in the setting who can make use of magic with some degree of reliability or can utilize it as a skill, then it is still a science, however inexact.

If magic is used to solve problems, then it's still by technology

Most of the fantasy I read has magic as really surreal and the purview of completely alien entities and their designated proxies (if any). I guess if magic is basically "science, but magical" you could have a point.

Of course, even if humans and other "mundane" creatures can wield magic, it's still not necessarily science. Take Discworld magic, for instance. Wizard magic is treated as analagous to science, but not other kinds, such as witch magic and divine power.


It's usually not so bad as long as long as magic is portrayed as "interfering with the delicate processes in advanced technology." But in practice, what you get is the token "skeptic" who can't appreciate the "truth" of a magical world or a failure by the author in defining what makes one form of technology so different from another.

Oh, yeah, the token skeptic. I hate those guys, too.


Cue an ending where the protagonist gets his faith back and puts the collar back on because we've proven that there's a loving God who will design aliens who are specifically vulnerable to water.

Well, you have to admit, only a god could keep such a race alive long enough to pose any threat.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-06-18, 06:39 PM
Most of the fantasy I read has magic as really surreal and the purview of completely alien entities and their designated proxies (if any). I guess if magic is basically "science, but magical" you could have a point.
Really? Most fantasy I run into has a tendency of making magic very boringly didactic, convenient and safe. All of which sort of misses the point, I think.

But even Robert E. Howard's Conan had the Hyperborians, who really did master a sort of "arcane" science. Really, if magic is practiced by an advanced being, it's a science to that advanced being. How bizarre, dangerous or irrational it seems is all pretty relative.


Of course, even if humans and other "mundane" creatures can wield magic, it's still not necessarily science. Take Discworld magic, for instance. Wizard magic is treated as analagous to science, but not other kinds, such as witch magic and divine power.
It doesn't have to be an exact science for it to be a science. If a fiction has wizarding universities or journals on the topic (however eccentric and unstandardized they may be), then obviously they've got some sort of theory to their practice.

Furthermore, Discworld took a tongue-in-cheek attitude towards magic for purposes of satire or parody.

TheThan
2009-06-18, 07:35 PM
Oh I’ve stumbled across another thing that just ruins some fantasy movies (albeit really bad ones). I call it: *drum roll*
The Flaccid Bow Syndrome

So the super awesome archer is getting ready to snipe an enemy at range with his longbow. He takes aim (if we’re lucky) and pulls the string on his bow back three inches, then lets loose his arrow. Which flies unerringly towards its target in penetrates deep into the enemy’s torso, killing him instantly.

Wait, he only pulled the bow back three inches, that’s not far enough for the bow to generate the power to shoot an arrow more than a foot, (and even then its actually falling off the bow not being fired). Yet the arrow travels quite far, sometimes upwards of 50 ft (within range of a lot of high draw bows).

I think this syndrome comes from two things, the first is that the actor “shooting” the bow isn’t strong enough to pull it back. The second is that the director has absolutely no idea how a bow works. It takes about ten minutes of research on wikipedia to find out the basics of how bows work.

Worira
2009-06-18, 07:43 PM
Maybe the bow just has a pull strength of 10 tonnes.

BRC
2009-06-18, 08:31 PM
I've actually learned to accept alot of these things, not because I can rationalize, say, a Nuclear Physicist leading a project to convert nukes into generators as a 28 year old Smoking hottie, to reference a bond movie. It's more that I've seen ridiculously young experts too often to really care anymore.

My theory concerning Stormtrooper armor, just like modern body armor, it isn't really expected to completally shrug off a direct hit from a millitary-grade weapon. It's expected to save the life of the person wearing the armor. Maybe Storm Troopers are trained to lay still when hit with a blaster, on account of their probably being too wounded to do anything but get in the way, and if they start moving around the rebels will probably put another blaster bolt in their heads just to make sure. Besides, until you get a medic to see how hurt you are, moving around may just exacerbate the problem.

On that note, I am bugged by how armor seems to either be "Can get hit by pretty much anything with no ill effects" or "Cardboard".

For example, in one epsiode of Chuck (Which, BTW, is an incrediably awesome show)

Chuck is being held hostage by a villain, Bryce, after confirming in Klingon that Chuck is indeed wearing a vest, shoots chuck in the torso from 15 feet away, causing the bad guy to drop him, then shoots the bad guy
Now, Chuck mentions that it hurt, but considering the vest was thin enough to be easily concealed under a normal shirt, they should have atleast worried about it doing more than that. I know very very little about guns and bulletproof vests, but getting shot in the torso is still somthing not to be taken lightly.


Another thing that kind of bugs me, is the idea that first aid and bandages negate injury, rather than minimizing the impact. If you get stabbed, you want to bandage that up, not because it means you are no longer stabbed, but because it stops the bleeding. You are still stabbed, and still have to deal with the consequences of that.

Thrawn183
2009-06-18, 08:35 PM
I have a problem with people surviving large explosions in close proximity because for some reason their aorta didn't, you know, rupture.

Now, it's tough to look at an explosion and say that it's strong enough to do something like that so I'm willing to cut a lot of movies some slack, but in the case of Mission Impossible 3, where Tom Cruise gets thrown sideways into a car by the explosion of a missle nearby? Yeah, that's one of those points where I'm like... eh, no.

Thane of Fife
2009-06-18, 08:56 PM
You know, people actually can do that kind of athletics. There's a whole "sport" of, effectively, running over/under/through things instead of around them called Parkour. I say "sport" because it's still just a modified jog. The stunts were realistic (as opposed to fantastic), though the convenient layouts and timing that made them possible in the movie probably weren't. I also liked it for showing that Bond's quarry was a lot more athletic than him, and managed to combine a "Bond chases the bad guy" scene with a "Bond fights an expert martial artist" scene by making the "martial artist" an athlete specialized in running the hell away.

Oh, I'm aware that it's possible, but it came out of nowhere. It's been a while since I saw the movie, so my memory could be hazy, but I seem to recall that there was no suggestion that the other guy was anything but some disgruntled guy living in the village(?). Similarly, I know that people can fence with remarkable skill, but seeing some random guy in a village in the middle of nowhere fighting like an olympic-class fencer would seem kind of bizarre to me.

averagejoe
2009-06-18, 08:56 PM
Really? Most fantasy I run into has a tendency of making magic very boringly didactic, convenient and safe. All of which sort of misses the point, I think.

Agreed. It's one of the major things I have a problem with when it comes to contemporary fantasy.

That said, magic as a science can have interesting things done to it. Fullmetal Alchemist, for example, when magic was explicitly a science. The central theme involved an aspect of the theory surrounding magic being incomplete and wrong in many obvious ways, and the consequences of this.

However, most of the time magic is pretty stupid, and if I like the work it's in spite of the magic.

JadedDM
2009-06-18, 09:00 PM
I have a problem with people surviving large explosions in close proximity because for some reason their aorta didn't, you know, rupture.

Now, it's tough to look at an explosion and say that it's strong enough to do something like that so I'm willing to cut a lot of movies some slack, but in the case of Mission Impossible 3, where Tom Cruise gets thrown sideways into a car by the explosion of a missle nearby? Yeah, that's one of those points where I'm like... eh, no.

Or how explosions never hurt you as long as you don't actually get hit by the fireball? Shrapnel doesn't exist, after all.

Jack Squat
2009-06-18, 10:07 PM
Also uniform violations. When in uniform, and outdoors, you wear a cover (hat). Again, the "hotshot" coming up to talk to a General/Colonel/Sergeant Major without his hat on, give me a break, right after you give me 20.

To be fair, they can't have the officers in perfect outfits due to laws (impersonating an officer appears to be illegal even when on a closed set), so they do little things like change up the pins used (because you'd never use shiny bars out in the middle of a combat zone). Perhaps they figure with these other small things (like a hat) can/need to be changed up as well. Also, I know not all units enforce uniform as strictly as others, though in any situation with a "hotshot", this probably isn't the case, as they're normally still in training.

Nerd-o-rama
2009-06-18, 10:11 PM
Oh, I'm aware that it's possible, but it came out of nowhere. It's been a while since I saw the movie, so my memory could be hazy, but I seem to recall that there was no suggestion that the other guy was anything but some disgruntled guy living in the village(?). Similarly, I know that people can fence with remarkable skill, but seeing some random guy in a village in the middle of nowhere fighting like an olympic-class fencer would seem kind of bizarre to me.Well, we also know from context he was a professional bomb-maker. This was a mercenary tech in the employ of Le Chiffre who happened to be in that town, not just some guy.

Still yeah, I do have to wonder why Parkour + Bomb-making go hand in hand, unless he likes to set his timers very short.

BRC
2009-06-18, 10:13 PM
Well, we also know from context he was a professional bomb-maker. This was a mercenary tech in the employ of Le Chiffre who happened to be in that town, not just some guy.

Still yeah, I do have to wonder why Parkour + Bomb-making go hand in hand, unless he likes to set his timers very short.
Maybe his thought was "You know what, I may be chased by some very determined people at some point. It would be nice to know how to get away from them"

Personally, I loved that scene. Bond Vs Ninja Bomb Maker.

Surfing HalfOrc
2009-06-18, 10:23 PM
To be fair, they can't have the officers in perfect outfits due to laws (impersonating an officer appears to be illegal even when on a closed set), so they do little things like change up the pins used (because you'd never use shiny bars out in the middle of a combat zone). Perhaps they figure with these other small things (like a hat) can/need to be changed up as well. Also, I know not all units enforce uniform as strictly as others, though in any situation with a "hotshot", this probably isn't the case, as they're normally still in training.

"Little Things" don't phase me at all.It's the MAJOR mistakes that drive me nuts!

