Bad Movie Logo
"A website to the detriment of good film"
Custom Search
HOMEB-MOVIE REVIEWSREADER REVIEWSFORUMINTERVIEWSUPDATESABOUT
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 18, 2014, 09:36:42 AM
539519 Posts in 40866 Topics by 5156 Members
Latest Member: essx30
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Movies  |  Bad Movies  |  Do filmmakers think we are stupid? « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
Author Topic: Do filmmakers think we are stupid?  (Read 6641 times)
ulthar
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 324
Posts: 3833


I AM serious, and stop calling me Shirley


WWW
« Reply #15 on: June 30, 2006, 04:26:48 PM »

lilcerberus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How's about those Matrix fx, where bullets create
> shock waves as they travel?
> It's my understanding that in order to produce
> shock waves, an object needs to be moving above
> seven hundred miles per hour, whereas your average
> bullet has a top speed of about four hundred miles
> per hour.
>

I'll field this one.  Any object traveling faster than the local speed of sound will produce a shock wave in that medium.  Virtually ALL rifle bullets, and many handgun bullets, are supersonic at the muzzle.

The speed of sound is about 1150 ft/s (or about 750 mph), which is not that fast in terms of modern small arms projectiles.  9mm Luger loads with 120 gr bullets are about 1300 ft/s, for example.  30-06 Springfield with 165 gr bullets run about 2800 ft/s; a LOT of rifle loads are over 3000 ft/s (in the Mach 3-ish range), and some even exceed 4000 ft/s.  The only common handgun that I know is almost always subsonic is a .38 Special, which is typically around 950 ft/s using the ordinary bullets.

And just for gee-whiz, I've done some research work on molecular beams cruising at a stately Mach 20 or so.  Detonation shocks move that fast or a bit faster, too.

Your question about shocks and bullets is an interesting one.  One of the most damaging aspects of being hit by a rifle bullet is NOT puncture trauma from the bullet itself, but rather a secondary effect from the shock called "cavitation."  Puncture trauma effects the harder tissue directly (bone, muscle), but the shock effects pulverize low density soft tissues such as the lungs.  This is why you often see a lot of soft tissue damage quite distant from the wound channel in rifle insults that you don't see in handgun injuries.

Deer hunting gives one a lot of opportunities to study these effects, as well.  If you've ever post mortem'd a deer shot by a rifle (at reasonably close range), you can see the shock effects in soft tissues very clearly.

Sorry.
Logged

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Professor Hathaway:  I noticed you stopped stuttering.
Bodie:      I've been giving myself shock treatments.
Professor Hathaway: Up the voltage.

--Real Genius
WyreWizard
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: -24
Posts: 273



« Reply #16 on: June 30, 2006, 04:27:39 PM »

lilcerberus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How's about those Matrix fx, where bullets create
> shock waves as they travel?
> It's my understanding that in order to produce
> shock waves, an object needs to be moving above
> seven hundred miles per hour, whereas your average
> bullet has a top speed of about four hundred miles
> per hour.
>
> I have a headache.


Those aren't shockwaves.  Those ripples do not look like shockwaves at all.  They look to me like the slipstreams created by the bullets as they travel.
Logged

Babe, I'm leaving.  I must be on my way.  The time is drawing near.  The train is going.  I see it in your eyes.  The love beneath your tears.  And I'll be lonely without you.  And I'll need your love to see me through.  So please me.  My heart is your hands.  And I'll be missing you...
RCMerchant
Bela
B-Movie Kraken
*****

Karma: 0
Posts: 11140


"Charlie,we're in HELL!"-"yeah,ain't it groovy?!"


