The only time guns and explosions not working properly in movies is acceptable is when is an over the top dumb Arnold Schwarzenegger type movie. Pretty much when it's obviously meant to be silly.
[QUOTE=Novangel;48848143]Whenever they show off a person playing a game and it either looks like it's made in Second life, it has some retarded shit like 8 bit sounds overlayed onto it, or the person playing it is portrayed as a loser playing it in his basement or something.[/QUOTE]
Even worse when the actors are just mashing buttons as hard as they can and are clearly not playing fucking anything.
How hard is it to get actors to just sit down and play real games. I mean, I get not showing the games for licensing reasons, but you can still have them play a real game when filming to make it more believable, and I'm sure they'd have fun with it.
I'm tired of teen book movies like Hunger Games, Maze Runner, Divergent etc etc.
[QUOTE=Hunter-Spy;48855242]I never saw pacific rim, but [sp]they never even kissed in that movie[/sp] did they?[/QUOTE]
[sp]It's completely platonic in the end, as confirmed by the actors and del Toro especially.[/sp]Much to the dismay of people expecting the same old thing. The novel, being based on the early draft of the script, says otherwise. Good ol' Del Toro for breaking the mold in the movies he makes.
[QUOTE=Sharker;48855236]Or they attempt to fake recoil and it just looks like this
[img]https://uproxx.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/tumblr_mbxaxlk2sa1qi2c9do1_500.gif?w=650[/img][/QUOTE]
Really, why can't they just buy a couple of GBB airsoft pistols and use those? At least it'll be a lot better than what they have currently.
Then you have shit like this:
[vid]http://i.imgur.com/ZNTubAG.webm[/vid]
He shoulders the AK way too high in one part, no recoil in the first part, espically when he backstabs the guy, obvious shaking of the gun during the second poart, and the charging handle is VERY clearly shown that it's not going back.
You also gotta love the guy who gets shot in the back and gets lifted off his feet.
[sp]TWD is still a good show though[/sp]
kid's movies being shit at character development and plot
another one, this is not uncommon for zombie movies and one game or two, [sp]a protagonist or major character going "Oh no, I am bitten and infected!"[/sp]
I hate when characters are stupid. Not explaining things, conveniently not doing the obvious/logical thing, running in a straight line away from a rolling object travelling in a straight line...
When dialogue is written for the benefit of the viewer and not the other characters. Some things aren't explained, and if you were the character in the movie you'd be asking "...what?" but because the audience might already know, it's not explored. Obviously this needs to be done to some extent, but every time I see it done wrong it's very annoying.
People putting themselves in dangerous situations. For example, the good guy with the gun is chasing after the bad guy. He enters the room, looks around briefly, and walks forward with his gun drawn. Doesn't check his corners, doesn't check the doorways, doesn't attempt to stay in cover.
I also really, really hate when characters don't behave believably. You watch someone do something and you just think "Nobody in their right mind would react that way to this situation".
When a car takes 3 bullets to the trunk and explodes, as if it had some sort of Grand Theft Auto health bar.
When the protagonist gets asked "wut can we do m8?" and suddenly he gets an amazing idea there and then.
I hate watching movies because they're so damn predictable these days.
Massive plotholes, mostly ones that are easily fixed. Especially ones that aren't fixed simply due to characters being stupid or having arbitrary moral failings.
For example, take the movie After The Dark. The premise is that it's the last day of a college class, and the teacher tells everyone to take part in some thought experiments. Namely, there's 21 people at a fallout shelter right before the entire world is nuked, but it can only take 10 people. Any more and the supplies wouldn't last until the radiation levels went down enough to survivable levels. Each student draws their role from a box, such as being a biologist or violinist. They have to vote to choose who to bring in, and then the surviving 10 have to see how well they'd survive. There are 3 rounds of the same scenario, with everyone keeping the same roles throughout, although the fallout shelters are in a different place each time and the second round reveals extra facts about each student's role. (Ex. they have cancer, they're infertile, they're a criminal, etc.)
The teacher's character - because he's inserted himself into the thought experiment for some reason - instantly starts killing off and insulting certain students, and some students get uncomfortable. Said students say "hey, can we just leave, it's the last day of class and this isn't fun". The teacher says "no, you have to stay, I'm still in charge of your grade and I can ruin it if I want to."