One that really got to me (since I was a Torpedoman's Mate in the Navy) was the remotely detonated torpedo The Hunt for Red October. You just can's push a button and shut down a torpedo!

Most "Military" and "Cop" movies hire an adviser, but it seems like the Made for TV ones scrimp in that area.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-06-18, 10:25 PM
Agreed. It's one of the major things I have a problem with when it comes to contemporary fantasy.

That said, magic as a science can have interesting things done to it. Fullmetal Alchemist, for example, when magic was explicitly a science. The central theme involved an aspect of the theory surrounding magic being incomplete and wrong in many obvious ways, and the consequences of this.

However, most of the time magic is pretty stupid, and if I like the work it's in spite of the magic.
It's not a problem that the magic is a science. The problem is mostly that the science is written to be too exact. Having characters with perfect mastery over nature rarely makes for a good story conflict.

As you point out, alchemy in FMA is an imperfect science. A lot of the drama stemmed from giving desperate, ambitious or vengeful people such flawed and dangerous tools and letting them loose.

Tyrant
2009-06-18, 11:50 PM
Not that it sways the "Signs" discussion one or the other because the aliens still should have tested for this, but I thought it was all the crap in the water that was toxic to the aliens. The little girl's whole deal was telling everyone what was wrong with each glass of water and those were the glasses that were all over the house.

Sholos
2009-06-19, 02:16 AM
In the same vein as Signs, War of the Worlds (or whatever it was called) bugged the heck out of me. You'd think that the aliens would have looked at the microbes on the planet, or at least worn environmental suites. I mean, they've been studying the planet for how long? And they never thought to look at germs? Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Oslecamo
2009-06-19, 04:10 AM
In the same vein as Signs, War of the Worlds (or whatever it was called) bugged the heck out of me. You'd think that the aliens would have looked at the microbes on the planet, or at least worn environmental suites. I mean, they've been studying the planet for how long? And they never thought to look at germs? Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Actually, I remember hearing a quite plausible explanation for this.

The aliens in question had destroyed all harmfull microorganisms on their own planet millenias ago. Actually so long ago that they had forgoten about it and viruses and bacteria were little more than a rumor, a story to scare little children at night.

After all, viruses and bacteria aren't exactly something you can pick up on a radar or a telescope.

Fin
2009-06-19, 05:40 AM
Water is the most common compound in the universe, made of the two most common elements in the universe. And this is a civilization that can conquer problems of space travel but don't even know how common water is?

That is not strictly true as Oxygen and Hydrogen aren't even the most common elements in Earth's atmosphere, Nitrogen is. And as for the Galaxy as we know it, Hydrogen and Helium are the most common in space. As for water being the most common compound, that may well be true (although I would have suspected that it was probably a carbon compound but I don't know so I can't say) but aside from earth there is no water occurring naturally only ice. Perhaps from the aliens super telescopes it just looked like a harmless transparent rock! :smallbiggrin: So they would have only encountered it first on earth!

Joran
2009-06-19, 10:21 AM
That is not strictly true as Oxygen and Hydrogen aren't even the most common elements in Earth's atmosphere, Nitrogen is. And as for the Galaxy as we know it, Hydrogen and Helium are the most common in space. As for water being the most common compound, that may well be true (although I would have suspected that it was probably a carbon compound but I don't know so I can't say) but aside from earth there is no water occurring naturally only ice. Perhaps from the aliens super telescopes it just looked like a harmless transparent rock! :smallbiggrin: So they would have only encountered it first on earth!

Oxygen is the most common element in the Earth's crust and the third most abundant element after Hydrogen and Helium. I'm more convinced that it's something in the water, but the aliens get so little face time or explanation that my brain tries to fill in the gaps. It then distracted from the moment. I think I'm supposed to think "Wow, the signs were all around him. There is a meaning to all the chaos in his life" rather than "Wait, it was water? What kind of alien is allergic to water? Wait, why isn't he wearing an encounter suit in an alien environment? If I were an alien, I would wear an encounter suit. Actually if I were an alien, I'd probably just ignore Earth."

warty goblin
2009-06-19, 12:21 PM
Actually, I remember hearing a quite plausible explanation for this.

The aliens in question had destroyed all harmfull microorganisms on their own planet millenias ago. Actually so long ago that they had forgoten about it and viruses and bacteria were little more than a rumor, a story to scare little children at night.

After all, viruses and bacteria aren't exactly something you can pick up on a radar or a telescope.

Destroying all of the harmful varieties of virus/bacteria/microorganizms on a planet is so far into absolute stupidity territory as to boggle the mind.

To take the most obvious case, the bacteria in human fecal matter is fairly hard on a person should they eat it, yet if you erradicated the stuff your digestion would shut down. Then there's the problem that doing this would screw the unholy hell out of an ecosystem. Then there's the problem of whatever strains you left alone evolving into harmful forms over time as well.

Nerd-o-rama
2009-06-19, 01:02 PM
Maybe that's why Mars is a plantless desert, and why the Martians wanted to invade Earth. They screwed up their ecosystem trying to "correct" it.

Mewtarthio
2009-06-19, 01:09 PM
Or maybe the book was published in 1898. When was the Hazmat suit invented, again?

Oslecamo
2009-06-19, 01:12 PM
To take the most obvious case, the bacteria in human fecal matter is fairly hard on a person should they eat it, yet if you erradicated the stuff your digestion would shut down.

The aliens in the movie drinked blood directly, a process in wich you really don't need bacteria to help your digestion. Actually bacterias are normally only needed to help digest the harder vegetable matter, meat is easier to assimilate by animals, and pure blood is even easier.



Then there's the problem that doing this would screw the unholy hell out of an ecosystem.

Since they entered Earth shooting their death lasers like mad in order to conquer/destroy it, I don't think they really cared much about preserving ecosystems. This is, they're trying to conquer Earth in the first place when they could probably terraform some planet whitout life, or even easier, to bribe humanity with shiny toys. They probably erradicated all other life on their own planet after millenias of "mistakes" like this and are now desesperate for a new place to live. Desesperate enough to don't care about some "virus" legend.



Then there's the problem of whatever strains you left alone evolving into harmful forms over time as well.

If you have the tools to erradicate all harmfull microorganims from the face of the earth, I'm pretty sure you would have the tools to prevent the remaining ones from rebelling. Or perhaps they simply erradicated all microorganisms just to be safe. Their advanced technlogy probably was used to replace whatever fuction was realized by bacterias, just like we replaced horses by machines to do the hard worck for us.

UltraDude
2009-06-19, 01:28 PM
Or maybe the book was published in 1898. When was the Hazmat suit invented, again?

*Posts this statement in neon lights*

The movie had this little thing where it had to be at least somewhat faithful to a hundred or so year old story.

TheThan
2009-06-19, 01:44 PM
Oxygen is the most common element in the Earth's crust and the third most abundant element after Hydrogen and Helium. I'm more convinced that it's something in the water, but the aliens get so little face time or explanation that my brain tries to fill in the gaps. It then distracted from the moment. I think I'm supposed to think "Wow, the signs were all around him. There is a meaning to all the chaos in his life" rather than "Wait, it was water? What kind of alien is allergic to water? Wait, why isn't he wearing an encounter suit in an alien environment? If I were an alien, I would wear an encounter suit. Actually if I were an alien, I'd probably just ignore Earth."

you forgot stupidity...
:smalltongue:

mangosta71
2009-06-19, 02:37 PM
That is not strictly true as Oxygen and Hydrogen aren't even the most common elements in Earth's atmosphere, Nitrogen is. And as for the Galaxy as we know it, Hydrogen and Helium are the most common in space. As for water being the most common compound, that may well be true (although I would have suspected that it was probably a carbon compound but I don't know so I can't say) but aside from earth there is no water occurring naturally only ice. Perhaps from the aliens super telescopes it just looked like a harmless transparent rock! :smallbiggrin: So they would have only encountered it first on earth!

Hydrogen has such a low density that it does not remain in the atmosphere. But, for an idea of how prevalent it is in the universe, look at any star. The primary component of any star is hydrogen. The sun is basically a freakin' huge H-bomb. So yes, hydrogen is certainly the most common element in the universe. I would expect oxygen to be third, as its molecular weight is a power of 2, and it's more stable than the lighter elements whose molecular weight also fall into that pattern excepting helium (which should be the second most common element, and indeed is).

warty goblin
2009-06-19, 02:46 PM
The aliens in the movie drinked blood directly, a process in wich you really don't need bacteria to help your digestion. Actually bacterias are normally only needed to help digest the harder vegetable matter, meat is easier to assimilate by animals, and pure blood is even easier.

So what? It still takes some serious bacteria to break down plants, and unless I'm really, really missing something, most animals either eat plants, or eat something that eats plants (with possibly a few more steps). The point being that you still need those bacteria to break down the plants at some point down the line. As previously noted, chewing on raw cow excrement is generally considered to be harmful, due to said bacteria. Remove that bacteria, and all your herbivores will starve to death, along with the carnivores, and you're left with plants. Which you won't be able to digest, because you killed all of those bacteria.

Even if you are carnivorous, you still need those plant eating microbes.



Since they entered Earth shooting their death lasers like mad in order to conquer/destroy it, I don't think they really cared much about preserving ecosystems. This is, they're trying to conquer Earth in the first place when they could probably terraform some planet whitout life, or even easier, to bribe humanity with shiny toys. They probably erradicated all other life on their own planet after millenias of "mistakes" like this and are now desesperate for a new place to live. Desesperate enough to don't care about some "virus" legend.