WWW
« Reply #17 on: June 30, 2006, 04:28:18 PM »

The next time I try to fight a cyclops,I'll be sure to do it scientificly,unlike those idiots in the Sinbad movies. Or to shoot at Atomic supermen-they might go up in an atomic fireball.Oh yeah,that can't happen...it's unreal...If somebody is so stupid as to believe what goes on in a FANTASY is based on reality, well,they derserve what they get. And as far as a kid thinking he was Superman-C'mon! Maybe what they needed were more attentive parents.
Logged

\"Supernatural?...perhaps. Baloney?...Perhaps not!\" Bela Lugosi-the BLACK CAT (1934)


Interviewer-"Does Dracula ever end for you?"
Lugosi-"No. Dracula-never ends."





http://www.tumblr.com/dashboard
http://www.tumblr.com/dashboard
http://rcmerchant.tumblr.com/
odinn7
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 57
Posts: 2259



« Reply #18 on: June 30, 2006, 08:17:05 PM »

But RCMerchant...you have overlooked the shark killing spree that was egged on by the movie Jaws...



ulthar wrote:
"Your question about shocks and bullets is an interesting one. One of the most damaging aspects of being hit by a rifle bullet is NOT puncture trauma from the bullet itself, but rather a secondary effect from the shock called "cavitation." Puncture trauma effects the harder tissue directly (bone, muscle), but the shock effects pulverize low density soft tissues such as the lungs. This is why you often see a lot of soft tissue damage quite distant from the wound channel in rifle insults that you don't see in handgun injuries."

He has a point about this. This whole shock thing is what makes the relatively small 5.56mm round so deadly. It flies at such high speed that when it hits, it causes this cavitation that ulthar talks about. Without this effect, the small round would basically leave a pencil size hole in you that could most likely be patched up.
Logged

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

You're not the Devil...You're practice.
RCMerchant
Bela
B-Movie Kraken
*****

Karma: 0
Posts: 11140


"Charlie,we're in HELL!"-"yeah,ain't it groovy?!"


WWW
« Reply #19 on: June 30, 2006, 09:15:47 PM »

I dunno...this is all kinda anal retentive. Stupid dumbasses killing sharks because a movie scared them.Half wits will do stupid things-check out all the idiots on those Spike TV home video shows breaking each others necks because they take WWF as real. "Stupid is as stupid does." Should we blame the Bible for the Crusades?
Logged

\"Supernatural?...perhaps. Baloney?...Perhaps not!\" Bela Lugosi-the BLACK CAT (1934)


Interviewer-"Does Dracula ever end for you?"
Lugosi-"No. Dracula-never ends."





http://www.tumblr.com/dashboard
http://www.tumblr.com/dashboard
http://rcmerchant.tumblr.com/
Newt
Mostly Harmless
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 650
Posts: 2992


I want to be Ripley when I grow up.


« Reply #20 on: July 01, 2006, 11:29:30 PM »

I rather enjoy the Darwin Awards.  If movies are providing the means for idiots to do their bit in cleaning up the gene pool...so be it.

As for holding movies to a factual standard: there is such a thing as the 'suspension of disbelief' when dealing with fiction/entertainment.

My standards do differ for documentaries.  That is where I expect to find 'reality' and I can get quite annoyed when I find it to be lacking.
Logged

"I absolutely adore movies. Even bad ones. I don't like pretentious ones, but a good bad movie, you must admit, is great." - Roddy Mc Dowell
"May I offer you a Peek Frean?" - Walter Bishop
"Thank you for appreciating my descent into deviant behavior, Mr. Reese." - Harold Finch
 "I'm going to need a swat team ready to mobilize, street maps covering all of Florida, a pot of coffee, 12 jammie dodgers and a fez." -  11
Scottie
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 8
Posts: 433



WWW
« Reply #21 on: July 02, 2006, 01:17:58 AM »

To answer some questions and to possibly shed some light into the dark and murky past of the fictional cinema, let's jump into our wayback machine and travel to 1896:

-Plessy v. Ferguson was settled and asserted that distinctions based on race ran afoul of neither the Thirteenth or Fourteenth Amendments
-Utah was admitted as the 45th United State
-Opening ceremonies of the 1896 Summer Olympics, the first modern Olympic Games were held, and
-George Melies made The Haunted Castle

The Haunted Castle is a "trick" film that used in camera editing to move actors while the camera was off to give the appearance that an actor had been teleported to a different place. This was still a newly discovered technique developed by Melies himself during the "Cinema of Attractions of pre-sound, Vaudeville accompanying cinema." In The Haunted Castle, a bat appears to fly into screen and transforms into Mephistopheles. Ol' Meph produces a cauldron which he uses to conjure up a young girl and various supernatural creatures.