Right there, right fucking there, why don't any of the students say "um, no, fuck you, if you drop my grade for not roleplaying with you then I'm going to talk to the dean and get you fired"? Especially when, during the second round, the teacher roleplays [sp]holding one of the students at gunpoint and trying to rape her.[/sp] Regardless of trying to be "realistic" or needing a villain, that shit would get you kicked out of any D&D group, let alone [I]a teaching position at a university[/I]. Yet no one complains, no one leaves, no one tells anyone working at the college "this teacher is kind of creepy". He even threatens to drop certain peoples' grades when they don't roleplay exactly how he wants them to.
In the end, one of the students who drew a particularly bad role in the beginning [sp]figures out that the teacher rigged the roles so that he would get the worst role and the teacher's pet would get the best role. The teacher openly explains he did this, and the whole thought experiment roleplay, because he disapproves of the romantic relationship between said student and the teacher's pet. Furthermore, it is revealed to the audience that the teacher actually has a thing for the teacher's pet, and they either dated or are currently dating behind the other student's back.[/sp] That shit is creepy as fuck, and the teacher doesn't see any repercussions. He doesn't even need to be fired, they just need some professor to come by and say "some students had some complaints about your behavior" or "please follow university rules from now on".
Some other plotholes in the movie:
-nuclear bunkers [sp]need a password to EXIT them, and they don't keep the password inside the bunker[/sp]
-there's a nuclear bunker between two active volcanoes
-someone decided to nuke two active volcanoes
-one student roleplays remembering things across rounds, and although this is mostly just to stop the teacher from forcing his way into the bunker group, it could be avoided by saying something like "I've been to this bunker before and remember x" or "what kind of bunker [sp]needs a password to exit[/sp]"
-the students roleplay [sp]summoning a nuke through sheer force of will to settle a fight with the character the teacher is roleplaying as[/sp]
There's also that movie A Sound Of Thunder, based on the Bradbury short story.
In the original story, there's a time travel safari company, but they're always extremely careful. They only kill creatures that would die within minutes anyway, walk only on floating paths, and retrieve any bullets they've shot. The point of the story is that killing even a single butterfly (that was supposed to live) millions of years in the past can have drastic changes for the future.
In the film, though, the safari chooses to kill a T rex that was about to die due to an explosive volcanic eruption. Someone accidentally kills a butterfly, but [I]wouldn't the butterfly have died in the pyroclastic flow too?[/I]
It also says that changes to the future happen in arbitrary waves that come in certain intervals, which makes absolutely no goddamn sense.
[QUOTE=Last or First;48856158]There's also that movie A Sound Of Thunder, based on the Bradbury short story.
In the original story, there's a time travel safari company, but they're always extremely careful. They only kill creatures that would die within minutes anyway, walk only on floating paths, and retrieve any bullets they've shot. The point of the story is that killing even a single butterfly (that was supposed to live) millions of years in the past can have drastic changes for the future.
In the film, though, the safari chooses to kill a T rex that was about to die due to an explosive volcanic eruption. Someone accidentally kills a butterfly, but [I]wouldn't the butterfly have died in the pyroclastic flow too?[/I]
It also says that changes to the future happen in arbitrary waves that come in certain intervals, which makes absolutely no goddamn sense.[/QUOTE]
Not gonna lie: while the idea of that story is commendably clever, even in middle school I thought it failed on the logic level. How did they build the pathways? Surely that would kill and effect some ancient life. Why even risk the fate of all life for pointless safaris? Basically, you aren't supposed to look at the story with harsh logic but instead just admire its idea.
[QUOTE=YourBreakfsat;48855040]Guns:
When the gun isn't being held correctly but the user has a 200% accuracy hit.
When the gun obviously has no recoil and is obviously shown that the bolt/slide isn't going back and ejecting rounds.
When the character hipfires and sprays and manages to hit and kill everything in its way.
When the character never reloads, but suddenly runs out of ammo when the antagonist comes along.
When the character apparently packs one magazine for his rifle, but a thousand magazines for his pistol.
When the character has very obvious forced trigger discipline.
The Walking Dead is a huge culprit of all of these.[/QUOTE]
Medieval Version:
When badass swordsmen do not seem to know even the basics of swordfighting
when alien motherships run on windows 98 or xp
When they kill off the loveable jerk or looser. I'm sick and tired of writers having the exact same moral compass on which character deserves live or death.