It takes a lot of explosive oomph to seriously damage an ecosystem longterm. Look at all those lush green old WWI battlefields in France today, then compare them to how they looked back in 1914. Or look at Chernobyl, which is doing just fine despite having a whackton of seriously toxic stuff dumped in there. Hell, even slamming the planet with big ass meteorites hasn't done more than kill off large swaths of the higher animals for a while. Blowing stuff up isn't going to have a tenth the impact on the ecosystem that killing everything capable of processing plant matter would.



If you have the tools to erradicate all harmfull microorganims from the face of the earth, I'm pretty sure you would have the tools to prevent the remaining ones from rebelling. Or perhaps they simply erradicated all microorganisms just to be safe. Their advanced technlogy probably was used to replace whatever fuction was realized by bacterias, just like we replaced horses by machines to do the hard worck for us.
Also apparently the power to spontaniously generate proteins, since as previously noted, otherwise you'd be dead.

snoopy13a
2009-06-19, 04:15 PM
but aside from earth there is no water occurring naturally only ice.

A few of Jupiter's moons are believed to have liquid water. Mars may have have liquid water as well.

Mewtarthio
2009-06-19, 04:46 PM
So what? It still takes some serious bacteria to break down plants, and unless I'm really, really missing something, most animals either eat plants, or eat something that eats plants (with possibly a few more steps). The point being that you still need those bacteria to break down the plants at some point down the line. As previously noted, chewing on raw cow excrement is generally considered to be harmful, due to said bacteria. Remove that bacteria, and all your herbivores will starve to death, along with the carnivores, and you're left with plants. Which you won't be able to digest, because you killed all of those bacteria.

Even if you are carnivorous, you still need those plant eating microbes.

:smallsigh: I repeat: 1898. Germ theory had only been proven less than forty years prior. HG Wells can't be expected to have known about how viruses jump species, or what role microbes play in digestion, or any of the sort of things that make War of the Worlds ridiculous today.

Querzis
2009-06-19, 06:05 PM
I have no problem with physics that make no sense from our perspective. Everytimes I see a movie or read a book, I consider it a different world. For example, in One Piece, everyone is about 20 times tougher then anyone in the real world from the words of the creator himself. And there is absolutely no problem with that because hes very consistent with it. Everyone is incredibly tough, even the redshirts and the mooks. But lets say a mook get hit by a blaster weapon in the shoulder and die (or at least, doesnt move anymore) and then, two movie later, a princess without any armour is also shot in the shoulder and treat it like its a scratch? Now I have a really big problem with this.

Consistency. Thats all I ask for in fictions. Lets take the same two examples again. Now there is this guy whos even tougher then everyone around and doesnt seems to be hurt by any bludgeoning damage at all. Why is that? Because hes made of rubber! Well thats weird but it work very well within the One Piece world. Now that princess didnt care about getting hit by a blaster even though it killed or at least incapacitated everyone in one shot before. Why is that? Because shes a main character? Wrong answer mister Lucas... Or, since lots of people have problem with that one (and I do too) if you can easely survive in a room full of radiation up until the point where you do what you are supposed to do in that room and then automatically die. That really pissed me off.

Same things with psychology and character trait. Everytime someone says their Suspension of Disbelief was ruined because someone did something they found stupid or that they coudnt understand it just make me laugh. The example from Terminator Salvation where that girl save a guy she met two day ago? I'm sure there is lots of girls in the real world who would do that. I have been around enough people to know that, even if I dont understand some personality traits or even if I think its really stupid, some people would do it. Not everyone is like me. But if you introduce a character as incredibly smart or courageous or gentle or anything else, then he'd better damn well be.

I just want my fiction to be consistent with their world and their characters, they dont have to be consistent with the real world or with how I would act. If they would, they just woudnt be fiction.

GoC
2009-06-19, 06:21 PM
The big one:
Inconsistency. Be it inconsistent fighting ability, inconsistent intelligence, inconsistent physics (especially when it's for the benefit of the heroes and the villain and to the detriment of the mooks and the scenary), ect.
This ruins more than half of all movies for me.

Subset of the above:
Plot powered stupidity. People acting stupidly to further the plot. Either so that they get killed by the monster, so that the heroes have something to do or so that the heroes can win. A sure sign of sloppy writing.

And on that same note:
Redshirts.

And a couple of pet peeves:
Did Not Do The Research. It's ok as long as it's part of the premise or if it's pointed out that the writers are aware of this but that things just work differenty. If they don't point it out then i just think it's an inconsistency.

And the most annoying case of the above:
Conservation of Momentum violations. Come on people! Newton's laws are obvious and taught in every school! This is especcially obvious in space.

EDIT:
The universe having morality. Whoever supports Ends Justifies Means is always proven wrong. Can't we just accept that the universe does NOT have a standing on moral issues?! Includes the Power of Love.

No Sense of Scale. A subset of Did Not Do The Research.

Bioships. And biological creatures in general beating modern militaries without some serious magic.

Humans being superior. Very common. Particularily obvious when it's humans vs. robots. Strong AI will pwn humans, ok?! Get over it.:smallannoyed:

EDIT2:
Variable Gravity. Another case of inconsistency. Generally used to make X look "awsome". >_>

Vaynor
2009-06-19, 06:26 PM
Example #1:
Juggernaut throws Wolverine through the roof. All is good... until he falls back down through the floor?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3ddVbnQg_c

You're forgetting how much Wolverine weighs - he could have feasibly broken down through the floor after falling down on it. It is rather unlikely, of course, but not as ridiculous as example #2.

GoC
2009-06-19, 06:47 PM
You're forgetting how much Wolverine weighs - he could have feasibly broken down through the floor after falling down on it. It is rather unlikely, of course, but not as ridiculous as example #2.

The skeleton is only a small percentage of body volume. Having a skeleton of the same density as steel might double or tripple his weight but nowhere near the amount required.

Kekken
2009-06-19, 10:07 PM
The universe having morality. Whoever supports Ends Justifies Means is always proven wrong. Can't we just accept that the universe does NOT have a standing on moral issues?! Includes the Power of Love.

First off, if you honestly believe that all movies have some sort of moral universe, and that good things will always happen to good people and bad things will always happen to bad people then you need to widen your movie watching experience. I suggest movies like Fight Club, Se7en, and American Beauty; none of these films present a universe that is moral. Instead, any morality and meaning (and, in the case of American Beauty, happiness), is created by the characters themselves.

Second, although, as an existentialist, I too do not believe that there is any meaning in the universe, and the only meaning to be found is within, there are plenty of people out there who do believe that the universe follows a moral compass, usually (but not always) guided by a deity or deities. A lot of these people are filmmakers, wishing to explore their believes in this medium. Who are we to criticise this? Yes, we should criticize bad films, but not just because we disagree with how the in story universe of the film is presented.

After all, if you hate movies because of this, then you must hate Star Wars for its black and white view of the morality of the Force (before various video games and stories in the EU made the dark side 'cool'). But, in the context of the overall story, this view works, as it ties in with the other themes of heroism and faith that the franchise explores (in between awesome star-ship battles and lightsaber duels, of course...)

GoC
2009-06-19, 10:26 PM
First off, if you honestly believe that all movies have some sort of moral universe, and that good things will always happen to good people and bad things will always happen to bad people then you need to widen your movie watching experience. I suggest movies like Fight Club, Se7en, and American Beauty; none of these films present a universe that is moral. Instead, any morality and meaning (and, in the case of American Beauty, happiness), is created by the characters themselves.
I don't recall saying all movies have a moral universe.:smallconfused:


Second, although, as an existentialist, I too do not believe that there is any meaning in the universe, and the only meaning to be found is within, there are plenty of people out there who do believe that the universe follows a moral compass, usually (but not always) guided by a deity or deities. A lot of these people are filmmakers, wishing to explore their believes in this medium. Who are we to criticise this? Yes, we should criticize bad films, but not just because we disagree with how the in story universe of the film is presented.
Actually, I can say I don't like a film for pushing it's religious or political rules on others.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-06-19, 11:27 PM
Actually, I can say I don't like a film for pushing it's religious or political rules on others.
Because at best, such messages come across as preachy, idealistically corny and otherwise ruins a good story.

At worst, it spreads misinformation, fills people's heads with poorly thought-out soundbites passed off as critical thought and lowers art to the level of mere propaganda.

Such things creates such headbangingly stupid moments where people muse about the nature of free will or talk about the sanctity and providence of nature or something.

Terraoblivion
2009-06-19, 11:33 PM
There is a difference between preachiness and more serious exploration of questions. Of course a movie or novel will never carry anything more than the author's opinions and possibly arguments for and against, but that does not mean that those views cannot be interesting in their own right and can enrich a story to be truly thought provoking.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-06-19, 11:40 PM
There is a difference between preachiness and more serious exploration of questions. Of course a movie or novel will never carry anything more than the author's opinions and possibly arguments for and against, but that does not mean that those views cannot be interesting in their own right and can enrich a story to be truly thought provoking.
So not my point.

There is such a thing as a hack-writer. Hacks have narrow horizons and often mess up their own work because of it.

Frankly any discussion about free will or a theme that sets up yet *another* false dichotomy between technology and nature and suchlike are likely to give me the overwhelming urge to punch the author. They're rarely well done as a rule and everybody still feels the need to harp about it.

It's even worse when such flawed ideas are used as a justification for a specific religious/political position.

Yulian
2009-06-19, 11:46 PM
The Inefficient Efficient Killer
The heartless, soulless murder-machine (figurative or literal) designed/trained to kill in the most efficient, effective way possible, that... fails to do so. I think this is generic enough that I won't spoil it... Why does the Terminator keep picking people up and throwing them around, when it could simply crush their skulls with its fist/s?