Okay, so in 1896, only one year after the unofficial invention of the motion picture camera patented by Edison himself, the cinema is already being used to create fictional work.

This film and the other "trick films" of George Melies can be considered some of the first narrative films ever made. Before his work was only the travelpics created by Edison, Lumiere, and the American Biograph and Mutoscope Company. These pictures were merely 30-second to 1-minute long locked down tripod shots of various landscapes or people of particular interest... Images of Niagra Falls, Rough seas at Dover, busy streets in New York and Paris, the Grand Canyon, etc, etc...

And so when these travel pics lost their novelty, around 1896 when George Melies made The Haunted Castle, the fictional narrative became the dominant form of cinema. I refer you to the first truly popular film, Birth of A Nation by D. W. Griffith. The story is about a non-fictional time in history told in a terribly fictional way. I refer you to the popularity of Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplin, and Harold Lloyd and their fictional slapstick. I refer you to the unofficially accepted first fictional movie ever made, The Great Train Robbery (1903). I ask you to pay attention to the first unofficially accepted 'talkie,' The Jazz Singer. I refer you to the first three-color color film, La Cucaracha (1934). I don't see in any of these ranks a single non-fictional story.

We can even cross genres and tap into the most widely published book today, The Bible, and look at the fiction within it. It's historical information written in an elaborate and sometimes entertaining manner. Compare that to the operating manual of 1964 Chevy Corvair. Which is completely true down to the width of the timing belt? Now, which is more popular and possibly more entertaining to read?

I ask you this: can you recall how many times an innocent youth attempted to summon the devil in the form of a bat so that they could conjure young girls and supernatural spirits to Earth? None that you know of? Skip ahead ninety-eight years to 2004 when Hotel Rwanda was made. Can you recall how many people were very personally affected by the brutal reality of the fictional film about the atrocities occuring in Africa? If you can't, I can. Some of my friends later joined the Peace Corps or offered to participate in service trips to help people around the county in similar situations, and they cite Hotel Rwanda as one of the reasons they joined. So, what I'm trying to convey is that you cannot throw out an entire style of filmmaking because you didn't like Jaws. Humans have killed more humans than they have killed sharks in human existence. And the reason humans kill each other lies much deeper than because somebody made a film about it.

I basically ask you to pay attention to history to understand that unrealistic fiction is not a new fangled invention created by dope smoking commies trying to corrupt our youth. Fictional movies have been around almost as long as the cinema has been in existence and it will be around long after you and I are dead and decayed. So sit down so we can move the subject back to Robot Monsters in 3-D and how that kid that one time tried to communicate with outer space using a bubble making machine.

Sheesh.
Logged

___<br />Spongebob: What could be better than serving up smiles? <br />Squidward: Being Dead.
RCMerchant
Bela
B-Movie Kraken
*****

Karma: 0
Posts: 11140


"Charlie,we're in HELL!"-"yeah,ain't it groovy?!"


WWW
« Reply #22 on: July 02, 2006, 04:32:53 AM »

Scottie,you have stated, and very well, I might add, the whole heart of fantastic cinema. IT IS FANTASY.(When I grow up, I wannna be smart too.)
Logged

\"Supernatural?...perhaps. Baloney?...Perhaps not!\" Bela Lugosi-the BLACK CAT (1934)


Interviewer-"Does Dracula ever end for you?"
Lugosi-"No. Dracula-never ends."





http://www.tumblr.com/dashboard
http://www.tumblr.com/dashboard
http://rcmerchant.tumblr.com/
ulthar
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 324
Posts: 3833


I AM serious, and stop calling me Shirley


WWW
« Reply #23 on: July 02, 2006, 08:21:01 AM »

Scottie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> The Haunted Castle is a "trick" film that used in
> camera editing to move actors while the camera was
> off to give the appearance that an actor had been
> teleported to a different place. This was still a
> newly discovered technique developed by Melies
> himself during the "Cinema of Attractions of
> pre-sound, Vaudeville accompanying cinema."


Wow.  Just within the past week or so, I wondering who was the first to use this very technique with a motion picture camera!  I am impressed, sir.  And thank-you for the info.