When characters are simply killed off for no real reason, or because the writers can't come up with a ending.
Protagonist is in danger. Moments before meeting death, someone else comes and saves him/her at that last moment.
If you reverse the polarity of the quantum inverted vortex you'll create a rift effect that will enable us to hack in to their systems and cause a reverse feedback loop that will destabilize their whole programming network!
(excessive technobabble)
[QUOTE=ichiman94;48856678]Protagonist is in danger. Moments before meeting death, someone else comes and saves him/her at that last moment.[/QUOTE]
'Deus ex machina' is one of the oldest in the books.
When the military pulls a mcguffin device out of their ass.
Godzilla movies, especially in the 80s/90s (as much as I love them and hold them dear) are super guilty of this.
"Oh shit dude it's Godzilla what do we do?"
"Well get the giant, 30 meter long VTOL-capable laser-firing mega-robotic flying machine that we've just happened to have sitting around"
I don't really like slow motion
[QUOTE=gokiyono;48857532]I don't really like slow motion[/QUOTE]
It worked really well in this movie.
[video=youtube;CztxQIn5ZhQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CztxQIn5ZhQ[/video]
when someone lights a cigarette at the beginning of a scene and then puts it out half a minute later at the end of the scene
[QUOTE=bradleigh;48856525]when alien motherships run on windows 98 or xp[/QUOTE]
Or Mac OS 9
[sp]Independence Day[/sp]
Mine are very stupid pet peeves ..i dont really mind so much but i always notice them
Like when the main guy is getting the living shit kicked out of him by someone ..then they decide "playtimes over" and pull a knife or something
Then suddenly the man who couldnt dodge a punch a second ago and who also now has a broken nose/face covered in blood/one of his eyes swollen shut and probably a concussion is suddenly ducking and dodging like fucking neo from the matrix.
bare knuckles = ow my fucking face this guys too fast
pulls a knife = triple spin backbend with an immediate sidetwist followed by a flex-leg-split-duckndodge maneuver 10/10
Cliche "Hot female in peril" scenes bother me.
I don't think they're sexist or anything, they just bother me.
[editline]8th October 2015[/editline]
ALSO the cliche: hot girls/hot jock boys = mean and bitchy and end up dying.
And the whole nerdy girls/nerdy boys = nice and sweet and always win.
It's so stupid.
Really stupid and scientifically inaccurate things that create common misconceptions and stupid myths that result in the death of people and pseudo-intellectual dickbags sounding "smart" when any person knowledgeable on the subject would know that they are nothing but a dumb dickbag that watches CSI or whatever.
[QUOTE=NeverGoWest;48860497]Really stupid and scientifically inaccurate things that create common misconceptions and stupid myths that result in the death of people and pseudo-intellectual dickbags sounding "smart" when any person knowledgeable on the subject would know that they are nothing but a dumb dickbag that watches CSI or whatever.[/QUOTE]
I laugh whenever someone references the necronomicon in real life ..people have literally gone one quests to find it.
It was literally invented for the evil dead films and now its literally a mythical artifact people think could exist like the holy grail or the Cintamani Stone
[QUOTE=mini me;48860583]I laugh whenever someone references the necronomicon in real life ..people have literally gone one quests to find it.
It was literally invented for the evil dead films and now its literally a mythical artifact people think could exist like the holy grail or the Cintamani Stone[/QUOTE]
I think the same thing happened to the holy grail and cintamani stone.
[sp]this bitch don't read lovecraft, lets all laugh at him![/sp]
[QUOTE=IJNOMED;48860206]ALSO the cliche: hot girls/hot jock boys = mean and bitchy
And the whole nerdy girls/nerdy boys = nice and sweet and always win.
It's so stupid.[/QUOTE]
THIS. Not when it's applied to dumb horror films, but in pretty much every fictional high school setting, the popular kids---all of them---are portrayed as cruel and shallow. Likewise the outcasts are typically sweet-natured and thoughtful. Did the writers never actually attend high school, or is it just too hard to write non-stereotypes? As someone who was bullied during her middle and high school days, let me tell you that those stereotypes are mistaken. Whatever your social standing, you could be either cruel/shallow or sweet/deep, or cruel/deep or sweet/shallow for that matter.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.