This is one reason I find the DC comic book character Black Adam so interesting (among other reasons). He does fight like this.

Against weaker foes whom he fully intends to kill he basically just gets his hands on them and tears them apart like wet paper bags and there's nothing they can do about it.

I hate seeing people with assault rifles standing at the end of a hallway being unable to hit targets standing in the hallway. You really have to be some kind of cripple not to manage that one.



Anyway, I'm sure by the time we're killing each other in space we'll have figured out efficient ways to do it. :smallamused:

You need to read more Larry Niven. Footfall has awesome and realistic space combat. His Man/Kzin Wars stuff also has really good hard sci-fi space weapons, like the infamous "galactic grenade". It was a drum filled with ball bearings packed around a radio-detonated explosive core.

Lob it at an enemy ship, set it off, and BBs zip into their hull at excessive speed, leaving lots of holes for air to get out. It's also a "dumb" weapon, almost no electronics to detect or jam and hard to detect in the middle of a battle.

I hate seeing people go into massive melee battles wearing skimpy or no armour. Chick-armour especially irks me. Against foes wearing more-or-less decent armour, you should be cut to ribbons, scratched and bleeding all over even if you survive and win.

"Clean" fights, usually. Fights are brutal awful things. If someone doesn't bleed, it's not really a fight. Seeing someone take a full-on punch to the face and shrug it off? I don't care who you are, even professional fighters will feel it.

Hmm...in duels...two people try their level best to kill each other in one-on-one combat, then one of them is somehow inconvenienced, so the other one pauses, waits, then they continue.

I'm not talking about an honour-duel, I'm talking a combat where the objective, absolutely, is to kill the other person.

If I badly wound you in a fight to the death, my next move is going to be an attempt to hurt you more and kill you if I can. It really takes me out of the mood of the fight, and I'm talking stuff that happens that someone was actually trying to do, like gut-stab or disarm them.

Gun stuff, a few in particular. When a semiauto handgun runs out of bullets the slide locks back. You insert a new magazine, then hit the slide release and the slide moves forward, sliding a fresh round into the chamber. Ready to shoot, immediately, just point and click.

I saw Sylvester Stallone, a man who absolutely should know better, in Demolition Man run out of ammo while shooting at Wesley Snipes in the cryo-prison, slide in a new mag, release the slide, then rack it again, ejecting an unused round.

This isn't being nitpicky, this is one of the most basic things you should know if (like his character) you were a cop.

Oh, Averagejoe? I have been practicing for a while now to **** and fire my revolver rapidly because I prefer having a lighter trigger pull for accuracy. Also, if you did have a semiauto with a round in the chamber and you'd had it on safety, cocking it can be used to lighten the pull as well. It is a bit of a threat because now, a very light squeeze on your part will fire, as opposed to having to go through the whole cycle when you start squeezing.

What else...fun thread.

Oh yes, main characters with no military or combat training successfully fighting larger, stronger, and better-trained foes, and really sticking it to them, not a "last-ditch, desperate, damn-you-got-lucky" thing either.

It's like when an 90-pound chick somehow fights a 240 pound man successfully. Training may be all well and good, but strength absolutely matters, this is why professional fighting sports have weight classes. Look, Summer Glau may be quick, but honestly, in real life I'd bet I could take a full strength punch from her and remain standing without any big problems.


tell me you didn't want to laugh when the guy flipped through a tiny hole, follwed by Bond simply running through the plaster wall and I'll show you a purple dog.

Bond SMASH!

I loved that. Amusingly realistic, too. Again, strength matters.

As for Signs, this is a failure of basic chemistry. If we find a chemical through spectography on a planet, we can figure out how it will effect us because that's one of the things a working knowledge of chemistry gives you. I was a mortician for a number of years, and I learned how formaldehyde (CH2O) binds the nitrogen atoms in tissue together.

That means, with enough knowledge of chemistry, even if you had never encountered formaldehyde before, you could figure out how it would effect your tissues because you know you have nitrogen in your proteins.

So if you know your own body chemistry, you will know how water would effect you.

Finally, a most hateful thing I call "Predator Loom". This is when predatory animals/monsters/robots finally corner their quarry, then stand there, looming threateningly when they should be attacking!

Now obviously, not all predatory animals attack instantly upon sighting their prey, but when it's been attacking said prey over and over at every opportunity only to stop in its tracks when it finally has a really good shot? Arg! Killbots especially have no excuse for this, even less so when said killbot is using ranged weapons.

I must also cast my vote for wanting to see "The Hookocalypse" movie.

- Yulian

Sholos
2009-06-20, 01:28 AM
:smallsigh: I repeat: 1898. Germ theory had only been proven less than forty years prior. HG Wells can't be expected to have known about how viruses jump species, or what role microbes play in digestion, or any of the sort of things that make War of the Worlds ridiculous today.

Then maybe they shouldn't have tried making a movie of it.


It's like when an 90-pound chick somehow fights a 240 pound man successfully. Training may be all well and good, but strength absolutely matters, this is why professional fighting sports have weight classes. Look, Summer Glau may be quick, but honestly, in real life I'd bet I could take a full strength punch from her and remain standing without any big problems.
However, if she grabs your testicles, squeezes the bajeejus out of them, and the clocks you over the head with a metal serving tray, you might go down, too. I don't understand why people don't get that scene.

Also, I'm not sure that Jayne is 240 lbs.

Yulian
2009-06-20, 01:38 AM
Then maybe they shouldn't have tried making a movie of it.


However, if she grabs your testicles, squeezes the bajeejus out of them, and the clocks you over the head with a metal serving tray, you might go down, too. I don't understand why people don't get that scene.

Also, I'm not sure that Jayne is 240 lbs.

I was talking in general. I'm 220 lbs at 6'3" and in shape (little ways to go). Weapons and groin shots are very different, I'm talking about hitting. No woman at that size with little pipe-cleaner arms can exert enough force to make it really do any damage.

- Yulian

Innis Cabal
2009-06-20, 01:46 AM
I was talking in general. I'm 220 lbs at 6'3" and in shape (little ways to go). Weapons and groin shots are very different, I'm talking about hitting. No woman at that size with little pipe-cleaner arms can exert enough force to make it really do any damage.

- Yulian

Its clearly never happened to you. It dosn't take a whole lot of force to cause any type of damage. A hard squeeze is nore then enough to cause you pain.

Sholos
2009-06-20, 01:47 AM
I was talking in general. I'm 220 lbs at 6'3" and in shape (little ways to go). Weapons and groin shots are very different, I'm talking about hitting. No woman at that size with little pipe-cleaner arms can exert enough force to make it really do any damage.

- Yulian

Not in a straight up fight, no. Good thing she doesn't do anything like that. She goes for throat shots (and I don't care how big you are, you still need to breathe) or uses weapons. So there's no point complaining about her decking Jayne.

Thufir
2009-06-20, 05:52 AM
It also depends where she hits you. In the words of Mr. Vandemar:
"People think it's how hard you kick that hurts. But it's not how hard you kick. It's where. I mean, this's really a very gentle kick... but it hurts just as much as this - which is much harder."

Dinvan
2009-06-20, 06:47 AM
With the amount of experts on physics and science in this thread, its a wonder some one from nasa hasn't hijacked the thread and started asking your opinions.

Back on topic
Other people ruin my Suspension of Disbelief by crying about how "unreal" a science FICTION or FANTASY is. I can pritty much cope with anything reality breaking in a movie as long as its in tune with the movie its self (no x-men in transporter please).
I watch all the major releases and I have to say there are some nasty ones out there but at the end of the day its still make beleive.

Comet
2009-06-20, 07:00 AM
Other people ruin my Suspension of Disbelief by crying about how "unreal" a science FICTION or FANTASY is. I can pritty much cope with anything reality breaking in a movie as long as its in tune with the movie its self (no x-men in transporter please).
I watch all the major releases and I have to say there are some nasty ones out there but at the end of the day its still make beleive.
I'd have to agree here.
Sometimes it feels that the complaints about movies not being realistic enough are just missing the point.
Of course, if the movie claims to be realistic on any level, some consistency is to be expected. In such cases seeing utterly inrealistic things on-screen breaks SoD.

But then again, some movies just aren't about the gritty and realistic world we live in. Those movies are about unlikely drama, improbable swordfight etiquette and completely laughable space physics that transport airships around at the speed of plot.
Saying that there should be more blood and guts and broken bones in Pirates of the Caribean just feels kinda silly.

Erloas
2009-06-20, 09:50 AM
It's like when an 90-pound chick somehow fights a 240 pound man successfully. Training may be all well and good, but strength absolutely matters, this is why professional fighting sports have weight classes. Look, Summer Glau may be quick, but honestly, in real life I'd bet I could take a full strength punch from her and remain standing without any big problems.


Well I'll start by saying I have no idea what specific example you are going off of. But if you think size is the most important thing in a fight you are very mistaken. I fight (or used to, haven't got to much recently) in the SCA, which isn't exactly hand-to-hand but the observations still fit. I know I can hit a lot harder now weighing 155ish then I could when I weighed 210ish. I have fought a lot of people that are very large and a some that are fairly small. Size is no guarentee to how hard someone can hit. Its not uncommon to run into large people that can hit hard, but I've also ran into a lot of smaller people that hit harder then larger ones. Technique has way more to do with it the muscle.
In fact the people that hit the weakest and wear out the fastest are the ones that try to generate power from muscle rather then from technique.

What is also true is that someone can be surpisingly strong even if they don't look like they would be. I carpool with a woman about 20-25 years older then me, and she isn't very big, and she doesn't look strong, but she goes to the gym almost every day and I know she can lift a fair amount, a lot more then you would expect looking at her. Especially for women they can get very strong without it being overly obvious. Its actually really easy to see in gymnists a lot of other highly active sports that women do.