(Incidentally, I'd like to know who was the first to use...various camera centric fx techniques...but that could be its own thread).
Logged

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Professor Hathaway:  I noticed you stopped stuttering.
Bodie:      I've been giving myself shock treatments.
Professor Hathaway: Up the voltage.

--Real Genius
odinn7
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 57
Posts: 2259



« Reply #24 on: July 02, 2006, 09:08:32 AM »

Great post Scottie...
Logged

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

You're not the Devil...You're practice.
Jim H
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 238
Posts: 2976



« Reply #25 on: July 03, 2006, 05:01:41 PM »

I thought the book ending to Jaws was kind of lame.


**BOOK SPOILERS**




Not just because the shark simply bleeds to death and then sinks, but I thought it weak how Quint gets an incredibly obvious take on Ahab's death - the reason he asks for the knife in the book (same dialogue) is to cut ropes his legs are tangled in.  He gets pulled down with the shark and drowns.  I rolled my eyes at that when I read it....






**END**





By the way, in Mythbusters when they punctured the tank, it zoomed around and did do some damage...  If he hit the tank right, it certainly would have hurt the shark, even if it didn't kill it.
Logged
WyreWizard
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: -24
Posts: 273



« Reply #26 on: July 04, 2006, 01:47:28 PM »

Well, If I were Mr. Spielberg, I would have thought more about my audience.  If the death scene in the novel was boring, I would not have used the scuba tank explosion.  To make that scene more exciting and plausible, instead of using a scuba tank, I would have used something with more punch, like a propane tank.  A propane tank would more likely explode when shot than a scuba tank because of the volatile nature of propane.  But I wonder, was propane available back then?
Logged

Babe, I'm leaving.  I must be on my way.  The time is drawing near.  The train is going.  I see it in your eyes.  The love beneath your tears.  And I'll be lonely without you.  And I'll need your love to see me through.  So please me.  My heart is your hands.  And I'll be missing you...
LilCerberus
A Very Bad Person, and
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 213
Posts: 2935


A single red bauble, a blue blanket, and a tree


WWW
« Reply #27 on: July 04, 2006, 02:14:06 PM »

WyreWizard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, If I were Mr. Spielberg, I would have
> thought more about my audience.  If the death
> scene in the novel was boring, I would not have
> used the scuba tank explosion.  To make that scene
> more exciting and plausible, instead of using a
> scuba tank, I would have used something with more
> punch, like a propane tank.  A propane tank would
> more likely explode when shot than a scuba tank
> because of the volatile nature of propane.  But I
> wonder, was propane available back then?


I've been holding this back out of decency but...
Those twerps at Columbine tried shooting at propane tanks. It didn't work.

"If it's not going to be a book, it's going to be something else. Crazy is crazy."
- Stephen King
Logged

"Science Fiction & Nostalgia have become the same thing!" - T Bone Burnett
Normal is what people are until you get to know them.
http://www.wrir.org      http://www.youtube.com/LilCerberus      http://www.facebook.com/LilCerberus      http://www.facebook.com/pages/Absolutely-Als-Bag/235489689811513      http://lilcerberus-ob.blogspot.com/   https://plus.google.com/109856182158905164403
Just Plain Horse
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 9
Posts: 567


« Reply #28 on: July 05, 2006, 08:54:48 AM »

Scottie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I ask you this: can you recall how many times an
> innocent youth attempted to summon the devil in
> the form of a bat so that they could conjure young
> girls and supernatural spirits to Earth? None that
> you know of? Skip ahead ninety-eight years to 2004
> when Hotel Rwanda was made. Can you recall how
> many people were very personally affected by the
> brutal reality of the fictional film about the
> atrocities occuring in Africa? If you can't, I
> can. Some of my friends later joined the Peace
> Corps or offered to participate in service trips
> to help people around the county in similar
> situations, and they cite Hotel Rwanda as one of
> the reasons they joined. So, what I'm trying to
> convey is that you cannot throw out an entire
> style of filmmaking because you didn't like Jaws.
> Humans have killed more humans than they have
> killed sharks in human existence. And the reason
> humans kill each other lies much deeper than
> because somebody made a film about it.
>
> I basically ask you to pay attention to history to
> understand that unrealistic fiction is not a new
> fangled invention created by dope smoking commies
> trying to corrupt our youth. Fictional movies have
> been around almost as long as the cinema has been
> in existence and it will be around long after you
> and I are dead and decayed. So sit down so we can
> move the subject back to Robot Monsters in 3-D and
> how that kid that one time tried to communicate
> with outer space using a bubble making machine.
>
> Sheesh.