Now if you had two people of fairly similar skill and both are in good shape then size will come into play a lot more.

GoC
2009-06-20, 10:36 AM
Hmm...
One 50kg superskilled waif vs. ten 100kg muscle bound punks with a decent amount of street fighting experience and weapons.
In real life I think her chances would be zero (got this opinion from watching those MMA contests) mostly due to grapples and the fact that the stunning punch is nowhere near as common. What do you guys think?

Worira
2009-06-20, 11:48 AM
Yes. She would be dead.

Also, to the person who mentioned throat shots, have you ever actually tried to punch someone in the throat? First, it's not actually a viable target, unless the person you're trying to do it to isn't expecting an attack in the first place. Second, it takes a lot more force to collapse the trachea than you seem to think, and even if you manage it, they still have time to punch your face in.

Nerd-o-rama
2009-06-20, 12:00 PM
It's a good thing River exists in a Joss Whedon story where this kind of thing happens daily, then. The fights aren't meant to be realistic, they're meant to look cool and semi-plausible if you don't think too hard about them.

Marillion
2009-06-20, 12:16 PM
Hmm...
One 50kg superskilled waif vs. ten 100kg muscle bound punks with a decent amount of street fighting experience and weapons.
In real life I think her chances would be zero (got this opinion from watching those MMA contests) mostly due to grapples and the fact that the stunning punch is nowhere near as common. What do you guys think?

The UFC is not a reputable source of information when it comes to street fights.

If it was one on one, she'd have a chance at actually fighting. Throat shots (It takes some force to permanently collapse the trachea, but even a light tap will make you gag and distract you, and surprisingly few people remember to tuck their chin down in a real-life situation), knee stomps (the knee is probably one of the easiest joints to break), groin shots, ear pulls (the human ear tears at the consistency of corrugated cardboard, and yes, I know this from personal experience), taking advantage of terrain and circumstances, and my personal favorite, eye gouges. The only unfair fight is the one you lose.

One on ten, though, her only realistic chance is to run. The same goes for everyone, even if the one is another musclebound punk with streetfighting experience. Retreat is always a viable tactic. You might be called a coward by morons, but you'll be alive, and any fight that you can walk (or run) away from is a fight you win.

Remember: Fighting is what happens when self-defense goes wrong. Why is that little girl surrounded by punks who want to kerb stomp her? Don't ever put yourself in that situation, and you won't have to know if you can win.

doliest
2009-06-23, 12:14 AM
Usually I can look past things breaking the laws of physics, I can even look past one person pulling off inhuman feats of strength/agility if it's well told, but as a pseudo-student of history and military history I have a hard time putting up with situations where the heroes side should lose badly and yet they win, (I'm looking at you, star wars.) Not to mention when I can point out the problems with the hero's/villians plans. Not to mention the rarity with-which logistics gets brought up, even in war movies, but I digress as this is starting to sound nerdy even to me.

Sholos
2009-06-23, 12:53 AM
Wait, what went wrong in Star Wars? I mean, besides Endor. Endor would have been much better with wookies.

Jimor
2009-06-23, 04:10 AM
In Total Recall, where the henchmen surround Ahnold in a full circle, start unloading their automatic weapons at him, find out he's a hologram...

No friendly fire casualties? :smallconfused:

(That movie is easy pickin's though)

mangosta71
2009-06-23, 09:14 AM
Wait, what went wrong in Star Wars? I mean, besides Endor. Endor would have been much better with wookies.

The fact that every battle features the side with military training and superior firepower getting its ass handed to it by a pack of untrained civilians?

KnightDisciple
2009-06-23, 09:21 AM
The fact that every battle features the side with military training and superior firepower getting its ass handed to it by a pack of untrained civilians?

...Because, you know, none of the people on the Rebel's side had any military experience. It's not like there were any Imperial defectors, or people trained by local defense forces, or any such thing. No sir.

H. Zee
2009-06-23, 11:01 AM
I was talking in general. I'm 220 lbs at 6'3" and in shape (little ways to go). Weapons and groin shots are very different, I'm talking about hitting. No woman at that size with little pipe-cleaner arms can exert enough force to make it really do any damage.

- Yulian

If she were to punch you at the right angle and with the right technique in the throat, the solar plexus, the collarbone, the eye, the "sweet spot" at the side of the jaw, or the temple, not to mention pressure points, you would revise that opinion pronto. Assuming you were still conscious.

Oslecamo
2009-06-23, 11:26 AM
If she were to punch you at the right angle and with the right technique in the throat, the solar plexus, the collarbone, the eye, the "sweet spot" at the side of the jaw, or the temple, not to mention pressure points, you would revise that opinion pronto. Assuming you were still conscious.

Why do you think most puncks wear helmets?:smalltongue:

Drakyn
2009-06-23, 11:31 AM
It takes a dedicated and batman-like degree of preparation to wear a helmet on your solar plexus, to say nothing of your collarbone.

I think we can all agree on this: being punched by someone hurts, and although it may hurt more if the puncher is larger, if they're hitting the right spots it's going to hurt a load of plenty lots no matter what.

Sholos
2009-06-23, 11:45 AM
The fact that every battle features the side with military training and superior firepower getting its ass handed to it by a pack of untrained civilians?

Let's see.

Capture of the Tantive IV. Rebellion gets owned. HARD.

Battle of Yavin. Rebellion wins due to special information and having Luke on their side, but only comes back with one flight of Y-wings and two X-wings. Every other pilot that went into that fight died. In other words, it was a mixture of pure dumb luck and the Force, which we know to be a pretty big influence on events.

Battle of Hoth. Rebellion gets owned. HARDER. Seriously, they lose their major base, and it's not even as though the Empire was bringing that big a force to bear on them.

Battle of Endor. This victory was almost entirely due to the Emperor's arrogance. He completely ignored the very credible threat of the strike team, and it cost them the fight.

So, the two battles that the Rebellion won were really more flukes than anything else. If you look at anything outside of the movies, you'll see that the Rebellion doesn't have all that good a track record outside of random raids. Which, let's face it, is how most rebellions founded on guerrilla warfare go. Heck, look at the American Revolution. Trained, professional army on one side, ragtag army on the other. Who won?

Also, as KnightDisciple pointed out, it wasn't like the Rebellion was completely devoid of military experience. In fact, a lot of the higher-ups in the Rebellion were military at some point in their lives.

Set
2009-06-23, 12:26 PM
Oh yes, main characters with no military or combat training successfully fighting larger, stronger, and better-trained foes, and really sticking it to them, not a "last-ditch, desperate, damn-you-got-lucky" thing either.

Along this vein, when a character soundly is thrashed by a foe that massively outclasses them, and then returns *with no plan at all* other than being 'really pissed off' and wins handily through sheer determination.

For me, the classic example of this was in an episode of Buffy where they put her up against a vampire that beat her nearly to death in one episode, and, given time to prepare and ready her troops, which included a mage capable of teleporting the thing into the sun, she went weaponless into a bare-knuckled brawl with it. She didn't dodge a creature capable of crushing her head like an egg, but just took punches to the head and 'because she was pissed off' apparently somehow avoided having her head knocked clean off her body, and then killed the thing pretty much bare-handed.

The 'rules' just seemed to change mid-story. In one episode, the creature is immune to being staked (unlike most vampires) by the strongest girl on the planet. A few episodes later, they can be staked *by girls with normal human strength* (one human strength character, barely strong enough to lift the sword she was holding, cut two of the 'indestructible' things in half with one swing!). In the early appearance, holy water burns the creature. Later, they are immune to holy water. That sort of thing just throws me right out of the story. It's either immune, or not immune. It can either kick the main characters butt, or it can't kick the main character's butt. If it *can* kick her butt, she'd better come back with a plan worthy of Hannibal Smith, and bring her A-game, not just say, 'I'll try trading punches with it again! Yanno, the plan that didn't hurt it at all the last time, and ended up with me in the hospital after it left me for dead. The plan where I hit it as hard as I could and it smiled at me and backhanded me through a brick wall? Yeah, that'll work this time, because I'm pissed off!'

It's particularly galling on a show like Buffy, which went out of it's way in the earlier seasons to show her lose her powers and beat a vampire through ingenuity, or highlighting how her powerless 'sidekicks' end up saving her life time and again, because sometimes having the show set in a library turned out to be useful and promote the idea that one could make a plan and outwit one's vastly superior foes, instead of borrowing 'tactics' from the Incredible Hulk and then being awarded a completely undeserved victory by writer fiat.

mangosta71
2009-06-23, 12:53 PM
I guess I should have clarified - my earlier comment was a guess as to Doliest's issue with SW.

In any case, of course the Rebels had a few officers with military training. But the grunts who were doing all the fighting? Even assuming training in local garrisons, they had little or no combat experience. Hell, the ewoks didn't even have weapons. Sure, the emperor was arrogant and stupid, but did he honestly have no competent officers anywhere in the chain of command? Giving Vader's penchant for murdering anyone who screwed up, I consider that unlikely.

Nerd-o-rama
2009-06-23, 01:05 PM
Set: season 7 of Buffy, right? There's a reason that was the last one, and no it's not because they ran out of new and more powerful bad guys after the personified root of all evil, although that was probably a factor. The writing in that season just generally failed spectacularly.

Aotrs Commander
2009-06-23, 01:14 PM
The fact that any and all experimental prototypes are always destroyed complete with any plans for rebuilding them (the Death Star being a rare exception). Ye gods, if the heroes nearly got pummelled by some elite thingamy and only won by sheer fiat, why not build another one and try again...? Or better yet two?

This sort of applies to the plots as well, wherein the bad guys never try the same trick twice, despite getting so close the last time. (Okay, Mojo Jojo did it once and it failed again, but he is an idiot...)

Consistency is what mainly gets my goat. I can except all manner of physical law violations in a universe so long as it's consistant. Or, at the bare minimum, makes a spirited attempt to explain why it isn't (even after the fact). So long as I can see someone's thought about it (showing the working, metaphorically) I'm happy.

It would also be nice to see an episode of any crime drama that doesn't cling to the idea that the one helpful guy turns out to be the murderer or whatever, while all the fracktards are not. It is getting, way, way to easy to work that out in the various CSIs. "Yes, he's being helpful he must be the criminal... Sigh..." They really need to work on not being so predictable sometimes...

I'd actually like to see once, related to Set's post above, wherein the heroes meet some elite-crotch-kicking-spleen-severing wotsit and barely beat it, only to run into two or more later in the series and get absolutely panelled. I.e. violating the law of conservation of ninjutsu the way Naruto violates the laws of physics (and arguably camoflage...)

And I mean the show in general, not Naruto's gear in particular! I have no problems with the our favoruite bright orange-clad ninja, but I do get twitchy when he's singled out by folk for wearing inappropriate gear in comparison to the other characters. It's one of my pet peeves. Yes, he wears orange, but at least it's not freakin' white robesor better yet, let's take the prime offenders here, a white mask more appropriate to a clown over black camo gear if you're an elite spec ops team who work at night.

I'd love to see the casualties figures for ANBU, because I'd bet most of them die from head trauma from being stabbed in the face. The mask so obvious screams "hit me, I'm a target!" Seriously, who do they think they're fooling? The only people that will be actually intimidated by the ANBU's clown costume are complete muppets (post academy Sakura); any half-way competant ninja, when presented with a disembodied floating clown head at night (shippuden Sakura) will have a knee-jerk reaction to stab it in the eyeballs with a kunai.

But no-one ever rags on Neij's or ANBU's choice of clothing, though I see more people mock Naruto's gear than I care to remember. I mean seriously, you could hold a lamp to Neij at night and he'd shine so much Shino could have hours of fun picking beetles off him! Gah... (And yes, much of it is in fanfiction, but that doesn't mean it doesn't smack my suspension of disbelief in the metaphorical bowels when I see it, even with the loose standards I hold fanfiction to.)

Renegade Paladin
2009-06-23, 02:30 PM
Wall-E also annoyed me with the inconsistent technology levels. They destroyed the Earth, but somehow have anti-grav, artificial gravity, and something that looks like FTL...

I haven't seen Wall-E and don't intend to, so I have to ask: How is destruction of Earth incompatible with anti-gravity, artificial gravity, and FTL travel in terms of tech level? I would point out that many sci-fi universes, notably Star Wars, have all of these things in combination with the ability to destroy a planet.

Nerd-o-rama
2009-06-23, 02:41 PM
I haven't seen Wall-E and don't intend to, so I have to ask: How is destruction of Earth incompatible with anti-gravity, artificial gravity, and FTL travel in terms of tech level? I would point out that many sci-fi universes, notably Star Wars, have all of these things in combination with the ability to destroy a planet.

Actually, they didn't destroy the Earth, just polluted it so much and covered it in so much nondecomposible junk it became unable to sustain life. The complaint was "why didn't they use all that technological knowhow to clean up Earth?"

Of course, if they'd put as much effort into reconstructing the planet as they did into putting a few thousand privileged people on a perpetual space cruise, then they might have actually managed to undo the damage in a timely fashion, but remember, Earth was being run by, for all intents and purposes, Wal-Mart. They were more concerned with maintaining their own wealth and privilege and the viability of the consumer class. That was the whole point of the movie, was humans caring more about comfort than responsibility.

It's a good film, it just doesn't have a very subtle moral.

Thrawn183
2009-06-23, 02:43 PM
He means through inability to dispose of toxic waste, not the actual ability to exlode a planet.

doliest
2009-06-23, 04:04 PM
My major problem,(aside from the ewoks) was the idea that the empire quickly collapsed just because of the events in part six, even if the emporer died I have a hard time believing the entire military of the empire simply collapsed to the rebels and let them re-instate the democracy....actually a massive civil war seemed like the most likely thing to happen, atleast to me.

Nerd-o-rama
2009-06-23, 04:19 PM
While George Lucas is dumb enough that that's probably what he originally intended, the Star Wars Expanded Universe goes into great detail on how it was not that simple. While the Empire lost a lot of cohesion with its dictator's death, it took several more years for the Rebels to seize Coruscant and fracture the Empire's control structure, and another couple of decades to fight and defeat any and every yahoo admiral in the Empire who (quite sensibly) didn't surrender gracefully. And a couple of clones of Palpatine, too.

The one good thing you can really say about the Star Wars EU is it still makes more sense than the trilogy. In general. Okay, not really, it's just this one thing.

Serenity
2009-06-23, 04:20 PM
As far as the Turok Han in season 7 go, it is explicitly stated that they can be staked--you just need to be able to muster up the force to punch through their supernaturally strong sternum, something Buffy wasn't expecting the first time around--and by the time the Potentials are doing it, they've been empowered as full-fledged Slayers themselves by a ritual involving an artifact of considerable power tied closely to the Slayer Line? Did the rules change? Probably. But then, the point of that last episode was that Buffy was changing the rules.

Philistine
2009-06-23, 04:21 PM
I guess I should have clarified - my earlier comment was a guess as to Doliest's issue with SW.

In any case, of course the Rebels had a few officers with military training. But the grunts who were doing all the fighting? Even assuming training in local garrisons, they had little or no combat experience. Hell, the ewoks didn't even have weapons. Sure, the emperor was arrogant and stupid, but did he honestly have no competent officers anywhere in the chain of command? Giving Vader's penchant for murdering anyone who screwed up, I consider that unlikely.

Actually, Vader's penchant for murdering anyone who screws up would tend to erode the competence of the Imperial officer corps. First, and most obviously, if you kill 'em, they don't learn nothin'. :smallamused: Second, it's terrible for discipline: things that don't deserve the death penalty won't be reported, unless the Dark Lord of the Sith is on hand to see what happened personally. Third, it makes defection to the Rebellion a much more attractive option for any Imperial who ever makes an error (or who fears that Vader will think he has). Finally, and most perniciously, it crushes all semblance of independent thought, leaving you with a fleet full of people unable and/or unwilling to do anything on their own initiative. That's not even a good quality in grunts, but you surely don't want to see it in your officers.

By the time of the Battle of Yavin, Vader would have been carrying out this program for nearly 20 years; an entire generation of officers would have come up within this system. Small wonder, then, if the entire Imperial command structure is rotten.

doliest
2009-06-23, 04:25 PM
While George Lucas is dumb enough that that's probably what he originally intended, the Star Wars Expanded Universe goes into great detail on how it was not that simple. While the Empire lost a lot of cohesion with its dictators death, it took several more years for the Rebels to seize Coruscant and fracture the Empire's control structure, and another couple of decades to fight and defeat any and every yahoo admiral in the Empire who (quite sensibly) didn't surrender gracefully. And a couple of clones of Palpatine, too.

The one good thing you can really say about the Star Wars EU is it still makes more sense than the trilogy. In general.

That makes a good deal more sense, I've avoided EU because from what I've heard most of it is utter garbage. There are still to many franchises that don't take any of this into account. I'm also wondering if the EU goes into detail about how the majority of the empire/republic takes all of this? I mean with all the destruction this would cause you'd think they'd be happy just having the old empire back....

TheThan
2009-06-23, 04:29 PM
Another thing that gets me are these police dramas (or worse those police action flicks), where the common street punk (CR2) are heavily armed with military grade hardware. It makes me go “where are they getting those assault rifles and sub-machineguns? Why don’t the cops have them, at this point, there is no need to worry about escalation, they already have vastly superior firepower!?”


On star wars:

If you read the expanded universe material, the empire really didn’t collapse immediately after Endor. It took many years to do that. Even then, the military government that rose up after Palatine was intact.
Despite the screwed up modified ending where it shows all the various locations of the previous movies all rejoicing and having a party, they make it look like the empire just magically disappeared. Which is one of my gripes with the enhanced versions of the original trilogy (don’t even get me going on Jabba).


Up until Endor, the rebels were only capable of fighting the empire on the small scale. They knew they couldn’t stand up and trade blows, they’d get crushed. So they had to resort to guerilla warfare. They raided supply lines and committed acts of sabotage, because that’s all they could do. Come to think of it, playing through X-wing will give you a good idea of what it must have been like for the characters (well the pilots at least).

In some expanded universe material it was suggested that the emperor made heavy use of Battle Meditation (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Battle_meditation) to force a higher degree of competency and efficiency in his troops. In fact they suggest he used it so much, that his forces became dependent on it. So when he died, his troops fell into disarray, leaders couldn’t lead as well, troops couldn’t take orders as effectively, storm troopers lost their fearlessness etc. Which partially explains the rout the Imperial Navy suffered at Endor. They were winning, badly too, up until the emperor died. Then things started falling apart and the navy retreated.


edit
Yeah, Vader caused so much fear amongst his own troops, that they were pretty much too petrified of him to take the initiative and be competent officers.

doliest
2009-06-23, 04:37 PM
While the battle meditation is a potential reason, it still leaves the problem that the rebels would have to escalate the conflict to actually re-establish the republic, and if that happened then they would quickly be crushed by the empires superior force, but again it's still a better reasoning then, 'The empire collapsed, end of story.'