Wow, very well put, Scottie! I very much agree, but I am fascinated with the notion that the messages people use in their stories- not just films, but all forms of story-telling- have been used to influence the feeble-minded into going along with a particular mentality to suit the times. There is a school of thought that Truman's decision to make and drop the atom bomb on Japan had to do with his reading the works of HG Welles when he was a teen... science fiction stories of the time suggested the only way to keep America safe was in the invention of a superweapon.  People who wrote for pulp magazine were interested in sales, and thought little or nothing of the broader imppications of their actions. Could they predict how their work would influence politics? Probably not. Should they have been held accountable for the deaths at Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Absolutely not. What people needed to do was question how the politicians of the time planned to solve the problems their foolish pride would-and always does-create. People- the stupid, stupid masses- are more the deciding factor in what occurs in this/or any country than anything else. People need proper education to make informed decisions- which is a rare happenstance indeed. Most of the masses pretend to be satisfied in "just getting by" until next day or week or month or whatever. Having to learn beyond the incredibly limited scope their half-assed schooling has taught them takes time away from tehir own petty desires. What Hollywood produces, or what laws, bills and secret deals are made depends on how informed the people are and how they use this knoweledge.

I too feel there's nothing wrong with watching some silly, mindless distractions some of the time- or pontificating the effects ... but the concept behind blaming a group or an organization for all the problems in this world is lazy, "just getting by" thinking, and truly shows a lack of a genuine desire to change what the individual sees as a flaw, error (or injustice). Assuming we're all people here (I know, my name has a tendency to throw people off), we are all responsible for what goes on in our world while we are living in it. Will we be held accountable by some tribunal? Who's to say? But I do know we must deal with the consequences of our choices. We are currently dealing with the consequences of not paying attention to politicians and how little anybody gives a damn about anything beyond their petty needs. Are you tired of it as well? Then put forth some energy into changing that, otherwise it will remain for a much longer period of time... possbily long after we are all "dead and decayed". I don't know about others, but I'd be ashamed of myself if I did nothing to try to change that.
Logged
BoyScoutKevin
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 155
Posts: 3073


« Reply #29 on: July 06, 2006, 06:45:23 PM »

I don't remember whether this is brought up later on in this thread, but the film was "The Program" w/ James Caan. And when someone was killed duplicating that stunt in the film, I heard that scene in the film was immediately edited out of the film, even while the film was still playing in theaters.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Movies  |  Bad Movies  |  Do filmmakers think we are stupid? « previous next »
    Jump to:  


    RSS Feed Subscribe Subscribe by RSS
    Email Subscribe Subscribe by Email


    Popular Articles
    How To Find A Bad Movie

    The Champions of Justice

    Plan 9 from Outer Space

    Manos, The Hands of Fate

    Podcast: Todd the Convenience Store Clerk

    Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!

    Dragonball: The Magic Begins

    Cool As Ice

    The Educational Archives: Driver's Ed

    Godzilla vs. Monster Zero

    Do you have a zombie plan?

    FROM THE BADMOVIES.ORG ARCHIVES
    ImageThe Giant Claw - Slime drop

    Earth is visited by a GIANT ANTIMATTER SPACE BUZZARD! Gawk at the amazingly bad bird puppet, or chuckle over the silly dialog. This is one of the greatest b-movies ever made.

    Lesson Learned:
    • Osmosis: os·mo·sis (oz-mo'sis, os-) n., 1. When a bird eats something.

    Subscribe to Badmovies.org and get updates by email:

    HOME B-Movie Reviews Reader Reviews Forum Interviews TV Shows Advertising Information Sideshows Links Contact

    Badmovies.org is owned and operated by Andrew Borntreger. All original content is © 1998 - 2014 by its respective author(s). Image, video, and audio files are used in accordance with the Fair Use Law, and are property of the film copyright holders. You may freely link to any page (.html or .php) on this website, but reproduction in any other form must be authorized by the copyright holder.