Superior meaning they had enough men that the 'throw them at the rebels til' the rebels die' strategy would have worked.

kamikasei
2009-06-23, 04:41 PM
It's also implied/stated, possibly only in EU material, that the rebellion was backed by powerful factions within the Empire - major worlds and systems and power blocs who weren't happy about having been conquered/annexed/usurped.

TheThan
2009-06-23, 04:45 PM
You mean human wave tactics.

Still the empire did start evolving militarily. They (slowly) realized that their star fighter tactics weren’t working and they began to rely more upon smaller more efficient capital ship designs (rather than the huge cities in space you see through out the Original trilogy). But the most important thing is they began to realize the value of the individual soldier on the battlefield. Basically troops became a resource to consider and were no longer disposable.

For example in Tatooine ghost, Han, Leia and Chewie were quite surprised when they ran into competent storm troopers.

doliest
2009-06-23, 04:52 PM
Well I was trying to avoid using said name but yes that is what I meant. Still I would like to know how the revels managed to even defeat the remaining factions of the empire using what resources they have, particularly since the general publics view of the rebels was rather vague.

hamishspence
2009-06-23, 04:56 PM
In one of the EU books (possibly a Rogue Squadron book or comic), there is a reference to said partying on coruscant- it was suppressed with extreme prejudice shortly after.

Renegade Paladin
2009-06-23, 04:56 PM
On star wars:

If you read the expanded universe material, the empire really didn’t collapse immediately after Endor. It took many years to do that. Even then, the military government that rose up after Palatine was intact.
Despite the screwed up modified ending where it shows all the various locations of the previous movies all rejoicing and having a party, they make it look like the empire just magically disappeared. Which is one of my gripes with the enhanced versions of the original trilogy (don’t even get me going on Jabba).
Amusingly, novels published after RotJ SE went out of their way to fix even that; one of the X-Wing series novels pointedly establishes that the celebrating crowds on Coruscant were mowed down by massed blaster fire courtesy of the Palace stormtrooper legion about two minutes after the camera cut away. :smallamused:

TheThan
2009-06-23, 05:05 PM
To the casual watcher who probably hasn’t read any EU material, it seems like the empire was just magically gone after the victory at Endor. Which is a huge mistake on Lucas’s part, it leads the viewer to think “hey what about the vast military might of the empire”. He should have stuck with the original ending, where the rebels are celebrating their hard won victory in classic Ewok style (dancing around bond fires).

and yes the EU fixes most of the major Smeg ups in the series.

The_Snark
2009-06-23, 05:11 PM
While the battle meditation is a potential reason, it still leaves the problem that the rebels would have to escalate the conflict to actually re-establish the republic, and if that happened then they would quickly be crushed by the empires superior force, but again it's still a better reasoning then, 'The empire collapsed, end of story.'

Superior meaning they had enough men that the 'throw them at the rebels til' the rebels die' strategy would have worked.

If the Empire had been united, that might have happened. Unfortunately, the Empire was sort of a cult of personality, built up around its founder. There was no designated heir (that I'm aware of), no precedent for determining how to manage a succession, and the most obvious candidate (Vader) was dead.

Cue a bunch of high-up officers and governors attempting to declare themselves Emperor, or (if they were less grandiose) declaring themselves the ruler of an independent sector/solar system. Even those who weren't interested in personal power still felt like they had to unify the Empire again before they could really do anything else. The priorities of most Imperial officers went like this:

1. Secure my position (or that of the person I'm loyal to)
2. Destroy those pesky Rebels.

The Rebellion survived because it didn't stop using guerilla tactics until some time later; by that time, it was powerful enough to hold its own against any one of the factions. I think the remnants of the Empire probably did unify a couple times after that (hazy on the details of EU history), but were foiled by whoever the protagonists of that story happened to be.


The one good thing you can really say about the Star Wars EU is it still makes more sense than the trilogy. In general. Okay, not really, it's just this one thing.

Classic case of too many cooks. They've had close to 50 different authors writing for them... plus games... plus comics... plus whatever else I've forgotten... and while most probably make an effort to do their research and read some of the other stuff, I doubt any of them are familiar with all the material. So they fix what they can, but sometimes they mess up, or create a second, contradictory explanation for an oddity in the films, or what-have-you.

Nerd-o-rama
2009-06-23, 05:22 PM
And some of the authors just suck. Kevin J. Anderson.

Renegade Paladin
2009-06-23, 05:43 PM
And some of the authors just suck. Kevin J. Anderson.
R.A. Salvatore.

(Oh my God! He killed Chewie! And is a gigantic hack!)

Cristo Meyers
2009-06-23, 05:44 PM
In some expanded universe material it was suggested that the emperor made heavy use of Battle Meditation (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Battle_meditation) to force a higher degree of competency and efficiency in his troops. In fact they suggest he used it so much, that his forces became dependent on it. So when he died, his troops fell into disarray, leaders couldn’t lead as well, troops couldn’t take orders as effectively, storm troopers lost their fearlessness etc. Which partially explains the rout the Imperial Navy suffered at Endor. They were winning, badly too, up until the emperor died. Then things started falling apart and the navy retreated.


Once I finally read the Thrawn trilogy I was pretty much instantly convinced that the only reason Zahn didn't explicitly say that the Emperor was using Battle Meditation is because I don't think it was a well-known power back then like it is now thanks to the KOTOR games.

Then consider that apparently most of the real up-and-coming talent in the Imperial Navy died on the Executor...

Jahkaivah
2009-06-23, 05:46 PM
Ah Star Wars... why didn't they shoot down that escape pod!?

I'm aware this is not a new complaint :smalltongue:

TheThan
2009-06-23, 05:49 PM
Once I finally read the Thrawn trilogy I was pretty much instantly convinced that the only reason Zahn didn't explicitly say that the Emperor was using Battle Meditation is because I don't think it was a well-known power back then like it is now thanks to the KOTOR games.

Then consider that apparently most of the real up-and-coming talent in the Imperial Navy died on the Executor...

yeah, I don't recall battle meditation in any form existing until Zahn thought it up. Then it took a while for the guys at bioware solidify it as a Jedi force power.

averagejoe
2009-06-23, 05:55 PM
You know what irritates me? When I'm having a Star Wars debate and someone says, "Nuh uh, they fixed it in this one novel which you haven't read and have no interest in reading." EU really doesn't count; a film series should be able to stand on its own.

Point is that these things ruined suspension of disbelief in the films. It doesn't count if, weeks or months later, you read some supplement that corrects this error; your suspension of disbelief was still ruined.

WhiteHarness
2009-06-23, 06:02 PM
You know what irritates me? When I'm having a Star Wars debate and someone says, "Nuh uh, they fixed it in this one novel which you haven't read and have no interest in reading." EU really doesn't count; a film series should be able to stand on its own.

I completely agree.

TheThan
2009-06-23, 06:11 PM
You know what irritates me? When I'm having a Star Wars debate and someone says, "Nuh uh, they fixed it in this one novel which you haven't read and have no interest in reading." EU really doesn't count; a film series should be able to stand on its own.

Point is that these things ruined suspension of disbelief in the films. It doesn't count if, weeks or months later, you read some supplement that corrects this error; your suspension of disbelief was still ruined.

Very true. Which is why I was pointing out that mistake Lucas made in the SE movies (special edition) and that if anyone who had not read said EU material wouldn’t know about it.

In all honestly all the mistakes in the films are due to Lucas redoing his own movies with the special editions.

For example Jabba the Hutt, in Episode One when we see him at the pod race, he’s large enough to just barley be able to get around on his own power. Then when we see him in episode four, he’s so small that Han can easily walk around him, stepping on him in the process. So apparently somewhere in the 30ish years between episodes one and four, Jabba decided to slim down, only to quit his diet and get fat again in episode six. Which is totally contrary to how Hutts operate.

Not to mention in episodes 1 and 3 Jabba Looks like he’s CG. He just doesn’t mesh with the environment and sticks out like a sour thumb. Which easily breaks my suspension of disbelief, when something just doesn’t look right, or doesn’t look like it belongs.

CarpeGuitarrem
2009-06-23, 06:17 PM
Regarding the earlier River vs. Jayne debate...

Point one. River has been totally psychologically conditioned to fight, a literal human weapon. She is able to harness her potential energy into an incredibly high amount of kinetic energy. What's this mean? Well, every human has a ratio of potential to kinetic energy. Being more muscular gives you more potential energy to throw about, but it's training and flexibility that increase your PE/KE ratio; the more effectively you can channel that potential energy into kinetic energy, the harder you can fight and hit. Martial arts (River's fighting style is based in kung fu, as one might expect, with ballet for style and looks) is all about directing kinetic energy where you want it to. Don't believe me? Have a talk with a judoka.

Point two. River has psychic abilities. This means that she's able to read and predict Jayne's attacks, and is also able to deliver attacks at him without looking, still knowing where he is. That substantially opens up her options for attack, making it easier for her to get to his weak spots. Especially the groin shot which proves to be his downfall.

Point three. Jayne fights dumb. Against the first two points, you have set a guy whose method of fighting basically consists of hitting the other guy first with a punch that'll deck him out.

90 lb girl aside, the odds were clearly in her favor. (And in the fight through the whole bar, remember that she was able to predict and react to enemy actions before they happened, as they were planning them, such as the one part where she has one guy shoot out another guy) Trained killer, operating entirely on instinct and practice. Versus potentially drunk brawlers with not that much training.

J.Gellert
2009-06-23, 06:23 PM
For me, three things.

First, when a plot could have been resolved with 5 minutes of thinking if, you know, the main characters actually got to thinking instead of doing silly things. Villains primarily display this (I am bothered by the seemingly smart ones, I am not talking about evil overlord problems).

Second, unrealistic explosions. Recent example: Wolverine brings down a helicopter. Alright, he's Wolverine, so that's cool. But then he scratches his claws against a rock and the resulting sparkle detonates the fuel tanks of the already-shot-down-and-burnt helicopter. The resulting CGI is very much like napalm and of course it covers the entire screen, without hurting Wolverine. They thought it seemed cool, but I just laugh.

Third, when the main characters are shown to be of greater value than anyone else. I literally just watched Terminator: Salvation and...
...while I loved it, it left me with a bitter taste because the movie just tells you: "There are NPCs, and there's Connor. His life is worth more!". Meh! Seriously, just... die? And everyone else accepts it like it's the natural thing to do? Even Connor? What kind of hero is he?

Liriel
2009-06-23, 06:25 PM
In the vein of military issues - one that makes me doubletake...not 100% ruins SoD is when they're talking about USS X and you can clearly see that it is USS Y. I can't cite an instance from memory, but that's what the internet is for. :smallsmile:

Example:
"Maybe real aircraft carriers posing as fictional ones shouldn't let viewers see their registration numbers. When this episode aired, producers heard from several "carrier purists" complaining that CVN74 is the U.S.S. John C. Stennis, not the (non-existent) Seahawk."

I knew I'd seen it in NCIS and in a few other movies/shows.

Like I said, not enough to ruin SoD, but it does make me go "Wait a minute..."

TheThan
2009-06-23, 06:27 PM
The question I have about River Tam is this:

Why did the government turn her into a martial weapon? She’s a psychic; she has WAY more potential as a weapon or an agent as it were, than just a person that kills people with her bare hands. She could kill people with just a though, or better yet, steal their secrets and use it as leverage to make them do what she (or the people controlling her) want.

averagejoe
2009-06-23, 06:33 PM
What kind of hero is he?

One whose parent raised him on the idea that he is more important than any other human. A claim which is backed up by time traveling robots trying to assassinate him personally.


I knew I'd seen it in NCIS and in a few other movies/shows.

Yes, well, I think NCIS needs to create some sort of suspension of disbelief before it can ruin that. The acting and writing make it obvious that it is a show about actors who act in what amounts to a police procedural. :smalltongue:

SmartAlec
2009-06-23, 06:47 PM
Why did the government turn her into a martial weapon? She’s a psychic; she has WAY more potential as a weapon or an agent as it were, than just a person that kills people with her bare hands. She could kill people with just a though, or better yet, steal their secrets and use it as leverage to make them do what she (or the people controlling her) want.

Whose secrets, though? In the Alliance's plan, they'll be the only people with secrets because they'll soon be the only people. There won't be anyone else to have leverage over. The Alliance government didn't want someone reading minds - and the events of Serenity shows just how frightened Alliance officials can be of someone like that, sending an assassin to kill them in case they know something.

The Alliance wants people like the Operative, who will go as far to kill someone without being told why, and in fact thinks that it's right and proper that he isn't told. River was likely an attempt to create a person even further along that path - someone who doesn't ask why they've been sent to kill someone because they don't even know they've been sent to kill someone, until the trigger code is sent.

They're not interested in her potential, or anyone's potential, really. First and foremost, they want people they can control.

Worira
2009-06-23, 07:11 PM
Regarding the earlier River vs. Jayne debate...

Point one. River has been totally psychologically conditioned to fight, a literal human weapon. She is able to harness her potential energy into an incredibly high amount of kinetic energy. What's this mean? Well, every human has a ratio of potential to kinetic energy. Being more muscular gives you more potential energy to throw about, but it's training and flexibility that increase your PE/KE ratio; the more effectively you can channel that potential energy into kinetic energy, the harder you can fight and hit. Martial arts (River's fighting style is based in kung fu, as one might expect, with ballet for style and looks) is all about directing kinetic energy where you want it to. Don't believe me? Have a talk with a judoka.

Yeah, that's not actually what potential energy is. A fat person has more potential energy than a muscular person.

TheThan
2009-06-23, 07:27 PM
. They could have gotten more use out of her as a means of gathering intelligence, they knew that there are still those loyal to the resistance out there, she could have been trained to infiltrate and destroy such groups from the inside. Or something just as simple as making people believe that the alliance exists to help all those out there (when really they just want power over pretty much everyone).

Even Mal realizes her potential. That’s why he brought her along for that heist at the beginning of Serenity.
The alliance is just wasting her capabilities by training her as a bull dog style assassin, when they could be using her in so many more ways.

If the alliance is so afraid of her, they could have disposed of her immediately. She can’t steal any secrets if she’s dead.

averagejoe
2009-06-23, 07:36 PM
Yeah, that's not actually what potential energy is. A fat person has more potential energy than a muscular person.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. I assume you mean gravitational potential energy, in which case your statement is incorrect because a muscular enough person can weigh more than a fat person (muscle is heavier than fat.) However, as I understand it, muscles basically work through expansion and contraction, using this to impart energy to your bones/limbs. What I do know is that this is a type of potential energy of the same sort one runs into when doing problems involving springs. Indeed, any problem we did in my classes that had do do with a person's muscles was reduced to a spring problem and, while I'm sure this is a gross simplification, I'm sure the principle can still apply. Remember, potential energy isn't really a thing; it doesn't exist. It's just such a useful idea that we use it to the point that it seems like it does exist.

Worira
2009-06-23, 07:56 PM
Actually, I was referring to chemical potential energy.

DamnedIrishman
2009-06-23, 07:58 PM
Actually, I was referring to chemical potential energy.

Fat people aren't necessarily more energy-dense than muscular people. It's a matter of mass, and the fat person could be a baby.

Jalor
2009-06-23, 08:00 PM
The only plot hole in The Dark Knight:
The Joker issues his threat to blow up a hospital. Cops rush in and evacuate the hospital. Thirty minutes later, there are somehow enough explosives in the hospital for a blast of titanic proportions. If the munitions were already there, someone would have found them. NOBODY, no matter how skilled, can fill a hospital with explosives while it's crawling with cops.

TRM
2009-06-23, 09:35 PM
The only plot hole in The Dark Knight:
The Joker issues his threat to blow up a hospital. Cops rush in and evacuate the hospital. Thirty minutes later, there are somehow enough explosives in the hospital for a blast of titanic proportions. If the munitions were already there, someone would have found them. NOBODY, no matter how skilled, can fill a hospital with explosives while it's crawling with cops.
Here's how he did it:

He has people on the inside. He has nurses, janitors, or utility people who are deranged enough to side with him. They all pack the hospital with explosives; some are in the basement, others are hidden in the rooms, the supply closets are filled with them, the insulation is replaced with C4.

He issues the threat.

The police flip out and immediately start evacuating the hospitals; they don't have time to look everywhere in all the hospitals in Chicago (I guess it's technically called Gotham...) for concealed explosives.

The Joker gets bored with Twoface and blows the hospital up.

Or, that's at least one reasonable theory. I was more frustrated with the first scene, where the Joker manages to drive a school bus through the wall of a bank without anyone noticing, but I wouldn't call it a plot hole and, given the Comic Book nature of the film, it only strained suspension of disbelief slightly.

TheThan
2009-06-23, 10:06 PM
Here's how he did it:

He has people on the inside. He has nurses, janitors, or utility people who are deranged enough to side with him. They all pack the hospital with explosives; some are in the basement, others are hidden in the rooms, the supply closets are filled with them, the insulation is replaced with C4.

He issues the threat.

The police flip out and immediately start evacuating the hospitals; they don't have time to look everywhere in all the hospitals in Chicago (I guess it's technically called Gotham...) for concealed explosives.

The Joker gets bored with Twoface and blows the hospital up.

Or, that's at least one reasonable theory. I was more frustrated with the first scene, where the Joker manages to drive a school bus through the wall of a bank without anyone noticing, but I wouldn't call it a plot hole and, given the Comic Book nature of the film, it only strained suspension of disbelief slightly.

I was going to suggest that the cops planted the explosives for The Joker. but there is already an unhealthy amount of love for the character around the internet, I was afraid I'd invite even more.

warty goblin
2009-06-23, 10:07 PM
Anymore my suspension of disbelief tends to be rather turned off by obvious audience pandering- books, movies, games, it really doesn't matter.

The prototypical catchall of this is the protagonist operating by substantially different rules than everything else. I used to qualify that with 'unless there's a stated reason" but I really don't anymore.

To give an example if everybody else in the piece of media is easily killed by gunfire, except the protagonist, that really, really ruins my suspension of disbelief. Why? Because it makes me stop caring everytime there's an 'awesome' gun battle, since I know there's no risk. Once I've reached a point of apathy, my mind becomes bored and starts looking for other sources of amusement. The most readily available victim is whatever I'm watching/reading/playing, and given enough time I will find a fault with it.

What I'm really trying to say here is that if you want to keep my disbelief suspended at high altitude, keep me amused first and foremost. There's plenty of things that are inconsistant, headscratching and stupid about various things that I like, but because they are otherwise engaging, I really don't actually care.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-06-23, 10:26 PM
The only plot hole in The Dark Knight:
The Joker issues his threat to blow up a hospital. Cops rush in and evacuate the hospital. Thirty minutes later, there are somehow enough explosives in the hospital for a blast of titanic proportions. If the munitions were already there, someone would have found them. NOBODY, no matter how skilled, can fill a hospital with explosives while it's crawling with cops.
I can explain this one very easily. The Joker rigs the hospital before he issues the threat to blow it up. There's not much chance that anybody could find and disarm all the charges inside of a busy hospital inside of thirty minutes.

Unless you take specific issue with the Joker's ability to accomplish logistical miracles, there's nothing specially implausible about the hospital attack.